[sszz]

Hmm I’d say all the book clubs I belong to are social first, book second; one club spends the majority of each meeting roasting the people who haven’t read the book, another good portion debating our selection procedures, and a minimal amount of time on the book itself. Different flavors for different people!

[satvikpendem]

If that's the case, why have a "book" club at all, rather than make a social gathering? Let me be clear in that I also attend social events, but they're called social events on the face of it. If I'm attending a book club, I expect to talk about books.

[chrisseaton]

> If that's the case, why have a "book" club at all

To get a conversation started, but it doesn't matter where it ends up.

Do you understand people making smalltalk and the purpose of it? It's like that.

[satvikpendem]

I said this in another comment, hope it clarifies my understanding:

Sure, I get smalltalk, and I now understand the dichotomy of book club types. Some people are expecting book clubs to be casual and others hardcore. Our definitions are not the same so our conclusions as to what book clubs should be are also not the same. I like both approaches but I like them to be delineated. If I'm with my friends I can appreciate it being a social gathering with a theme, but if I attend a "hardcore" book club, well, I expect it to be hardcore, talking about the book itself for most of the time.

[TheOtherHobbes]

It's a good excuse. And it attracts a Certain Kind of Person who wouldn't go for a different reason.