21
At our book club in the Denver library, a fight over 'The Goldfinch' almost made us disband.
After a member stormed out over the 'unreliable narrator' debate, we now have a strict 'no personal attacks' rule and a 2-minute time limit for heated opinions, so has anyone else had to set ground rules to keep things civil?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
seanh912mo ago
Man, my buddy's wine tasting group had to do the same thing. They got into a huge fight over natural wines. One guy called another's favorite bottle "glorified vinegar." They almost threw a spit bucket. Now they have a rule, no comparing wines to cleaning products. And everyone gets one minute to defend their pick before moving on. It got way too personal over fermented grape juice.
7
maxm502mo ago
What gets me is how these fights are never about the wine itself. People tie their whole identity to liking the right thing, so an attack on the wine feels like an attack on them. That's why the one-minute rule is smart, it forces the talk back to what's in the glass.
1
eric_murphy361mo ago
Honestly, why not just start every meeting by reminding everyone it's about the book, not them? We had to do that after a huge blow-up over "Catcher in the Rye." The two-minute rule is good, but we also made a "no mind-reading" rule... you can't say "you only like this character because..." and pretend you know someone's life. Stick to what's on the page. It cools things down fast when people feel heard but can't turn it into therapy.
6