Serial Reading, Social Reading

In my last post, on a trilogy of novellas, I talked about how I thought the serial format–the need for three short plot arcs–might have crowded out some of the world- and relationship-building, and my mixed feelings about the trend of serialization in romance fiction generally. Often it seems largely designed to boost buzz and raise the price of a novel rather than to experiment with a different narrative form.

Well, I read a couple of things today that made me rethink, or at least refocus, these points. The first was The Toast‘s announcement of a Middlemarch/My Life in Middlemarch book club, which will be a serial discussion of sections of the novel (tweeted by Rohan Maitzen, who developed her own Middlemarch for Book Clubs site). The second was Ruthie Knox’s post on writing a romance serial. Knox reminds readers that serially-published Victorian novels were often read aloud, the whole family listening and commenting. She suggests that today’s serial reading (fanfiction, sites like Wattpad) is similarly a social activity, and that’s part of what people enjoy about it. The other thing they like is anticipation, something we also enjoy in the serial story-telling of television:

serial fiction has its own built-in payoffs — payoffs we’re more familiar with from TV than from fiction. It insists that we take time to speculate, and it encourages us to speculate together. What will he do next? we ask each other. Did you notice that she hasn’t told us what happened to so-and-so yet?

I can’t wait for Monday, we say to our friends. This is going to be so great.

Both of these posts reminded me of what I love about serial, social reading, rather than why I’m suspicious of it.

I Miss Shared Anticipation for a Story

I pretty much don’t watch TV anymore, and when I do, it’s on Netflix. Not because I’m a TV snob but because I make my work schedule flexible by doing some in the evenings, and then there are three soccer practices a week, etc. etc. But I used to love group watching with friends. In grad school we had a weekly get-together for 90210 and Melrose Place (we needed a break from the highbrow). We’d dissect, speculate, criticize, applaud, but most of all look forward to our weekly time together. I miss doing that. I miss feeling “I can’t wait to see what will happen next!” Anticipation, as Carly Simon knew, is a special kind of pleasure.

But Actually, I Do Social, Serial Reading All the Time (Doh!)

You know, at work. In the classroom. I just never thought of it that way. One reason we assign a novel in chunks over 2-3 weeks is so as not to overburden students. But another is because it allows us to discuss the slow unfolding of plot, characters, and theme, to watch how our reactions change over the course of a book, to go back and reconsider what we said and thought at the beginning once we get to the end. This kind of reading is immensely rewarding and fun (to me, anyway), especially if done in a group. When I tried to read Middlemarch in sections and blog about it all on my own, I fizzled out after a post or two. Reading with others can keep up interest and energy in a big project. Maybe I’ll read along with The Toast. 

Serialization Can Be Partly For Buzz/Sales and Still Be Good

Because, you know, Dickens was trying to hook readers on his stories and sell more numbers of Household Words. And obviously TV series are full of tricks to keep us watching week after week–cliffhangers, Very Special Episodes, guest appearances. These things can feel purely manipulative when they don’t work very well, but done right, we enjoy them. We know the story-teller is manipulating our emotions, but we surrender to it because it’s fun, because these are emotions we want to have and to share with others. We are along for the ride. (In a similar way, Knox’s post was obviously written to generate interest in her serial, but it still had interesting things to say about the pleasures of serial reading/viewing, and the reasons it won’t work for some readers).

Some Kinds of Serial, Social Reading Are Not For Me

I have no interest in a social experience that the creator is part of, joining the discussion or just hovering in the background. That does seem primarily meant to generate buzz and fannish (in the sense of uncritical squee) enthusiasm, rather than thoughtful engagement. Fan engagement can, of course, be critical: the desire for “more” that fan fiction responds to can be a desire for “more of the same goodness,” but it can also be a desire to fill in a perceived lack in the canon, the feeling that the original work offered “not enough” of something. Since I don’t have first-hand experience with fandom, I’m not sure whether people post critical comments on others’ fanfic–that is, about each other’s creations. But I’m thinking people reading, say, a Ruthie Knox book posted serially on Wattpad are not likely to start making critical comments on it (though I could be wrong). And that’s fine–I wouldn’t either, in such a situation. But it’s also why I didn’t go there to read it.


I’m interested in some kind of serial-reading book club, whether what we read was serially published or not. Although reading a serial together as it comes out would be cool. Except like many of you, I’m sick of hype and promo and don’t want to feel I’m adding to the noise. So I hope you’ll weigh in with your thoughts about this.

This entry was posted in genre musings, personal, slow reading and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Serial Reading, Social Reading

  1. I read a serialized novel or set of novellas this past year: Rifter by Ginn Hale. I didn’t read the installments as they came out, but there was a Goodreads group and there seemed to be a lot of energy around each release, and a lot of speculation—it looked like fun. But I read it later, on my own. However, when another reader began going through, I ended up rereading the entire thing (I loved it that much) and really enjoyed her posts as she read the ten installments. So when it’s the right book, and there are other enthusiastic readers, I think it can be a lot of fun (the serial and the social).

    I did a trilogy of novellas way early in my writing career. I didn’t plan it that way; it’s just the way they came out. I didn’t have enough of base for it to create any buzz and it quite frankly seemed to frustrate what readers it did find. So I guess I think you can’t always know what the motives are for writing serials, even though obviously some people do plan them out a bit better than I did!

    Social reading is fun though. I’m stuck on this idea of reading Louise Erdrich’s body of work, for example, but I can’t imagine finding anyone online or in real life who would read along with me. It’s one reason I so enjoy the romance community. Even when I have to flag posts to read later and I don’t end up chatting about a book per se, it’s still fun to find out what other people thought.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      The great thing about on-line is that we can read “together” but asynchronously. When I read an older book, I often seek out reviews when I finish as a reasonable substitute for actual conversation while/after reading. And it often makes me think differently about what I read.

      I definitely don’t think I can always–or ever–know what an author’s motives for doing something are. It wouldn’t be at all surprising, or wrong, if making money was one motive. But there can be all kinds of others combined with that. Also, serial pricing is a publisher issue when authors are not self-published, and they are competing with very low-priced self-published books in some genres. I can understand the desire to experiment, though I think many of the experiments I’ve read about or tried have not worked that well from an “artisitic” standpoint.

  2. The Romance community is grounded in the social reading experience; that’s why it’s a community. We spend time on twitter and on blogs because we enjoy social reading (even if it’s not the same type of social reading that serials provide). So if there was a need, we were satisfying it before serials became trendy again.

    I’m not a fan of serials, but I can see why people find it appealing. However, I also fear that authors’ involvement in the conversation will stifle any potential critical discussion. And of course, there’s the fact that Knox’s full-length books are $3.79 (on kindle) and if I decide to read her serial, I’ll end up paying $9.99 for a similar number of pages.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      Yes, I agree we were already finding our own ways to be social–although many readers seem happy to find author/publisher-supported ways to do that too. (I notice Heroes & Heartbreakers has serial read-alongs–not sure if all the books are published by . . . what’s its sponser? MacMillan?) Maybe it’s like my neighbourhood that seems to support an infinite number of coffee shops, both independent and chains like Starbucks. Guess which ones I prefer to patronize, though?

      I find the pricing hard to figure out, and this in itself can feel deceptive, as in you really aren’t meant to figure out just how many pages per dollar you are getting.

      For me, the Kindle price of Roman Holiday “episodes” shows up as averaging $1.99, and apparently the total word count is about 150,000. So that is longer than a typical single-title romance, I think–aren’t they usually around 90-100K? But the price for all 10 episodes would be $20 for me. Which is a bit more than double the price of a stand-alone, full-length novel (tends to be $8.99-9.99 here for mass market) for not double the length. So, yeah. Even though I believe that a book can serve both Art and Commerce, I do feel screwed over by pricing like that, and it makes me hesitate to start in on a serial.

  3. One more thing! I was just thinking about contemporary romance and how there seems to be a demand for authors to be more prolific (I’ve complained about how contemporaries –and small-town series in particular– have a “quantity over quality” problem), and I wonder if serials is a way to cover the demand without sacrificing quality. It’s just one book we’re reading, but because it’s presented in episodes we feel like we’re reading more.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      I think this is definitely part of it. Conventional wisdom right now seems to be that an author must put out something new every 4 months at least. Which I think is ridiculous. I can’t keep up with that, I think quality suffers, I remember authors I’ve loved and want to read more from longer than that. But whenever I say things like that people point to the success of someone like Bella Andre and say I am not the average reader, so whatever.

  4. meoskop says:

    In the 90’s Linda Lael Miller did some serial runs with big books on either end. It was sort of fun to read them with others, since they were published rapidly, but they didn’t really feel finished. I am not a huge fan of book clubbing or serials.

    • Liz Mc2 says:


      I like book clubs–or somewhat planned discussions–if they arise spontaneously, that is, a bunch of people are interested in reading and talking about a particular book. Not so much when one person “assigns” a book for others to read. And since pretty much everyone I know dislikes the idea of serials, and I’m fairly dubious myself, this is unlikely to take off….

  5. QuilterPhyl says:

    I do enjoy participating (mostly on the fringes) in the online romance community. I also love to discuss my favorite books with my romance-reading friends right here where I live. But I really want to read a book at my own pace and at the time of my choosing. I have no interest in serialized books. I asked Ruthie if someday the book would be sold in a single format; she thought it might be put together in bundles, but she didn’t really know. Since I am also put off by the pricing I’m now hoping that a year from now it’ll quietly be released in a single unit at a reasonable price. I have so many books to read that I can live without reading this one as much as I might want to.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      There’s always another book to choose, isn’t there? I’m curious about whether serials will really take off or not. Maybe not with long-term romance readers, since it seems antithetical to the ways many of us like to read. But maybe new readers drawn in from/by fan fiction communities will really respond to it? As long as there is room for all of us in publishing’s models.

  6. Ros says:

    I recently read the Wattpad story (I waited until it had all been posted and read it in one go, so not really as a serial). I didn’t sign up to Wattpad, so I didn’t comment or vote or any of that stuff. I did read a handful of the comments, and it did make me remember wistfully my years in fandom, where you’d be waiting for the next instalment (sometimes for months and months) and checking anxiously to see when it was posted, just to gobble it up and then be waiting for the next one. There was definitely a social aspect to it. And actually, since my fandom was mostly Harry Potter, it arose in no small part because of the ‘serialization’ of the series. The gap before book five came out, in particular, was when a lot of fandom took to writing and discussing as part of a social response to an incomplete narrative. The waiting part was never my favourite thing, though. I liked it when fics were finished and I could click through straightaway.

    Critical commentary on fanfic? Almost never. Sometimes people would express disappointment (anger, frustration etc.) and usually it would lead to a big bust up and end up all over fandom wank. Mostly if you didn’t like what an author had done, it was better just to quietly click away. Even if you liked it but wanted to discuss it more than just ‘OMG that was awesome. Next time can Draco wear leather pants?’ that could cause issues. Not many fanfic authors, in my limited experience, were interested in critical engagement. And to be fair, not many readers were interested in it either, whether the author was involved in the discussion or not.

    • Ros says:

      Something I’ve been thinking for a while, actually, is how the YA and NA reading communities are similar to fandom. The response to Allegiant is classic fandom wank. But also things like squeeing over cover reveals, because yes, people would make ‘covers’ for their fanfic. And the relentless focus on shipping characters, even in non-romance books. And the way that bloggers want to be part of the promo community and want to ‘know’ authors.

      • Liz Mc2 says:

        Yes, I suspect a lot of both younger authors and readers in these genres have fandom experience. My daughter started reading and writing fanfic (of Erin Hunter’s Warrior cats series) at 10. I think a younger generation of readers may be much more likely to be habituated to serials, social reading, online interaction with creators, all the things some of us are struggling to get a handle on.

  7. AMG says:

    I’m a cynic. All I could think of while reading Knox’s essay was that this was a buzz generator, couched in faintly academic writing. Or it could be that after reading one fairly good book by her (Ride with Me), the subsequent books I’ve read felt flat or contrived. I really thought she was going to add something fresh to the genre, but I’ve been disappointed. I read 2 intallments of the Wattpad serial, and was immediately frustrated by the set up. Why do Romance heroines have to be so bloody hapless, ineffectual, and in need of a life coach/kick in the butt? I digress from Liz’s blog post, however.

    Since I watch most TV off my PVR, rarely experiencing it live, I find the internet has acted as a substitute for those ‘water-cooler’ moments when we gathered to gossip about episodes or events. Fan-fiction and shipping has somehow passed me by. I’m glad some people enjoy these activities, but I’ll keep them in my head, where they lived prior to the internet. While I enjoy connecting with fellow readers on Twitter, and blogs, the brevity of the format allows me to keep committment to a manageable length.

    The concept that I’m going to read a couple chapters of a book, then break down every detail exhaustively on Twitter or a forum, is ridiculous. I’m not in high school or university. One of the reasons I loved books as a child was that I could read the book, without having to wait for anyone else. The serial might seem like a benign entity, harkening back to the days when we clustered around the radio, waiting to hear what the Shadow knows, but I see it as a flat out cash grab. Every week/month the author has a legitimate reason to reach out to fans/consumers/street teams to get the word out that their new story is out. My father tells stories about how he would go to movies he might not otherwise see, in order to find out what was happening in the next installment of Roy Rogers/Tom Mix etc. serials. In the 40’s, the studio’s had a captive audience, but in 2013, there are so many ways to get your fix.

    Sorry, serials. You’re probably not getting my approval and dollars.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      I’m just never going to break out of my role as Home of Cynicism with my sporadic attempts to be Little Suzy Sunshine, am I?

      I guess I’ll just have to satisfy my desire for in-depth discussion in the classroom. Or find some new Appointment Television. I was thinking about old movie serials, too, so your father’s stories are definitely a propos. Storytellers have always found ways to hook listeners/readers/viewers. At least since Scheherazade, no? And perhaps our feelings about being on the hook have always been mixed. I’ve often been somewhat bewildered by my own narrative addictions, which haven’t always been to stories I thought were *good.* Even when I’m not loving something, I can feel the compulsion to find out what happens next, and I think serials with a low price-point for entry bet on readers feeling this compulsion to continue once they’ve started.

  8. GrowlyCub says:

    I read the 2 Liaden universe books Lee/Miller wrote live on the internet with new installments posting most Mondays (Fledgling and Saltation; as an aside, YA feel for book 1 and NA for book 2 before that became a thing). I did have the ‘is it up yet?’ moments of anticipation, but mostly that was followed by the letdown of ‘is that all?’. We had a group where we could chat, but since the authors are hostile to fanfic and to criticism of any kind, it wasn’t something that I felt added that much. Overall, I found the experience of serial reading not rewarding. This probably also had to do with the fact that this was a ‘draft’ which had many loose threads and a lot of opacity. I did enjoy both books when they finally were put out in print by Baen. I might not feel as frustrated with a serial that was conceived as such with polished entries, but as my normal reading modus is ‘gobble it up in one sitting’, serials just don’t seem to fit my style.

    I don’t watch TV and even when I did, I preferred shows that have complete story lines within most episodes (L&O, NCIS), although I admit I loved Witchblade and was very sad it went off air and I did watch and enjoy Downton (exceptions prove the rule? 🙂

    Additionally, I have a real thing about gauging and what I’ve seen of rom serials offers very little to convince me there were other than commercial reasons for serialization. Also, the recent trend of authors equating themselves to classic literary icons really rubs me the wrong way.

    I read only one of Knox’ book and while I enjoyed the beginning and middle, the resolution made me pretty angry. I’ve casually watched her on twitter and other places on the net via tweets by people I follow (don’t follow her myself) and got a pretty unfavorable impression of her, although her brand of personal marketing seems to work for many readers.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      Yes, I think serial reading/interacting as we read is alien to a lot of us, and we may not want to change our habits for all kinds of reasons–Brie and Sunita’s points about enjoying the privacy and reflection of reading are important to me, too.

  9. pamela1740 says:

    I felt cynical about Knox’s essay, too. I couldn’t help it. I wanted to meet her halfway, and she’s right about the joys of reading (and viewing) stories in community, as a social pursuit. But I thought some of what she said about the “slowly unfurling joy” was just treacly and self-interested. I would have felt less cynical if she’d just come out and said she hopes people will buy her books in this format and copped to her business reasons for doing it this way, along with exploring and articulating her literary and artistic choice. I do think the fact that she released one of her books for free on Wattpad makes a difference, but I respectfully still feel cynical.

    I also didn’t like the way some of her language betrayed a weird stigmatizing of the “compressed, solitary” activity of reading a standalone romance novel. Especially this:

    “Why, after all, would this reader want to nibble at a story when she can just _consume_ one?”

    Is it just me or does this make people who want to read a book without waiting for it to come out in installments sound like greedy intemperate gobblers? Perhaps it’s just that the food analogy wasn’t a good place to go.

    The post concludes with a clear statement that she is not privileging one format over the other: “…neither better nor worse…. only different.” But the rest of the post is not neutral, nor is her agenda as a published author of serialized fiction.

    Liz, this post really made me think again about the social aspect of reading, however, and Knox is right to celebrate it as well. For a number of years I was an active member of Outlander/Gabaldon fan forum(s) (there are numerous ones, but when I was active, 2 or 3 primary ones) which provided me a place to talk about books with fellow readers of romantic & historical fiction. A decade ago I was a sleep-deprived new mom, and only vaguely aware of the world of book blogging, but somehow in looking for reviews of the Outlander books, I stumbled into a very active fan world, with many sophisticated and savvy readers I could “talk” to.

    There was a lot of Jamie/Claire fandom, but also thriving pages of book discussions about other books, other media, literary phenomena, travel, pop culture, etc. The thing that ultimately drove me away was the presence of the author in the discussion space(s), either in person as herself, or via surrogates/gatekeepers. This speaks to your “Some Aspects of Serial/Social Reading Are Not For Me” conclusions. It’s not that I don’t (TOTALLY) enjoy the squee of engaging directly with an author on twitter. But I need a discussion space that’s not inhibited, and I want to be able to be as critical and questioning of favorite books as I would be of anything I read. What I loved about my experience in these particular fan spaces was the opportunity to quote and discuss and analyze and speculate about what happened IN the books. And we had some truly amazing and transformative discussions. What didn’t work was that these communities are not set up to be places for discussing and analyzing the texts from OUTSIDE. In other words, you could say you didn’t like a particular character, but would not want to propose that there was a problem with the way a particular character was written — and one has to respect and honor those limits to be fully part of the community. In exchange for playing along with the unwritten rules of the author’s engagement with the fan forums, readers frequently enjoy squee and perks such as unpublished excerpts, etc. Gabaldon has been floating unpublished excerpts online for nearly two decades, and it’s certainly proved part of an extremely successful serialization strategy.

    • pamela1740 says:

      Also, the whopping size of Gabaldon’s books does provide a real bang for the reader’s buck. By contrast the current crop of short novellas and chapterized serials seem especially over-reaching, in terms of pricing strategy.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      These are really interesting points–especially about “inside” reading being fine and “outside” reading not so much.

      My problem with the *consume* metaphor is that romance readers are so often slightingly referred to as “voracious” readers, mindless consumers. And that phrase seemed to line up with that critique, though I doubt that was intended. It did come across as . . . not quite derogatory, but “oh, you’re going to miss out!” despite the attempt to be balanced at the end.

  10. Sunita says:

    I’ve tried to read books serially and socially but I’ve almost never managed to pull it off. I failed with Lymond, I failed with Proust, I failed with various shorter genre fiction books. The only time it’s really worked for me is when I was reading The Rifter. I read first with Janine and then with my husband, and we talked about the installments (one or two at a time). But I did that because we were reviewing the series and it was a way of figuring out things that then went into the review (or helped shape it).

    Like you, I like talking about books after I’ve read them, or maybe when I’m rereading them. But reading has always been partly private for me (despite my great enjoyment at being part of the romance community). Talking about books *while* I’m reading them takes something away. I couldn’t have done The Rifter in a bigger group; in fact, there was a GR readalong that I completely avoided.

    I don’t know if that makes me a “solitary reader” who “consumes” in an emotionally intense fashion (certainly all my reading is not emotionally intense). I don’t think of myself as solitary in my reading habits, especially given that (like you) I spend hours every week talking about articles and books as part of my job. But the *act* of reading is part of my rest-and-recharge time, where it’s just me, the text, and my imagination.

    • Last night I was thinking about this. I enjoy the personal, private act of reading a book, and I also enjoy talking about it after. But I like having time to digest the experience before sharing it with other people. Not everyone reads that way, but to me, the conversation that takes place while we wait for the next installment is a forced discussion; something we do to entertain ourselves while we wait, but that it wouldn’t take place if we could just read/watch the whole thing at once. I’m not saying such discussion (forced or not) can’t be interesting and enriching, but it’s not something I would willingly choose to do.

      • Liz Mc2 says:

        Brie and Sunita, I was kind of playing devil’s advocate to myself in this post. Because I’ve also posted before about my problems with the way social reading and buzz/hype can interfere with my private reading experience–I can’t read without the voices of others in my head.

        To some extent I don’t mind hearing those voices; it is certainly my professional experience as a reader, where I have often read criticism of a work before the work itself. But when I’m reading for fun, I don’t always want to be comparing/evaluating my experiences against other people’s, or thinking very critically about what I’m reading.

        When I was a student, I would be reading “serially” as we discussed in class. But now I’m at the front of the room, we’re always talking about a text where I’m on at least my second time through, usually more. So anticipation is not part of my serial discussion experience.

        I wonder if we are more accepting of this kind of story-telling with TV because TV has always been a serial and often a social experience, while in our lifetimes, reading has been largely private and “complete”? How is waiting for installments of a serial different from waiting for the next book in a series, exactly? (I think it is, but it’s hard to say how, and how much of the difference is not just what’s familiar vs. what’s unfamiliar).

      • Sunita says:

        Yes! That’s it EXACTLY for me.

        I can talk about a book-in-progress with one or two people, but not in public, in a group. After I’m done, sure.

  11. Sunita says:

    @Liz: I think that part of the difference lies in listening v. reading. Eye-to-brain is different from ear-to-brain. I don’t know enough psychology to tell you why, but they are different cognitive experiences for me.

    TheH and I listen to audiobooks when we’re on road trips, and we both enjoy that. And I’ve always treated TV and films as communal experiences by default. I’ll go to a movie alone, but I prefer going with someone to share it with.

    As for series v. serials, I’m not sure either. At least part of it is the length and scope of each installment. If it’s basically a short story, it has to be intense. Voinov’s Dark Soul filled this requirement for me. The Rifter, by contrast, was less intense in some of the installments, but each one was essentially a self-contained novella, so it worked too.

    Serials are also hard because short stories and novellas are hard to write. Harder than many think. I wish more authors recognized that.

  12. kaetrin says:

    I’m not one for serials – I read so many books I feel like it would be too difficult to keep a little chunk of a book in my mind until the next instalment. That’s not how I read so it feels uncomfortable for me.

    That said, I do follow Diana Gabaldon on Twitter and almost every day there is a little snippet from her WIP. It’s usually a couple of paragraphs, but generally no more than a half a page. I find I can snap in and out of that fairly easily and get enjoyment out of it. Partly it’s because the time investment is so small (and partly it’s because it’s free – I wouldn’t pay for it) but to interrupt a book I’m reading to read 2 or 3 chapters of another one, then go back to my prior reading and then interrupt another book the next week or month – that’s too disruptive for me.

    Like others have commented above, I think reading is part of my rest and recharge time. I like interacting on social media about books but I like to choose what I read and when and I usually only have one print/ebook and one audiobook on the go at any one time. And, as much as I like the social aspects, I tend to write down my thoughts before reading other reviews or getting into much discussion. It’s nice to have a discussion where I know what I thought on my own and then, as a result of input from others, I start thinking about a book in a different way, and sometimes, even modify my view.

  13. Suzanne says:

    I’ve never been involved in a book club and am frustrated by books that are published in a serialized format for monetary purposes. However, I recently read Knox’s ‘Truly’ on Wattpad on a weekly basis and am currently participating in the ‘Roman Holiday’ serial reading experiment. The reader comments on the Wattpad novel were all brief and universally complimentary, but not as much in the Roman Holiday reader forum. Several readers have expressed frustration with the plot and felt free to criticize the book, particularly in regard to character development. Some of the comments are thought provoking and made me rethink my initial responses to the writing. The forum moderator is an author/friend/possible critique partner of Knox, but she doesn’t defend the writing or answer queries about the novel. Her role primarily appears to be to facilitate and encourage the discussion, wherever it goes.I like that the discussion is not guided and that the readers respond to each other’s ideas. Social reading in this way is definitely more work than private reading because I feel a responsibility to read the installments in a timely fashion so that I check in with the other readers. I haven’t felt that way since I was in school. I am enjoying this experiment in social reading, but it is probably a one time venture.

    • Liz Mc2 says:

      Thanks for the comment! It’s interesting to hear the experience of someone who is participating.

      I’m still curious, but the biggest hurdle for me (as with serial TV these days) is finding the time to keep up.

Comments are closed.