| xnera @ 2004-07-07 21:13:00 |
Idea
Mood: 
geeky
Fact: We all miss NA. Alot.
Fact: Some folks are reading it for the first time, or getting caught up in what they've missed.
Fact: 
atorable was kind enough to put the links in chronological order, at least partially.
Brainstorm: Why don't we have a group re-read?
I've seen group re-reads on George R. R. Martin's fanboard, and it always looked like tons of fun. It would be a chance for us to relive our favorite threads, discover new favorites, and oh heck, speculate all over again as I'm sure there is still stuff we don't know. We'd just have to decide on a schedule. Would we want to do one post a day, or try to group posts by major event and then skip a few days via new threads? And yeah, I am envisioning this all happening here on 
nraged.
Thoughts? Opinions? Mongoose? Chocolates and roses?
EDIT WITH TECHNICAL THOUGHTS
Okay, you all love the idea. Really, no surprise there.
Did a rough count of total posts between the community and the charcter journals, and there are over 2700 posts. So if we did a post a day, we'd be here for over SEVEN YEARS! Er. I know you said slow, but that's a bit too slow. Besides, I don't like the idea of doing a new thread daily. Not everyone can get to their computers daily, and I'd really like everyone to have a chance to discuss the posts.
So what I'm thinking we'll actually do is what black_dog suggested here: new discussions twice a week, focussed on 5-10 posts each, or whatever feels right story-wise. Obviously this would be flexible if we hit a dense part of the story (the explosion, the attack on the weasleys, etc). I figure each new discussion would be a new post to nraged, with a list of the links we'd be covering for the next couple of days.
Thoughts? Ideas? I am flexible, folks, so let me know how this would work for you.
Comments:
| chinae @ July 8 2004, 02:27:07 UTC |
I think that is an excellent idea. I started reading nocturne last year around April and never really got a chance to go back and re-read the old posts. Well, know I am but it would be nice to have company.
(parent)| shieldkitten @ July 8 2004, 03:13:43 UTC |
I would love it, especially since I'd only joined in on the wibbling in the last days of NA.
(parent)| dallazkatt @ July 8 2004, 04:08:14 UTC |
That sounds wonderful. I've been trying to dig up old entries from everyone cause there's so much I haven't read. I'd love to read along with those that have been here since the beginning.
(parent)| bubblebee @ July 8 2004, 04:12:53 UTC |
I like that idea!
(And here. Have some chocolate. It'll make you feel better :) )
| sistermagpie @ July 8 2004, 04:13:30 UTC |
I second the suggestion to do it slowly, but it sounds like a great idea. Now that we have the whole story I have a feeling past posts will be even better on re-read.
(parent)| bloodybrilliant @ July 8 2004, 04:24:30 UTC |
I am all for this and I agree with sistermagpie on the subject of old posts: they may become a little clearer now that we know the ending. We may have revelations or see things in a different light. I like this idea.
I had just started going through NA from the beginning about 3 or 4 weeks ago, but I had no idea how to do so in a cohesive way. I read NA's posts for a few months, then I started on potterstinks's posts...but that left out everyone else on each day. I did not know of a good way to read all the posts made on a specific day/days relating to the same event.
Is there a good way to do this for us all? Anyone need help organizing it?
| black_dog @ July 8 2004, 04:55:24 UTC |
I think this is a great idea. I'd vote for grouping posts, because we're naturally going to read them faster with them all there, and the interconnections would make the most sense.
One question -- how soon would we get tired of talking about a single batch of posts? Maybe do two "batches" a week, each batch 5-10 posts depending on the topic? Should we determine "batches" in advance based on the logic of the story? Should I shut up and not get so far ahead of things? :)
| xnera @ July 8 2004, 05:01:23 UTC |
One question -- how soon would we get tired of talking about a single batch of posts? Maybe do two "batches" a week, each batch 5-10 posts depending on the topic? Should we determine "batches" in advance based on the logic of the story? Should I shut up and not get so far ahead of things? :)
Actually, this is EXACTLY what I have been thinking. Twice a week, in about 5-10 posts, or whatever makes sense story-wise.
| sistermagpie @ July 8 2004, 14:00:59 UTC |
Heh. If it's you and me we'd probably talk about the same batch of post for several years.:-D
(parent)| black_dog @ July 8 2004, 17:33:19 UTC |
:D Leaving a pattern of nice long trails of discussion threads, partly overlapping each other like shingles on a roof. Or a boat wake, or something!
I think it would be an absolute blast to analyze the early stuff in light of what it was pointing to, what we know got built on it.
This whole thing is a really good idea.
| sistermagpie @ July 8 2004, 19:45:17 UTC |
LOL. I'd love to include links to our old discussions with the links, not that we could probably find them!
(parent)| black_dog @ July 8 2004, 22:26:17 UTC |
I think some weeks, anywhere we looked we'd trip across them. :)
Seriously, though I was looking at the post numbers from atorable's amazing bit of NA scholarship -- it was really startlingly heavy early in the game. I think we've got months ahead of us even to catch up to the beginning of NrAged. Then, like someone time-traveling around the universe (or a certain PoA character), we will see the back of our own heads!
| jiffy_spiffy @ July 8 2004, 05:02:15 UTC |
I like that idea! I think you'd have to go slowly though, but that sounds like a lot of fun!
(parent)| saffronlie @ July 8 2004, 05:33:00 UTC |
Yeah yeah! This would be great. My sister has been making her way through the archives and we end up doing a lot of shared reading, except she kind of hates me looking over her shoulder. It's awesome to just sit around and go, "oh, that was when that thing happened, and remember this, and hey look this thing happens later".
I also like this plan for how it will work, it will be easy to cover major plots then. :D
| onthehillside @ July 8 2004, 05:41:18 UTC |
Just putting it in writing that I love this idea!
(parent)| nannyo @ July 8 2004, 08:19:06 UTC |
fantastic idea (the 5-10 posts a week idea)...ALthough many of my comments may just be that I love the Weasleys, and Lupercus, but still, I'm up for it!
N.
 |
pixelbit @ July 8 2004, 11:37:28 UTC |
I LOVE this idea! Since I joined late, I also didn't get to join in on the discussions first time round - I've been kicking myself for not finding NA/nraged earlier. Revisiting things would be brilliant.
(parent)| anoni @ July 8 2004, 11:43:13 UTC |
Oh, please do. I was beginning to get depressed when nobody posted in Nraged for a grand total of ::cough:: one day, and having this to cling to would be wonderful. And it makes much more sense than posting random links to threads in my own LJ - I keep worrying about irritating those on my NA filter every time I do one of those.
::showers with chocolates to roses::
|
unknownwisdom @ July 8 2004, 12:04:15 UTC |
Back just in time. Excellent.
This sounds like a great idea, I'm all for it. Also, I have a small question, is there any new information on the player Q&A that could happen? Just curious...
| primroseburrows @ July 8 2004, 16:48:54 UTC |
This is a great idea. There are plenty of posts I haven't read yet (I only started reading NA last year). Slowly is good.
Whee! An actually non-wibbly NA comment. *g*
| pyrae @ July 8 2004, 17:02:03 UTC |
Sounds great! Black_dog's idea works just fine for me. I hopped on a bit late, so I missed a lot of earlier posts, and a group rereading sounds fun.
(parent)| black_dog @ July 8 2004, 22:07:36 UTC |
Some further thoughts on making this concrete:
How do we get started? I was thinking about ways to chop up the posts and set goals. I think of the first "Act" or "movement" of NA as the period from the start of the game to the Bleu Ball -- say, ending with Draco's "recovery" post on June 20, 2002, a couple days after the ball. During that period, posting is very heavy and the story lines are mostly introducing the characters and sketching out how they relate to each other, rather than any sustained plot stuff (except for the first hints of some PS/JH fascination that's still covered in hostility.) After that period comes the first lull in postings, and then most of July/August is at a much more moderate pace of posting until the next big lull in the fall.
That's only the first month of the game, but it's about a fifth of all the posts from the first year -- about 285 by my count. Even if you were to cut off arbitrarily at May 31, that's 150 posts, too much to digest in a first go.
I do think, though, that we might want to start out by diving into the introductory material, more than 10 posts or so, before settling down to follow the plot at a more measured pace.
So I was thinking -- how about the first four days, May 16-19, for the first week of our re-read? It's about 40 posts, it's mostly character sketching and introduction rather than heavy plot, and it lets us go over our first impressions of the characters in some depth rather than in 10-post fragments?
If we spend a week on that, by the time we're done someone can read ahead and propose how to divide the rest of the stuff through June 20 into bite-sized chunks. I'm thinking that because NA's first month is so heavy, we may want to take it slower than real-time. In other words, chew over each days' post (maybe combine some light days) for half a week at a time. Once we get into the July and later posts, the pacing changes and we may want to deal in larger units of time for each discussion segment.
What do you think? It has the advantage of being a simple rule to start with, and lets us sort of plunge in right away. The idea would be, between now and next Friday (include next weekend, maybe?) any observations on the first 4 days of the game, first 40 posts, would be in order -- and they'd mostly focus on initial characterization, on the starting point. Some time next week, we could start circulating a schedule for the next several batches of posts as some of us read ahead.
Over to you, xnera!
| coughingbear @ July 9 2004, 13:23:37 UTC |
This is brilliant! I only discovered Nocturne Alley a few months ago, and since it finished have been going back and reading earlier bits, via the nraged discussions at historic_alley (am continually amazed at all the clever analysis), so I love the idea of looking at it all from the beginning.
Off to look at the early posts!
|
intern_alley @ July 8 2004, 22:29:06 UTC |
*is in the middle of organising posts in chronological order*
Don't forget Luna, as I did!
| kitaoroshi @ July 9 2004, 20:53:35 UTC |
Wicked idea! When does it start? Was unfortunate in being un-enlightened in the ways of N_A until about a year ago.
(parent)| moocow1985 @ July 11 2004, 00:52:56 UTC |
I'm a little late in the discussion on this one, but would it be possible to incorporate the NrAged posts in once we get to the point when it started? Perhaps linking to an NA post and then the post(s) in nraged that go with it?
I kind of see nraged as part of NA, seeing as I started reading after nraged was firmly established.