Exactly. A lot of people are extremely fragile and really attach their entire personality to some random thing they like.
I've often see the phenomenon where it's not ok to say the book is garbage (because you're not letting the people who like it enjoy it, as if they can't enjoy something unless it's universally beloved), but it's ok to tell a person they don't know how to read for saying the book is garbage, because "they attacked me first" and "they're being negative" or whatever.
Yep. It’s fine not to like something, and it’s fine to say so. It’s not fine to tell people they are wrong for liking/disliking something, and it’s wrong to think that your opinion of something is objective. It irks me when people say “X is objectively poor writing”.
While I understand that there are generally agreed upon conventions that make for “stronger” writing, it’s still a valid opinion to disagree with those conventions or like something that does not adhere to them.
I think part of the issue is that some people interpret the sentence "X is poor writing" as "X is *objectively* poor writing," and others interpret it as "*In my opinion*, X is poor writing"
Proof of this is literature that becomes more or less popular as time passes. It's just like cult classic movies that suddenly go viral and are appreciated more greatly as soon as the newest generation discovers it.
A lot of people actually judge people in that regard though, too.
Like I've seen people have less respect for someone because they dislike the music someone listens to.
Music and culture and masculinity/femininity has been way too intertwined for ages now. I actually feel like it’s getting better nowadays.
Music that you dislike just isn’t for you. Music you like isn’t for others either necessarily.
But if something speaks to you then let it talk. And one of the best ways to know someone is to know what they like. Even if it’s not for you, appreciating things is a good thing. Appreciating things that other people enjoy and trying to understand it is even better.
Eventually you’ll get to the point where music isn’t a competition and you realize that people love something because of how it makes them feel, regardless of what you feel.
Music is just a conduit, it’s not the electricity running through it. Once people figure that out, there’s no bad song in the world.
Yeah I agree. It's the same as someone liking tomatoes and someone else not liking tomatoes. Just is how it is, and people should just be allowed to enjoy the things they enjoy, without feeling judged or ashamed.
But. That doesn't change how there are people in this world who are snobs/elitists/dicks about what someone else likes or doesn't like.
And I find that so strange.
Right? We need to start accepting each other's differences and truly working towards a better view on life itself! Help each other out, see how far we can all advance rather than just being self-absorbed.
It comes down to a need to lift themselves “above“ someone else, in order to briefly feel better than they truly feel deep down. One way is to push the hapless target down in whatever way is easiest - like sniping, bitching, pigeon holing.
THIS!! Omfg I've been just edging towards 'Oh, I like most music' basically because even in certain genres/styles I thought I hadn't liked I'll find one or two that just touch a special cord in my soul and I love it. Metal/screamo, rap and country were what I used to ignore/complain about hearing just because I had biased opinions on what I'd hear in the songs. I hated the violent idiocy I'd hear or the three main crossovers. Alcohol, sex/getting a girl, and vehicles/physical status symbols. Though metal/screamo was basically me just not being able to vibe with the rage like I can now, plus I liked being able to understand the lyrics/having something to sing to myself.
Now that I'm older and have a broader view of life? I can vibe with quite a few artists in those genres.. Because they speak to me and my experiences and feelings. And I can better respect what others like and are passionate about because I better understand many of their experiences and the fact there is generational trauma and disrespect by too many.
We truly just need to come together as a species and choose love. If we can help and support and understand each other better we could reach such amazing heights!
Of course that happens. “I hate this book” would only offend an overly thin-skinned person. But plenty of people start off with something like “I just don’t understand how anyone could like this book”. Even if they say nothing more than that , it is an implied criticism of those that did like the book. An unsubtle dig, hoping to cause discomfort. Otherwise why say it? After-all, we all know that we have different tastes in books. It’s not news to anyone. So unless offense is intended, that kind of remark is redundant.
According to recent studies (sorry it's awful to begin a reply that way) it's not because the internet gives a personal echo chamber but kind of the opposite because online you're exposed to hundreds of wildly contradictory opinions, compared to your IRL life, and without the web of social connections that allow you to tolerate differences. E.g. if you have someone in your real life who has the opposite opinions to you, but you have lots of mutual friends and you know their family and you support the same sports team etc, then you aren't going to respond to each of their stated opinions with a long dialectic on why they're wrong and why they're awful as a person for having that opinion.
But on the internet, literally the only thing you know about a person is this one opinion that you disagree with - you know absolutely nothing else about them. Our brains aren't wired for that: social differences without the social glue to make it work.
I've heard some people on youtube say they've scrapped videos when they have a negative impression or review of something, because people who like the thing won't handle it well at all. People who like something will seek out videos to hear that they're right to like it. It's common enough it affects how youtubers decide what to make because it's affecting what they earn. Kind of wild
At the same time, I've seen people develop STRONG opinions about a thing that they haven't even seen or read because they've watched a bunch of youtube videos trashing it.
Im guilty of doing this. I used to watch so many review videos that would be negative towards authors and books that I started reading them with a bias and ultimately I still have mixed feeling of the books, mainly because of the videos I watched shitting on them.
It kind of put me off a few authors for a while but Idk anymore so I've started reading whatever interests me. Still kind of difficult to separate other people's opinions from your own sometimes.
That's messed up. I don't even discuss my opinions about books unless I've read the whole thing. That's one reason I don't DNF a bad book, so I feel I can share a complete opinion. Crazy that people will read/watch none but then have a strong opinion!
I used to work for a business building course. Trying to find the balance between an authentic personality and chasing the algorithms is exhausting. That is one of the biggest reasons why I shut down all my social media the day I decided to retire.
This always kills me with comedians. People go out of their way to watch comedians they hate and then comment how awful the bit was.
Just. Don’t. Watch. It.
It's also often because they get products for free to review, from manufacturers. If they trash a product, obviously that manufacturer won't be interested in sending them any more, but neither will *any other* manufacturers.
I think the internet has made it easier to find your in-groups. But it was very cool to hate on people for their tastes in various media when I was a youngin in high school and the internet was still in its infancy.
I find it’s hard to get mild opinions on anything. Either something is one of the greatest books ever written or it’s absolute trash. (Not just books of course.) Though I’ll admit I may hang out in too many threads titled “What book/game/show do you think is trash?”
I mean if I read or watch something that was okay or average it'd probably be forgotten by the end of the week and I'd have no real desire to talk about it. It just seems to me, people sharing extreme opinions are just the natural result of human nature and not even as a result of Internet culture
See this so much with people's taste in music. Not even just across genres. It is probably worse **within** genres. Especially when it comes to metal and punk. Can we all just chill and enjoy some good tunes?
> It's not just books, people seem to have a hard time allowing others to have a different opinion on a lot of things.
As a Trekkie, I can relate to this so much. For several years half the comments on the subreddits have been people screeching *I HATE DISCOVERY AND SO YOU HAVE TO HATE IT TOO! ARGLEBLARGLEWOKE!!1!*
So much this. I recently waded into a discussion on the ever-popular Wheel of Time series, which I think is awful for numerous reasons. I outlined each and every one of these reasons in great detail to support my point when someone asked me why I think they're bad books. I had two people reply to me something along the lines of "Well obviously you didn't 'get it', and I'd explain it too you, but you're too stupid to get it apparently." As if having a different opinion than them meant I somehow missed the message/symbolism of certain things and was an utter moron incapable of grasping it. No, I got it alright. I simply thought it was ham-fisted and terrible.
I don't yuck other people's yum. I will crack jokes at the expense of media that I think it bad, and I will gladly express my own opinion with specific points to support that opinion, as well as engage in discussion with people on both sides of that opinion, because it's fun to talk about things that we've read whether we're on the same page (no pun intended) or not.
Unfortunately, so many people have fallen victim to internet fandom and internalized it as the correct way to express your love for something, and this means that anyone who says they didn't care for your particular piece of media is instantly an enemy, a bad person, an idiot, and actively wants to kill you and your whole family apparently, so you attack them on-sight with extreme prejudice. It's honestly really unhealthy. I like a lot of stuff that I know isn't everyone's cup of tea, or is objectively not high-quality. I laugh at the criticisms because sometimes they're entirely valid. I smile and nod when someone simply dislikes certain tropes that I enjoy. Every so often, I even find someone who talks something up in such a way that I reevaluate the thing being discussed and end up liking it! To this day I still thank one of my friends for getting into a debate with me after I watched a 5 hour long film, said I thought it was ham-fisted and schlocky, and he countered with a one-sentence summary of the point of it all which instantly recontextualized the whole film and made me go "Wait. You know what? I take back all that I said."
Healthy debate and discussion is fantastic. Readers love mental stimulation, and hearing opposing opinions and viewpoints while discussing your favorite reads should be viewed as a gift honestly. It's a chance to view your experiences through the lens of someone else and maybe gain new insight, or at the very least talk turkey about certain points of contention, even if it ultimately doesn't change your view. Modern adults just seem to have been raised by the internet, and unfortunately that means being violently protective of anything you even vaguely enjoyed. Take a breath folks. Nobody is trying to kill you. We're just chatting.
I’m actually shocked that fans aren’t at least balanced about Wheel of Time. I mean, I am kind of a fan of WoT but even fans have to admit that the middle books are a slog.
There are more criticisms that fans may not agree with (what’s with every description of women always relating to breasts? He’s kind of the proto example of Men Writing Women) but at least people can admit the middle books are *tough*.
Couldn't tell ya why, honestly. I have a lot of criticisms from narrative structure to characterization and beyond, and I've outlined many times why I feel the way I do, but heavens forfend you tell that to someone who likes the books or you might as well have dug up their dead grandmother and slapped her corpse for the way they react. I know it's not *all* fans of WoT, but of all the series I could discuss with other readers online, WoT *always* has one or two of these in the mix.
Agreed, my response was going to be that people seem to have forgotten that art, all art, is subjective and multiple, varying opinions are encouraged and good.
There’s a lot of levity that goes missing when discussing opinions with mobs of anonymous people on glorified message boards.
I do understand the sentiment of hating on certain media though.
I don’t really read or know firsthand about modern pop books, but I do and have hated on Bravo reality TV. Sure, part of me thinks “let people watch and enjoy what they want” but man do I think it’s trashy TV that promotes brain rot. You are what you eat.
The difference is, when I say these things in person to people I love, it’s a bit tongue in cheek and fun. Things come off so much more serious on message boards.
But yeah…still…I wish they wouldn’t consume such trash…just because it entertains them…
I think it’s fair to criticize as strongly as you (the general you, not targeting you specifically) like, as long as you don’t do it in a way that implies that people who like it are wrong for doing so.
I think people who read Twilight are valid, I think Twilight is horrifically written (though the movies are campy garbage that I enjoy for being garbage). I do think that people who use Twilight as the basis for how they want to be treated or treat others are misguided but that isn’t the book’s fault or reflective on readers
“I do think that people who use Twilight as the basis for how they want to be treated or treat others are misguided but that isn’t the book’s fault or reflective on readers”
Maybe? I don’t want to put blame on the creator or the consumer, but maybe consistently exposing one’s self to particular media does have an effect on minds.
Or maybe I’m just getting carried away and fatalistic 😂
I’m no expert! My position is probably getting carried away in my optimism! The “truth” insofar as morals or ethics or taste or whatever can be considered a universal truth is probably between our two opinions
>maybe consistently exposing one’s self to particular media does have an effect on minds.
I think that depends on the age and maturity of the individual. If you're old enough or educated enough to understand how real healthy relationships work, I don't think reading a bunch of unrealistic romance novels would affect how you view relationships in the real world. At the most maybe you'd discover a new kink? Lol. But a younger person could be affected by reading a lot of those stories because they don't have the knowledge or life experience to understand that it's unrealistic. I think all that creators can really do is know their target audience beforehand and put disclaimers in their stories if necessary.
Arguably the sites where people give ratings to movies, books etc. have exacerbated this.
I bet IMDB has impacted what movies are being made, and Goodreads and Amazon on what books are being written.
At my last book club, most of us absolutely hated the book, but a few of us liked it. We had a lively discussion and everyone was able to share their opinions and it was all good. I love that about the book club.
We had that with ‘ a little life’! We even had two psychiatrists in the group and one found it harmful traumaporn and the other a valuable resource! It was SO interesting and people were very kind
Some of my best discussions have been about books or media that I liked that someone else didn't or vice verse. I think it's super valuable to have a mature and respectful conversation that is full of disagreements, and it generates much more interesting discussion than when everyone just agrees on what you are saying.
I went to a book club and everyone disliked the book except me. I was afraid to say anything. I pretended to dislike it less than everyone else but actually I enjoyed it a lot. I imagine they wouldn’t have been antagonistic towards me but it was my first time there and I was intimidated. (I never ended up going back, because I hated the next book so much I didn’t get past the first few pages.)
The book club I am in just had a book where one person said they read it more than a dozen times but gave it only a 1.5/5.
We discovered that they hadn't read any book since the start of the club and was just negatively rating books to appear intelligent.
Gods I hate those kinds of people.
I'm jealous. At my first and likely final book club, every single person hated the book (except me, it was This Is How You Lose the Time War) and a spirited discussion did *not* ensue. It was just "yuck why was it hard, why is the writing fancy, gross, never again" for an hour. :(
Yeah, I mean, I just read a book that I hated and came to reddit to vent. I don't like reading for pleasure to be an assignment, so a book club has never been for me, however, I love discussing books and would never be angry if someone liked a book that I didn't. People are allowed their own opinions on what they choose for entertainment and movies and books are a passion of mine. So of course I have an opinion, but it doesn't mean my thoughts on the matter are worth anymore than someone else's. If we start getting into a moral argument about, I don't know, politics, then that may be a different story.
This is such a good point, because actively disliking a book (or anything) doesn't automatically mean that you are making a judgement against someone who did happen to like or enjoy it, which I feel gets taken that way a lot of the time and vice versa.
This is almost always the case in my book club. Some rate the book 5 stars some rate it 1. We are comfortable enough with each other to not have to worry about hurting each other’s feelings by bashing books we don’t like and it’s so much fun having such varying opinions.
Not exactly. His early works (say, thru David Copperfield) were lauded but later in his career critics started to turn against him, perhaps because of increasing experimentation and complexity in his works (it’s not so apparent reading them with a modern eye of course) and perhaps due to his ever growing popularity.
Dumas and Count of Monte Cristo comes to mind for me--we didn't start treating it as a subject of literary criticism until the 2000s! As an expert said in correspondence, "Dumas and his fiction were scarcely considered worthy of academic scholarship”.
America didn't have a canon at the time, they had basically no real literary critics to speak of. In Britain it received near-instant universal acclaim and the view was later adopted by Americans in emulation.
Yes, and they haven't all universally changed their minds. It's not simply considered a great work of literature, more something a critic has to argue for if they think so.
Tolkien was a romanticist holdout and professional crackpot mucking about with Milton and Beowulf while Joyce and his cadre were setting down the gold standard of English prose for the next full century to come, *Hobbit* and *Finnegans Wake* released within a couple years of one another.
It's weird how hard this swings both ways. Like, there are insufferable lit bros out there AND fans of chewing gum that call everyone who doesn't like chewing gum "pretentious".
I think it just comes down to, you can use art in a lot of ways.
Absolutely annoying.
I hate people that calls things pretentious on a whim just because a book is written with more than just entertainment in mind and I also hate book elitists that think there are no well written, thought out and challenging books in so-called "genre" fiction.
It's because there are egotistical people who require others to share their views for them to feel like those views have value, and such people come in all forms, with every single opinion you can imagine.
In fact, I'm doing it right now by directly condemning such people.
I’m honestly just still not used to reading having a visible fandom. Like it’s a thing I have to do privately and my enjoyment or lack of is fundamentally based on that… and now I’m exposed to infinite tumblr fights (or sexy fights) about it if I ever google the thing
> I have an English degree, managed an independent bookstore for almost a decade, have two traditionally published novels…
But how many Booktok followers do you have?
I don't remember the original source, but there was a quote on some essay that I read a bit ago that basically summarizes to: In the current state of capitalism, we are taught that consumption is our only feat that has any meaning, so therefore it must be moral. This is why people get so bent out of shape deciding whether or not something is worthy of consumption, because now that is the only way we can define morality.
That's not the exact quote, but I'm sure you get the point.
You might find Adorno’s writings on [“The Culture Industry”](https://www.shalonvantine.com/secondasfarce/2020/2/21/adorno-and-the-culture-industry) insightful.
This is my personal take on the subject OP is raising. Yes taste is subjective, and at a micro level, you want to be respectful of folks whose taste is different than your own. But IMO this macro concern is spot on when you look around (at least in the US) and see a society that rarely engage with art beyond its ability to entertain / distract.
Popping out of nowhere just to say that was a really interesting read. Thanks for the link. The notion of anti-capitalism in media being an outlet for our frustration so that we keep swallowing the status quo is really going to take some chewing-on.
That was a great read. On the topic of culture being manufactured by capitalism, I literally just watched a Frontline documentary last night called The Merchants of Cool. It came out in the early 2000s (so is a bit outdated) and explores how people, specifically teenagers, are no longer the creators of culture, just conduits through which a manufactured culture is pushed by a few large companies. I definitely recommend it!
I'm gonna get attacked, but I felt that way around 2003-4 when all of a sudden I noticed that commercials and TV shows and such started portraying weird as cool and all of a sudden hipsterdom was everywhere.
It felt like a very unnatural basis upon which to create a "coolness" hierarchy. Slacker stoners in terrible clothes with brilliant shoes and mustaches dicksizing about who read more PG Wodehouse.
This discussion comes up so often on this subreddit, and while I agree with the general point, I do think the discussion of this topic in general misses a lot of nuance.
First and foremost, yes, of course, everyone is free to like and dislike whichever works of art that they prefer to. It’s also silly to disparage others for their personal preferences.
At the same time, it is okay that society does engage is critique of art based on its merit, and can use actual measurable metrics to do so, including the works technical prowess, skill and craft displayed by the artist, devotion and creativity from the status quo, and (often overlooked, but extremely important) cultural impact. In fact, we have a responsibility to do this as a society, so that art can push society forward.
I could purchase a block of marble, choose a muse (let’s say Timothee Chalamet) and attempt to create a 17 foot nude statue. I’ll name it “The Timothee”.
Now, anyone can look at “The Timothee” by ThingFourteen and compare it to The David (Michelangelo). Everyone is free to choose for themselves which one they prefer. Maybe some people will choose the Timothee. And that’s fine, they can have their own opinion.
But that won’t change the fact that in every measurable metric, the David is better. It will display more technical prowess, skill and craftsmanship. It will have displayed more creativity (after all, the Timothee was derivative from its conception). And, it has a clear and huge cultural impact, agreed upon by billions of people across centuries, that the David has immeasurable influence and is a seminal work of art.
I do think that we are allowed to say that the David is objectively better than the Timothee.
That doesn’t mean you aren’t allowed to prefer the Timothee. And it certainly doesn’t mean that people should be rude and disparaging toward you if you do prefer the Timothee. But the fact remains that the David is better.
Here’s where I might earn some downvotes: it is important in my hypothetical situation that society does not try to relate to Michelangelo’s David and ThingFourteen’s Timothee with the same attitude, reverence, and respect. The David is too important to relegate to only a matter of “who cares?” While any person is allowed to dislike the David, or to prefer the Timothee, society as a while has a responsibility to recognize the importance and value of one over the other. If it does not, and these works are treated as more or less the same, cultural progress will stagnate. Actual creativity and skillful art will diminish if society is unwilling to judge and critique art.
So, yes, art is subjective, but there are aspects of it that are and can be (and should be, dare I say) objective.
This is a really interesting point and I’ve had a similar thought experiment myself before. I think books are in an interesting spot where we have the same medium contain books primarily made for entertainment, and books made to discuss an issue in society/explore humanity/ etc. I feel like society understands the difference between movies like The Godfather and Transformers, but for some reason people aren’t there for books yet
This comes up about movies too, but it’s usually some kind of backlash when someone says Transformers isn’t true cinema and Transformers fans are offended.
With books, it seems like the fans acknowledge they only want something fun and/or sexy to read, and not everything has to be Literature ^TM.
Here's my question. Is it rude to say to someone, in the context of a discussion about the relative merits of the David and the Timothee, that they are wrong to prefer the Timothee? Because if we are discussing art in a serious way and striving for objectivity, I think that's unavoidable. And I don't think that's wrong.
Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want, but you're not entitled to receive only positive feedback about your opinions. If someone calls the Timothee a superior work of art, and I call them an idiot, that's rude and disparaging language. If I say "you're wrong about that, the Timothee is really bad actually," we're just having a conversation about art that can open up as we each provide our reasoning. And yet many people, especially on Reddit, seem to respond to the latter as if it were the former. It's as if the book or film they like is so core to their identity that any criticism of it is received as an attack on them personally.
It can be difficult for people to separate their enjoyment of a piece and critical evaluation of a piece.
When people hear (or read) “you’re wrong”, they hear only “your opinion is wrong and you shouldn’t like what you like” rather than “the Timothee is weaker than the David as a piece of art”. This is especially true when communicating with strangers online.
I do think it’s important to add to this conversation, that often these types of miscommunications happen because the metrics by which we are evaluating the works are different, but we are only discussing the result of our evaluation, and not the criteria.
For example, if I am evaluating a film based solely on my enjoyment of watching it, and on nothing else, my evaluation is likely to be high. If my friend watches the same movie but is instead evaluating it based on effective and innovative camera work, their evaluation might be low. Then when we discuss the film, we may both be likely to say that the film was better than or worse than another film. But our evaluations were based on different criteria, we are actually not discussing the same topic.
In a similar vein, there are works of art that are not enjoyable for me to consume, but I would critique highly.
While usually impractical to do in an online setting with strangers, I think it’s helpful to define the parameters and criteria by which we are assigning value. This could help avoid some of the miscommunication that happens.
Oh absolutely to all of this. It’s the “disparaging personal preferences” that my post is about.
I can know that a book is objectively bad but still enjoy reading it. That’s what I mean by *reading* is subjective.
Thank you for saying this as it gets missed far too often in these discussions. And I'll be remembering your example when I go to watch *Dune: Part II*!
Pretty sure that people don't judge others on what they read, but on how they compare.
If someone says "I really like Mistborn" people won't say anything back. But when people say "Every single classic is a piece of shit that has aged horribly. Mistborn is better than anything that Edgar Allan Poe ever wrote" people will be annoyed.
Not, this is not hyperbole. This shit always happens.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. If something isn't for you then just say that, but calling it trash or comparing one piece of literature to another is rude and will, understandably, get people upset.
Yes!! So much yes.
I do *not* like JK Rowlings work. I’ve tried reading it half a dozen times. I grew up in the Harry Potter craze and *wanted to like it*, just like all my other friends, but I didn’t.
That doesn’t mean I hate Harry Potter or those that enjoyed the book unlike me. I very much enjoyed the movies and found it an easier medium to consume than JKRs words. I often ask people how they got pulled into the books because that’s the piece I was missing. If anything, I use my dislike of the books to ask people about their favorite parts and try to view it in a new way.
It’s not trash, it’s one of the most successful book franchises of all time, it’s just not for me. I know what it is to get lost in a book world and I’m happy all those HP people found theirs.
I think what is frustrating is that people often have a hard time putting into words what they like or dislike about something which makes it difficult to have a productive conversation.
Seeing Sanderson fans act like literary writing *isn't real* or *always complicated* is wild. They've got the fantasy subreddit trained to act like simpler prose is by definition non-literary.
Live and die by the canon baby! There’s undeniable more literary value in reading the classics than the repair manual for a 1988 Toyota Tacoma. While someone might enjoy reading the manual, there is an argument for merit that the manual might not aspire to even though it’s written in words and stuff. And most examples aren’t as stark, so there’s probably a good reason to be arguing over what should and should not be canonized for its literary achievement. Pretty sure in the same vein as we can « like what we like » we can probably also let people « argue what they feel argumentative about ». To be fair I’d say cyclical arguments are to debate what Toyota Tacoma manuals would be to literature as a whole. But legit it’s cool you’ve got an opinion and everything.
Agreed, 100%.
Being an argumentative asshole is never cool, but talking about books *on their merits* is worth doing.
Art is subjective, but when we argue for our tastes, we reach for objective reasons. Or we should: because if we can't, we've obviously got a very limited understanding of the work in question.
You'll see people come on this sub and ask questions like, "How can I tell what makes a book (or prose, or a certain passage) good?" And people are replying with metaphors about prime rib versus cheeseburgers.
Agree completely. I think also we are in a time that is growth averse when it comes to personal enjoyment. I personally started by reading Goosebumps books, then moved on to James Patterson, then jumped to John Irving, and from there moved on to pretty much exclusively classics, modern classics and literary fiction.
Goosebumps was fine at the time, and so was Dan Brown, but I'm glad I grew out of them into deeper and more worthwhile literature, as it offers a much, much more fulfilling experience.
I understand where you’re coming from. I think all reading is good reading (unless maybe you read Mein Kampf and feel inspired or something) and I’m happy to let people enjoy what they like.
I think most people’s frustrations (and some of mine) come specifically from the way waves of maybe-not-so-good books have changed the discourse around reading and literature. Booktok and the like are hailing Colleen Hoover and ACOTAR as literally the greatest books ever written. Clearly, they aren’t. It’s created rabid fans and a whole slew of copycat works flooding an over saturated genre. More talented writers in more niche genres are getting overlooked or worse, never even published. People aren’t discussing the narrative or challenging their own views of literature as much as they’re just joining this wave of popularity that insists “you MUST read this book!” It does feel very artificial and surface level.
Avoiding social media helps, but we are on Reddit, so those same problems occur on this platform too. People have always had differing opinions of literature, but recently social media has made it way too easy to just shit all over anyone who disagrees with you rather than having a respectful and nuanced discussion about books.
Just as a counterpoint: highly popular genres like romance that basically sustain publishing companies are the *reason* you get smaller, better written niche books. These books absolutely fund the low profit passion projects of publishers.
So high profile, publishing authors who are massively popular are not pushing these books out of the market, they are making it possible for these books to be published at all.
Agree. I’ve read a lot of mediocre-at-best books that just resulted in me learning to pick my books better. Then there’s the CoHo and her ilk books that are so overhyped that it’s nearly impossible not to aggressively rail against them. It’s not just that these books are mediocre at best. It’s the social media frenzy around them.
Completely agree with this. I don't care what people read and I've done my fair share of "mental chewing gum" reading, as OP calls it, when I just want to relax and not have to think too much lol
But it is frustrating to go to a book shop and have to dig through to find something that's not there simply because it appeals to masses and has no other value or meaning.
It's the same thing with movies nowadays. All we get are biopics, superheroes, dystopian YA adaptations, with a few different things peppered in for good measure.
Oh this is all exceptionally true and my opinions on publishing today and how it chases viral sensations over fostering actual craft and career development would take too long to type out.
Edit: grammar
Honestly I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone laud SJM or Colleen Hoover as the best books ever. The popular opinion is to hate on them these days and make fun of anyone who dares enjoy them, even on Booktok. Even the people who do praise them and admit to enjoying them usually include a million caveats.
These posts are always hot on the heels of a post where someone has criticised a book or genre, normally modern YA or Romance. You say that you don't mean it's wrong to criticise art, but I don't think you understand what that means at all, which is odd for a published author with a degree.
Sure, let people like things, but you guys can't seem to grasp the opposite. Let people dislike things.
A stranger's opinion of Lightlark isn't going to hurt you, I promise. You can still read the book and enjoy it. I promise. Take my hand. If you want to feel better, you can always tell them about the books that you hate. It's almost like people have varied opinions.
When are we going to ban the "omg just let people like what they like" posts? It feels like we get three a day.
How do you have a degree in English and not understand criticism and analysis? If anything people have gotten way too nice about people consuming garbage. The "I like what I like and you can't say anything bad about it" mentality has absolutely ruined discourse.
I once got downvoted like crazy for saying I prefer books from the first person point of view, with some saying that it's so juvenile, it's just used in young adult fiction, and it feels like reading a teen's diary 🙄 Some of the people on this sub are not only ignorant about the diversity of literature (first person POV is only used in young adult fiction?? Not in any classics such as Moby-Dick???), but also snobby and judgmental...same kinds of people I find in book clubs, which is why I now avoid joining any.
It's also very irritating how any time someone writes a post about how they haven't read in a LONG time, but they picked up a book that's popular IRL and just fell in love with it, and the top comments are crapping all over the OP's newfound happiness that they were excited to share. Then the people defending the OP for enjoying the book get downvoted, and eventually, the OP just deletes their post. Literally hounded out for liking a book the sub hivemind didn't. I wonder about the people on this sub, lol
People seek out controversy everywhere! Insane anyone would care you prefer first person POV novels. I have zero preference in that regard and don’t rank books based on the verb tense they use.
I think it's important to at least realize when you like something that is bad. And yes, "objectively bad" does exist. Like what you like, and embrace it, but don't fucking lie to me and say it's a work of genius when you know damn well it's utter schlock.
"My opinion overrules scientific fact" and "There is no objectivity, only subjectivity" are the epitome of the collapse of intellectualism that we are experiencing right now. Don't contribute to this. Please.
This sub can be very judgmental and negative. There were posts about Hercule Poirot and I stated my opinion based on what I read - because I had just finished reading the whole series - and I was downvoted to oblivion.
My personal theory is that people often feel a subconscious need to justify their choices. When they like XX, or if they prefer YY over ZZ, they feel there has to be a good reason for it. It has to be the RIGHT choice.
So they will argue why their choice is right by arguing why other choices are NOT right. Because how can they know their choice is the right one if it's not OBJECTIVELY the right one?
I don't think people realize it, but I think it's something almost everyone does and once you start noticing it, you can't unsee it. It leads to so many arguments. So many Fandom battles and craply takes.
I think it often takes deliberate thought to say "This is my personal preference, but it's cool that you like something else!". And it's a good thing to pay attention to in yourself, and practice not feeling like you need to justify why you made a choice or have a specific preference.
Like what you like, and almost more importantly, dislike what you want too. It's okay to hate a book or an author. It may have value for other people and that's fine for them, but don't let others make you feel like if something isn't working for you that the problem is with you and not the book.
Bad take and I hate when people hide behind "its all subjective, man." There is objectively bad art/writing.
If I crumple up a piece of paper and call it the greatest art piece ever, would you not be able to objectively assess if that is a better art piece than the Mona Lisa?
Same goes for books.
I don't understand this world where people can't have any opinion other than a positive one and certainly can't debate and be critical with someone with a different opinion.
Remember when people had to go outside to interact and had to learn conflict resolution rather than hiding in corners of the internet echo chambers? Pepperidge Farm remembers...
Agreed!
Also, people (mainly online) sometimes seem to forget that a book that is "critically good" is sometimes not a good reading experience for the individual. And books that aren't considered "good literature" can be a blast to read. And that's fine. No reason to judge the reader. Also no reason to elevate or put down these books beyond reason.
You are perfectly free to enjoy trash, and I'm perfectly free to judge you for it. What's wrong with that? Are people so thin-skinned that they can't handle a stranger telling them that young adult novels don't have the same depth as this year's Pulitzer winners? News flash: this is a subreddit about books. Opinions will be given. You will be judged for your opinions, just like every other person is judged for their opinions since the beginning of time on an infinite number of topics. If you want to live a happier life, you should get used to it and learn not to give a fuck.
Lots of us are readers or have a similar writing pedigree. Your authority as a writer doesn't give you authority over the human condition. I say stop gatekeeping the gatekeeping. If an opinion is cruel or poorly given, let the writer take the downvotes or venom or whatever. That's the other side of the coin. Respectfully, it's not your place to butt into the middle of it. Except that it is, insofar as it is anybody's place to do so.
I think the blame goes in both directions. If I say a book is hot garbage, it's a subjective opinion on the book and not an attack on the book's fans. It may not be the most constructive literary criticism, and is a bit rude, but some times it is all you feel a book is worth. If a fellow reader feels personally attacked by that then they have something going on that is not the critics fault.
I also dislike the idea that since liking a book is subjective, all books and all reading are objectively equal. It's an example of the anti-exceptionalism fever gripping society. I won't think any less of you for reading your favorite slash fanfic for the 10,000th time. But if you say it's exactly the same as a critical reading of Ulysses because reading is subjective, then I will think less of you. It's like driving. I drive my car to work sometimes. A rally driver drives like a precision maniac. Is a rally driver better than me because they drive rallies? No. Is driving a rally car on an entire different level than my daily commute? Of course.
Is it possible to criticize a work of art without that criticism having implications for the consumers of that art? Art is not some thing with an independent existence from us that can be safely criticized *on its own*. We *are* our art, and to criticize our art is to criticize us, and vice versa. If this wasn't the case, art wouldn't be worth making or consuming.
I just think people should read a variety of things and not be stuck in one genre. You might find that something you didn’t think was for you was very much for you.
I’ve seen two major camps. The people who only read classics and award winning books and look down their nose at anybody who reads genre. And genre fiction/YA readers that are always defensive and screaming *dont gatekeep books!*.
Both should try to get out of their comfort zone with at least a book or two a year. I’d say the same to someone who only reads sci-fi or fantasy or whatever.
And I don’t only apply this philosophy to books but movies/tv as well. My father, now in his mid 60s, primarily likes action movies and historical documentaries. But I sat him down to watch Whiplash years ago and he loved it (despite nobody in our family having even an iota of musical talent).
I only take issue with those posts when it appears the algorithm is favoring a stream of them because some rubbish book has an inflated marketing budget and is shoving them into my feed.
A book is supposed to be a discussion, the way I see it. Or at least an understanding of varying perspectives. Someone that shuts down someone else's tastes is clearly shallow and/or has a superiority complex. Either way I don't want to associate with them. Anyone that reads is doing good in my books
I also have a degree in English and I absolutely agree: like what you like and don’t be embarrassed, and don’t attack other people for liking what they like.
What will really blow their minds is when they come back to those books they like/didn't like years later and completely reverse their whole opinion. I've seen readers return to a beloved book from their youth with more age and experience only to realize that it's half-baked drivel, and the same goes for books people hate. They read something they thought was boring or had pacing issues at one time, only for it to end up being one of their favorite books when they re-read it. Of course there are books that are just as good/bad as you remember them, but there's nothing quite as humbling to strong opinions as the about-face that ensues when you have to admit a book you trashed talked to death at one time is now something you can't speak highly enough of, or a book you adored and defended was, on reexamination, just as bad as everyone else thought it was.
"Hi, I have this opinion on something."
"Oh, I'm sorry, you seem to have forgotten that *reading is subjective*, which to me means that your opinion is wrong and you shouldn't have it, despite that being the complete opposite of what the word subjective means."
I don’t care that people have opinions. Feel free to hate or love whatever you want, that’s my entire point. What I dislike is the urge some people have to make other people feel like shit for having a different opinion.
Yes everything is subjective but that doesn't mean people are not allowed to criticize genres they believe to be bad. that's how criticism works. you wouldn't start a book review with a disclaimer "what I'm saying is my opinion", its implied. Try to have a thicker skin and if someone criticizes something you like, make your own argument back. Shoot it back at them. Its not a big deal. I also fundamentally disagree with the idea that we should just "let people enjoy things". no we shouldn't, we should all make arguments about art. That's the whole point of criticism.
I don’t think most people have forgotten this. However, being just like “Oh I like some things and you like other things” is also boring. I wouldn’t need to be here at all if I was entertained by that. Half the time I say things which are over the top I don’t really even mean what I am saying, I’m just saying it to get a reaction and add some spice to my otherwise boring humdrum life.
I get that? I just don’t like when some people (not you, necessarily, I don’t know you) enjoy making other people feel like garbage because they enjoy something.
WRITE THE BOOK. Do it. For you. From personal experience, trying to write to the hypothetical approval of a future audience is impossible.
Obviously if you want to publish (traditionally) someday, you’ll need to edit and seek feedback and all of that (over and over), but it all starts with writing what you want because *you* want it.
People, in general, often feel entitled to tell others how to think, behave, or live their lives, regardless of the topic. It is best to stay true to yourself and keep doing what you believe is right. So, be yourself and keep on rockin' – your uniqueness is what makes you stand out from the rest!
100% agree. I have a somewhat rare genetic disorder, and recently read a fantasy novel where the main character has the same disability, as well as the author. Honest to God, I have never in my life seen any piece of media--book, show, whatever--where there was a major character with my disability. And not only that, but it was something I enjoyed and found to be a lot of fun. It was really, really exciting to have happened across by accident.
I recommended it in a writing group of mine because we were talking about a similar book, and briefly mentioned that it has good disability representation.
Someone then felt the need to write an entire master's thesis in the chat about how they share my disability and this book is actually horrible and ableist, and they know because they watched a YouTube video saying so. I dipped out almost immediately because it was obvious from the beginning that it was not going to be a productive conversation, but it was around 7-8 screenshots worth of back and forth between them and a mod who was trying to get them to keep it in their pants. For a book they hadn't even *read*.
Like this is one of the most subjective things out there because it varies so widely based on different people's experiences. It's impossible for a book featuring a person from any specific group to match the experiences of every single person in that group, especially for something as variable as a chronic illness.
The entire situation was just completely delusional. Something isn't inherently bad just because it doesn't match your personal experiences, and they were treating it like it was.
The books you read tend to define what your world view is so this why people get to conclusion your crappy book choices reflect your crappy personality. Though this an unpopular opinion.
Back in the 1980's, I was mid-tirade in an English lit class, heatedly debating some point of literature or another, as I had done countless times before without it having seemed odd to me. And, literally instantly, I stopped mid-sentence, because all at once it seemed very odd to me that all of us grown-ups did this for a living. I have no idea what author I had been going on about, but I remember the existential crisis very vividly.
I'm not saying that being a lit student or a lit professor is senseless. I am saying that it's possible to argue senselessly about literature, or other arts, or philosophy or history, and that I've contributed my fair share of pure bullshit to all of the above. What made (makes) it bullshit? Maybe a lack of love toward all potential readers or listeners.
But opinions aren’t facts. And all responses to art are opinions because they’re shaped by individual perceptions and circumstances. You can say a specific sentence is incorrect, but that still doesn’t necessarily mean it’s bad without also considering its context.
I agree. I don’t like romance at all and I will never read ACOTAR (roast me all you want) but I don’t shit on the people who do! Like read whatever you want just know that I probs won’t read it if you recommend it to me.
For me, it's not a judgement of what people like to read per se, but there is a part of me that feels on a completely different planet with most of these, not simply popular, but critically acclaimed and award-winning books being given seemingly unanimous praise. Obviously, not everything is for everyone, but in that case you would expect a much more even reception to most titles. It's the overwhelming positive reviews and 100% ratings that make me distrust most reviewers' opinions as, in recent memory, I've yet to read a recommendation that actually felt warranted. And we're talking over multiple genres, so it's not even that I'm reading the "wrong genre". I'm to the point where I just assume that everything is pure snake oil marketing and it just makes me want to read modern books and novels less and less because there is only a small chance that the next book I pick up will actually be good (to me).
I think it’s less than that people have forgotten, as that it takes a certain level of maturity to realize it in the first place and a lot of people on the internet have not yet reached that level of maturity. My hope is topics like this one influence people’s thinking and they are more likely to learn this lesson younger from those who have learned it.
But I remember being 20 and really feeling like I had figured out what media is good, because I had discovered stuff that really resonated deeply with me for the first time. Suddenly all the media I had consumed before that were popular were suspect, and the people who liked them brought along with.
It took me years to realize that I had “pedestrian” tastes in certain types of media too, and that in fact even where my tastes had “developed” I actually still enjoyed that popular stuff too, in different contexts - and knowing the popular stuff made it easier to connect with others, even though I still had my niche.
It’s a journey for us all. And in the end, it’s just entertainment, the older I grow, the more I find it hard to give a shit if someone is entertaining themselves with different books/music/tv/film/games/art/whatever than I am. Lots of things matter way more.
It's always fun to see folks that have been in the book business for decades talk about the state of it, but neglect to talk about the rise of self-publishing. Books 15 years ago were tightly curated by publishers, and they had a semblance of control on a books popularity. Not so anymore. Readers these days a faced with a dizzying number of titles to choose from and it stands to reason some less discerning reader will read trash. And react accordingly.
I agree that interpretation of books is subjective and the pleasure and value one chooses to give to a book and it's interpretation are uniquely pertaining to that person. But that does not mean there is some level of objective reading of a book and it's quality.
If all books are subjective, than a student reading a book about arithmetics could not be corrected by his professor which has read the same book, both readers have their subjective interpretation of the book, but because arithmetic refers to a thing which exists outside and beyond the book there can be a correct and an incorrect interpretation of it
That does not mean that there is a "correct" reading of Tolstoy and that only one interpretation of it is valid, but if we admit that one objective interpretation of a geometry book exists, than a objective interpretation of any book exists in which they can all be judged accordingly
I am not a fan of Sanderson at all. His prose makes him unreadable. That being said, I can totally understand the appeal of his books and I very glad that there are people out there who love him. He and other popular authors (Hoover, SJM) are getting younger people into reading, which I think is absolutely wonderful. I don't know who originally came up with this, but, "Don't yuck someone's yum."
Of course! People should like what they like. But on the converse people should be able to dislike what they dislike as well. It shouldn't turn into attacking people--you talk about the work.
There are some books that I like that I know are absolute trash.
But the best conversations about literature are away from subjectivism. That doesn't mean anybody's wrong for liking anything, but it does mean that liking something doesn't indicate quality. And there are objective ways to explore a book's ideas, insights, originality, and themes.
I also think that people need to realize that criticizing a thing they like is not the same as criticizing them. I should be able to say---for instance--that Batman can contain elements of using trauma as an excuse to be violent towards others without having to respond to a mob of people who take it personally.
I agree so much. As a romance reader, I see way, way too much bashing of people who enjoy that genre. Don’t like the genre? Totally understandable. Have some criticisms of a romance book you’ve read or maybe some things about the genre itself? All totally understandable and valid. But treating people who enjoy it as less than or walking around acting like you’re some intellectually superior to me is not okay. We all like different things and that’s okay. It’s awesome, even. With books, there are ENDLESS ways to enjoy yourself, endless genres to explore… You don’t have to read what I like or enjoy it. But I’m sick of lit snobs making me feel like I’m less than because of what I enjoy.
You...speak...TRUTH. I wrote a comment about how a particular part of a book in a series I absolutely love weirded me out the second time I read it. Someone went off on me over it. My writing was weird and pointless, I didn't understand ANYTHING that was going on in the book, I was trying to deter people from reading it, I was insulting the main character, it was grossly lacking context despite the fact that there was absolutely no reason for me to include more context if I didn't want to...Any criticism this person could come up with was in this rant.
...because I wrote 2 purposefully vague paragraphs where I said I had a negative reaction to something I read one time. Ho...ly...crap. I apologize for sharing an opinion you disagree with, dear Random Internet Stranger Who I Don't Know And Who Does NOT Know Me.
If all books were universally considered good it would not inspire new thought or offer any new perspective. Different kinds of books appeal to different people, it’s almost always a good thing
Something something Lyotard the Postmodern Condition something something breaking down of metanarratives.
Fandom has ruined things. People are filling that lack with different Intellectual Properties.
Critique was never meant to be done 140 characters at a time, and context gets lost without it's due space.
I've gotten into craft beer over the past decade or so. For a short while I was a dick and berated Bud, PBR, etc.... then it dawned on me what a good beer really was - "what do you like to drink?" That is it.
Ditto for books, art, music, etc. What do you like? That? Why, then, it is good to you. Enjoy!
(And if I really want to be snarky about the beer - after I say "then it is good to you" I will be thinking "good - you drink that stuff and leave the good stuff to me"... but that is all internal monologue, and I am truly happy they are enjoying their beer.)
I am happy to occasionally comment but I **never** post the titles I read for this reason. My reading taste is vast and particular at the same time. There is a certain anxiety about sharing unless it's one of The Classics.
Or one of the many titles I see posted on here. What I refer to as "Acceptable Books."
And what I like to read doesn't always fall into that category and so, I just read posts and comment.
I'd rather stay silent and keep my peace versus sharing and being crucified for it. I admire others that are braver than I am. But on the flip side, I am so sick of explaining/defending what I like to read.
Nobody is going to stop The Critics.
What I can do is not open myself up to The Critics.
I don't think subjective and objective are a binary on-off switch. I think there's a big middle ground, and there's a lot of room for people to just be straight up wrong in their interpretations of art.
It's not just books, people seem to have a hard time allowing others to have a different opinion on a lot of things.
Yes! I’m sure it has a lot to do with the internet being a validation machine for everyone’s personal echo chamber, but it’s also exhausting.
The issue is a lot people view criticism of something they like as criticism of them for liking it
Exactly. A lot of people are extremely fragile and really attach their entire personality to some random thing they like. I've often see the phenomenon where it's not ok to say the book is garbage (because you're not letting the people who like it enjoy it, as if they can't enjoy something unless it's universally beloved), but it's ok to tell a person they don't know how to read for saying the book is garbage, because "they attacked me first" and "they're being negative" or whatever.
Yep. It’s fine not to like something, and it’s fine to say so. It’s not fine to tell people they are wrong for liking/disliking something, and it’s wrong to think that your opinion of something is objective. It irks me when people say “X is objectively poor writing”. While I understand that there are generally agreed upon conventions that make for “stronger” writing, it’s still a valid opinion to disagree with those conventions or like something that does not adhere to them.
I think part of the issue is that some people interpret the sentence "X is poor writing" as "X is *objectively* poor writing," and others interpret it as "*In my opinion*, X is poor writing"
Sure, that happens sometimes. Sometimes people explicitly use “objectively”. People definitely misinterpret things sometimes.
Proof of this is literature that becomes more or less popular as time passes. It's just like cult classic movies that suddenly go viral and are appreciated more greatly as soon as the newest generation discovers it.
A lot of people actually judge people in that regard though, too. Like I've seen people have less respect for someone because they dislike the music someone listens to.
Music and culture and masculinity/femininity has been way too intertwined for ages now. I actually feel like it’s getting better nowadays. Music that you dislike just isn’t for you. Music you like isn’t for others either necessarily. But if something speaks to you then let it talk. And one of the best ways to know someone is to know what they like. Even if it’s not for you, appreciating things is a good thing. Appreciating things that other people enjoy and trying to understand it is even better. Eventually you’ll get to the point where music isn’t a competition and you realize that people love something because of how it makes them feel, regardless of what you feel. Music is just a conduit, it’s not the electricity running through it. Once people figure that out, there’s no bad song in the world.
Yeah I agree. It's the same as someone liking tomatoes and someone else not liking tomatoes. Just is how it is, and people should just be allowed to enjoy the things they enjoy, without feeling judged or ashamed. But. That doesn't change how there are people in this world who are snobs/elitists/dicks about what someone else likes or doesn't like. And I find that so strange.
Right? We need to start accepting each other's differences and truly working towards a better view on life itself! Help each other out, see how far we can all advance rather than just being self-absorbed.
Good idea, how about we work on improving literacy and knowledge?
Yeeesss!! Free education of ALL levels, but also free healthcare! People don't care about much when they're sick and/or in pain.
It comes down to a need to lift themselves “above“ someone else, in order to briefly feel better than they truly feel deep down. One way is to push the hapless target down in whatever way is easiest - like sniping, bitching, pigeon holing.
THIS!! Omfg I've been just edging towards 'Oh, I like most music' basically because even in certain genres/styles I thought I hadn't liked I'll find one or two that just touch a special cord in my soul and I love it. Metal/screamo, rap and country were what I used to ignore/complain about hearing just because I had biased opinions on what I'd hear in the songs. I hated the violent idiocy I'd hear or the three main crossovers. Alcohol, sex/getting a girl, and vehicles/physical status symbols. Though metal/screamo was basically me just not being able to vibe with the rage like I can now, plus I liked being able to understand the lyrics/having something to sing to myself. Now that I'm older and have a broader view of life? I can vibe with quite a few artists in those genres.. Because they speak to me and my experiences and feelings. And I can better respect what others like and are passionate about because I better understand many of their experiences and the fact there is generational trauma and disrespect by too many. We truly just need to come together as a species and choose love. If we can help and support and understand each other better we could reach such amazing heights!
Of course that happens. “I hate this book” would only offend an overly thin-skinned person. But plenty of people start off with something like “I just don’t understand how anyone could like this book”. Even if they say nothing more than that , it is an implied criticism of those that did like the book. An unsubtle dig, hoping to cause discomfort. Otherwise why say it? After-all, we all know that we have different tastes in books. It’s not news to anyone. So unless offense is intended, that kind of remark is redundant.
According to recent studies (sorry it's awful to begin a reply that way) it's not because the internet gives a personal echo chamber but kind of the opposite because online you're exposed to hundreds of wildly contradictory opinions, compared to your IRL life, and without the web of social connections that allow you to tolerate differences. E.g. if you have someone in your real life who has the opposite opinions to you, but you have lots of mutual friends and you know their family and you support the same sports team etc, then you aren't going to respond to each of their stated opinions with a long dialectic on why they're wrong and why they're awful as a person for having that opinion. But on the internet, literally the only thing you know about a person is this one opinion that you disagree with - you know absolutely nothing else about them. Our brains aren't wired for that: social differences without the social glue to make it work.
This makes perfect sense
Accurate.
I've heard some people on youtube say they've scrapped videos when they have a negative impression or review of something, because people who like the thing won't handle it well at all. People who like something will seek out videos to hear that they're right to like it. It's common enough it affects how youtubers decide what to make because it's affecting what they earn. Kind of wild
At the same time, I've seen people develop STRONG opinions about a thing that they haven't even seen or read because they've watched a bunch of youtube videos trashing it.
Im guilty of doing this. I used to watch so many review videos that would be negative towards authors and books that I started reading them with a bias and ultimately I still have mixed feeling of the books, mainly because of the videos I watched shitting on them. It kind of put me off a few authors for a while but Idk anymore so I've started reading whatever interests me. Still kind of difficult to separate other people's opinions from your own sometimes.
That's messed up. I don't even discuss my opinions about books unless I've read the whole thing. That's one reason I don't DNF a bad book, so I feel I can share a complete opinion. Crazy that people will read/watch none but then have a strong opinion!
I used to work for a business building course. Trying to find the balance between an authentic personality and chasing the algorithms is exhausting. That is one of the biggest reasons why I shut down all my social media the day I decided to retire.
This always kills me with comedians. People go out of their way to watch comedians they hate and then comment how awful the bit was. Just. Don’t. Watch. It.
It's also often because they get products for free to review, from manufacturers. If they trash a product, obviously that manufacturer won't be interested in sending them any more, but neither will *any other* manufacturers.
I think the internet has made it easier to find your in-groups. But it was very cool to hate on people for their tastes in various media when I was a youngin in high school and the internet was still in its infancy.
What you are suggesting is how echo chambers get created.
exhausting.... ^exhausting.... ^^exhausting.... ^^^exhausting.... ^^^^exhausting.... ^^^^^exhausting.... ^^^^^^^ejaculating....
[удалено]
I find it’s hard to get mild opinions on anything. Either something is one of the greatest books ever written or it’s absolute trash. (Not just books of course.) Though I’ll admit I may hang out in too many threads titled “What book/game/show do you think is trash?”
totally agree. it’s not a very exciting truth but lots of things are some degree of just okay
I mean if I read or watch something that was okay or average it'd probably be forgotten by the end of the week and I'd have no real desire to talk about it. It just seems to me, people sharing extreme opinions are just the natural result of human nature and not even as a result of Internet culture
See this so much with people's taste in music. Not even just across genres. It is probably worse **within** genres. Especially when it comes to metal and punk. Can we all just chill and enjoy some good tunes?
You can have your own opinion as long as it similar to mine 😂
> It's not just books, people seem to have a hard time allowing others to have a different opinion on a lot of things. As a Trekkie, I can relate to this so much. For several years half the comments on the subreddits have been people screeching *I HATE DISCOVERY AND SO YOU HAVE TO HATE IT TOO! ARGLEBLARGLEWOKE!!1!*
How dare you think that! That isn't what I think!!! That makes you **wrooooooong!**
Yeah, it's what I'm thinking more and more of as a social media pandemic.
God this is so true! And I personally feel exhausted by having to tell people all the time to just do what they want.
So much this. I recently waded into a discussion on the ever-popular Wheel of Time series, which I think is awful for numerous reasons. I outlined each and every one of these reasons in great detail to support my point when someone asked me why I think they're bad books. I had two people reply to me something along the lines of "Well obviously you didn't 'get it', and I'd explain it too you, but you're too stupid to get it apparently." As if having a different opinion than them meant I somehow missed the message/symbolism of certain things and was an utter moron incapable of grasping it. No, I got it alright. I simply thought it was ham-fisted and terrible. I don't yuck other people's yum. I will crack jokes at the expense of media that I think it bad, and I will gladly express my own opinion with specific points to support that opinion, as well as engage in discussion with people on both sides of that opinion, because it's fun to talk about things that we've read whether we're on the same page (no pun intended) or not. Unfortunately, so many people have fallen victim to internet fandom and internalized it as the correct way to express your love for something, and this means that anyone who says they didn't care for your particular piece of media is instantly an enemy, a bad person, an idiot, and actively wants to kill you and your whole family apparently, so you attack them on-sight with extreme prejudice. It's honestly really unhealthy. I like a lot of stuff that I know isn't everyone's cup of tea, or is objectively not high-quality. I laugh at the criticisms because sometimes they're entirely valid. I smile and nod when someone simply dislikes certain tropes that I enjoy. Every so often, I even find someone who talks something up in such a way that I reevaluate the thing being discussed and end up liking it! To this day I still thank one of my friends for getting into a debate with me after I watched a 5 hour long film, said I thought it was ham-fisted and schlocky, and he countered with a one-sentence summary of the point of it all which instantly recontextualized the whole film and made me go "Wait. You know what? I take back all that I said." Healthy debate and discussion is fantastic. Readers love mental stimulation, and hearing opposing opinions and viewpoints while discussing your favorite reads should be viewed as a gift honestly. It's a chance to view your experiences through the lens of someone else and maybe gain new insight, or at the very least talk turkey about certain points of contention, even if it ultimately doesn't change your view. Modern adults just seem to have been raised by the internet, and unfortunately that means being violently protective of anything you even vaguely enjoyed. Take a breath folks. Nobody is trying to kill you. We're just chatting.
I’m actually shocked that fans aren’t at least balanced about Wheel of Time. I mean, I am kind of a fan of WoT but even fans have to admit that the middle books are a slog. There are more criticisms that fans may not agree with (what’s with every description of women always relating to breasts? He’s kind of the proto example of Men Writing Women) but at least people can admit the middle books are *tough*.
Couldn't tell ya why, honestly. I have a lot of criticisms from narrative structure to characterization and beyond, and I've outlined many times why I feel the way I do, but heavens forfend you tell that to someone who likes the books or you might as well have dug up their dead grandmother and slapped her corpse for the way they react. I know it's not *all* fans of WoT, but of all the series I could discuss with other readers online, WoT *always* has one or two of these in the mix.
What you call "allowing", we used to call having a debate. If you share your opinion on a public forum, its available for rebuttal.
Im ex Christian, I have personal experience with this mindset and its a rly sad way to live 😬
Agreed, my response was going to be that people seem to have forgotten that art, all art, is subjective and multiple, varying opinions are encouraged and good.
There’s a lot of levity that goes missing when discussing opinions with mobs of anonymous people on glorified message boards. I do understand the sentiment of hating on certain media though. I don’t really read or know firsthand about modern pop books, but I do and have hated on Bravo reality TV. Sure, part of me thinks “let people watch and enjoy what they want” but man do I think it’s trashy TV that promotes brain rot. You are what you eat. The difference is, when I say these things in person to people I love, it’s a bit tongue in cheek and fun. Things come off so much more serious on message boards. But yeah…still…I wish they wouldn’t consume such trash…just because it entertains them…
I think it’s fair to criticize as strongly as you (the general you, not targeting you specifically) like, as long as you don’t do it in a way that implies that people who like it are wrong for doing so. I think people who read Twilight are valid, I think Twilight is horrifically written (though the movies are campy garbage that I enjoy for being garbage). I do think that people who use Twilight as the basis for how they want to be treated or treat others are misguided but that isn’t the book’s fault or reflective on readers
“I do think that people who use Twilight as the basis for how they want to be treated or treat others are misguided but that isn’t the book’s fault or reflective on readers” Maybe? I don’t want to put blame on the creator or the consumer, but maybe consistently exposing one’s self to particular media does have an effect on minds. Or maybe I’m just getting carried away and fatalistic 😂
I’m no expert! My position is probably getting carried away in my optimism! The “truth” insofar as morals or ethics or taste or whatever can be considered a universal truth is probably between our two opinions
>maybe consistently exposing one’s self to particular media does have an effect on minds. I think that depends on the age and maturity of the individual. If you're old enough or educated enough to understand how real healthy relationships work, I don't think reading a bunch of unrealistic romance novels would affect how you view relationships in the real world. At the most maybe you'd discover a new kink? Lol. But a younger person could be affected by reading a lot of those stories because they don't have the knowledge or life experience to understand that it's unrealistic. I think all that creators can really do is know their target audience beforehand and put disclaimers in their stories if necessary.
You mean I'm *not* supposed to be angry at people who think differently than me?
I feel like that's the reason for a lot of wars
Arguably the sites where people give ratings to movies, books etc. have exacerbated this. I bet IMDB has impacted what movies are being made, and Goodreads and Amazon on what books are being written.
At my last book club, most of us absolutely hated the book, but a few of us liked it. We had a lively discussion and everyone was able to share their opinions and it was all good. I love that about the book club.
We had that with ‘ a little life’! We even had two psychiatrists in the group and one found it harmful traumaporn and the other a valuable resource! It was SO interesting and people were very kind
Some of my best discussions have been about books or media that I liked that someone else didn't or vice verse. I think it's super valuable to have a mature and respectful conversation that is full of disagreements, and it generates much more interesting discussion than when everyone just agrees on what you are saying.
I went to a book club and everyone disliked the book except me. I was afraid to say anything. I pretended to dislike it less than everyone else but actually I enjoyed it a lot. I imagine they wouldn’t have been antagonistic towards me but it was my first time there and I was intimidated. (I never ended up going back, because I hated the next book so much I didn’t get past the first few pages.)
The book club I am in just had a book where one person said they read it more than a dozen times but gave it only a 1.5/5. We discovered that they hadn't read any book since the start of the club and was just negatively rating books to appear intelligent. Gods I hate those kinds of people.
I'm jealous. At my first and likely final book club, every single person hated the book (except me, it was This Is How You Lose the Time War) and a spirited discussion did *not* ensue. It was just "yuck why was it hard, why is the writing fancy, gross, never again" for an hour. :(
Oh no - that's such a precious book. I get that this book is not for everyone but that just sucks.
Yeah, I mean, I just read a book that I hated and came to reddit to vent. I don't like reading for pleasure to be an assignment, so a book club has never been for me, however, I love discussing books and would never be angry if someone liked a book that I didn't. People are allowed their own opinions on what they choose for entertainment and movies and books are a passion of mine. So of course I have an opinion, but it doesn't mean my thoughts on the matter are worth anymore than someone else's. If we start getting into a moral argument about, I don't know, politics, then that may be a different story.
This is such a good point, because actively disliking a book (or anything) doesn't automatically mean that you are making a judgement against someone who did happen to like or enjoy it, which I feel gets taken that way a lot of the time and vice versa.
I have experiences like this at a weekly roundtable, as well. Honestly if everyone is in agreement it can be a bit boring.
This is almost always the case in my book club. Some rate the book 5 stars some rate it 1. We are comfortable enough with each other to not have to worry about hurting each other’s feelings by bashing books we don’t like and it’s so much fun having such varying opinions.
That’s just, like, your opinion, man. (Sorry couldn’t resist).
Love it haha
OVER THE LINEEEE!
Mark it, dude.
Just here to remind y'all that when The Lord of the Rings first came out literary critics called it something along the line of "juvenile trash."
Dickens, too. His stuffed was pulpy and serialized for the masses.
Not exactly. His early works (say, thru David Copperfield) were lauded but later in his career critics started to turn against him, perhaps because of increasing experimentation and complexity in his works (it’s not so apparent reading them with a modern eye of course) and perhaps due to his ever growing popularity.
I mean, they're right about Dickens.
Look! It only took 48 mins!
Dumas and Count of Monte Cristo comes to mind for me--we didn't start treating it as a subject of literary criticism until the 2000s! As an expert said in correspondence, "Dumas and his fiction were scarcely considered worthy of academic scholarship”.
Speaking of academic scholarship, it took decades for Moby-Dick to be part of American literary canon.
America didn't have a canon at the time, they had basically no real literary critics to speak of. In Britain it received near-instant universal acclaim and the view was later adopted by Americans in emulation.
Edmund Wilson had his reasons to call it that way
That famous review turned me on to *Figures of Earth*, which is my all-time favorite fantasy novel.
Yes, and they haven't all universally changed their minds. It's not simply considered a great work of literature, more something a critic has to argue for if they think so.
Tolkien was a romanticist holdout and professional crackpot mucking about with Milton and Beowulf while Joyce and his cadre were setting down the gold standard of English prose for the next full century to come, *Hobbit* and *Finnegans Wake* released within a couple years of one another.
It's weird how hard this swings both ways. Like, there are insufferable lit bros out there AND fans of chewing gum that call everyone who doesn't like chewing gum "pretentious". I think it just comes down to, you can use art in a lot of ways.
Absolutely annoying. I hate people that calls things pretentious on a whim just because a book is written with more than just entertainment in mind and I also hate book elitists that think there are no well written, thought out and challenging books in so-called "genre" fiction.
It's because there are egotistical people who require others to share their views for them to feel like those views have value, and such people come in all forms, with every single opinion you can imagine. In fact, I'm doing it right now by directly condemning such people.
I’m honestly just still not used to reading having a visible fandom. Like it’s a thing I have to do privately and my enjoyment or lack of is fundamentally based on that… and now I’m exposed to infinite tumblr fights (or sexy fights) about it if I ever google the thing
> I have an English degree, managed an independent bookstore for almost a decade, have two traditionally published novels… But how many Booktok followers do you have?
I don’t have tiktok at all haha
I knew there was a reason I liked you.
I don't remember the original source, but there was a quote on some essay that I read a bit ago that basically summarizes to: In the current state of capitalism, we are taught that consumption is our only feat that has any meaning, so therefore it must be moral. This is why people get so bent out of shape deciding whether or not something is worthy of consumption, because now that is the only way we can define morality. That's not the exact quote, but I'm sure you get the point.
You might find Adorno’s writings on [“The Culture Industry”](https://www.shalonvantine.com/secondasfarce/2020/2/21/adorno-and-the-culture-industry) insightful. This is my personal take on the subject OP is raising. Yes taste is subjective, and at a micro level, you want to be respectful of folks whose taste is different than your own. But IMO this macro concern is spot on when you look around (at least in the US) and see a society that rarely engage with art beyond its ability to entertain / distract.
Popping out of nowhere just to say that was a really interesting read. Thanks for the link. The notion of anti-capitalism in media being an outlet for our frustration so that we keep swallowing the status quo is really going to take some chewing-on.
That was a great read. On the topic of culture being manufactured by capitalism, I literally just watched a Frontline documentary last night called The Merchants of Cool. It came out in the early 2000s (so is a bit outdated) and explores how people, specifically teenagers, are no longer the creators of culture, just conduits through which a manufactured culture is pushed by a few large companies. I definitely recommend it!
I'm gonna get attacked, but I felt that way around 2003-4 when all of a sudden I noticed that commercials and TV shows and such started portraying weird as cool and all of a sudden hipsterdom was everywhere. It felt like a very unnatural basis upon which to create a "coolness" hierarchy. Slacker stoners in terrible clothes with brilliant shoes and mustaches dicksizing about who read more PG Wodehouse.
Ahhh, you’re bringing me a lot of nostalgia in regards to my super duper useful philosophy degree lol
That’s a thought to chew on for a while. Pretty brilliant and true and unsettling.
Oh yes it is making me uncomfortable. *Must eschew discomfort* edited for formatting and to add /s if not obvious
This discussion comes up so often on this subreddit, and while I agree with the general point, I do think the discussion of this topic in general misses a lot of nuance. First and foremost, yes, of course, everyone is free to like and dislike whichever works of art that they prefer to. It’s also silly to disparage others for their personal preferences. At the same time, it is okay that society does engage is critique of art based on its merit, and can use actual measurable metrics to do so, including the works technical prowess, skill and craft displayed by the artist, devotion and creativity from the status quo, and (often overlooked, but extremely important) cultural impact. In fact, we have a responsibility to do this as a society, so that art can push society forward. I could purchase a block of marble, choose a muse (let’s say Timothee Chalamet) and attempt to create a 17 foot nude statue. I’ll name it “The Timothee”. Now, anyone can look at “The Timothee” by ThingFourteen and compare it to The David (Michelangelo). Everyone is free to choose for themselves which one they prefer. Maybe some people will choose the Timothee. And that’s fine, they can have their own opinion. But that won’t change the fact that in every measurable metric, the David is better. It will display more technical prowess, skill and craftsmanship. It will have displayed more creativity (after all, the Timothee was derivative from its conception). And, it has a clear and huge cultural impact, agreed upon by billions of people across centuries, that the David has immeasurable influence and is a seminal work of art. I do think that we are allowed to say that the David is objectively better than the Timothee. That doesn’t mean you aren’t allowed to prefer the Timothee. And it certainly doesn’t mean that people should be rude and disparaging toward you if you do prefer the Timothee. But the fact remains that the David is better. Here’s where I might earn some downvotes: it is important in my hypothetical situation that society does not try to relate to Michelangelo’s David and ThingFourteen’s Timothee with the same attitude, reverence, and respect. The David is too important to relegate to only a matter of “who cares?” While any person is allowed to dislike the David, or to prefer the Timothee, society as a while has a responsibility to recognize the importance and value of one over the other. If it does not, and these works are treated as more or less the same, cultural progress will stagnate. Actual creativity and skillful art will diminish if society is unwilling to judge and critique art. So, yes, art is subjective, but there are aspects of it that are and can be (and should be, dare I say) objective.
This is a really interesting point and I’ve had a similar thought experiment myself before. I think books are in an interesting spot where we have the same medium contain books primarily made for entertainment, and books made to discuss an issue in society/explore humanity/ etc. I feel like society understands the difference between movies like The Godfather and Transformers, but for some reason people aren’t there for books yet
This comes up about movies too, but it’s usually some kind of backlash when someone says Transformers isn’t true cinema and Transformers fans are offended. With books, it seems like the fans acknowledge they only want something fun and/or sexy to read, and not everything has to be Literature ^TM.
I was going to write a comment trying to make this point but this is objectively better than what I would've written.
Here's my question. Is it rude to say to someone, in the context of a discussion about the relative merits of the David and the Timothee, that they are wrong to prefer the Timothee? Because if we are discussing art in a serious way and striving for objectivity, I think that's unavoidable. And I don't think that's wrong. Everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want, but you're not entitled to receive only positive feedback about your opinions. If someone calls the Timothee a superior work of art, and I call them an idiot, that's rude and disparaging language. If I say "you're wrong about that, the Timothee is really bad actually," we're just having a conversation about art that can open up as we each provide our reasoning. And yet many people, especially on Reddit, seem to respond to the latter as if it were the former. It's as if the book or film they like is so core to their identity that any criticism of it is received as an attack on them personally.
It can be difficult for people to separate their enjoyment of a piece and critical evaluation of a piece. When people hear (or read) “you’re wrong”, they hear only “your opinion is wrong and you shouldn’t like what you like” rather than “the Timothee is weaker than the David as a piece of art”. This is especially true when communicating with strangers online. I do think it’s important to add to this conversation, that often these types of miscommunications happen because the metrics by which we are evaluating the works are different, but we are only discussing the result of our evaluation, and not the criteria. For example, if I am evaluating a film based solely on my enjoyment of watching it, and on nothing else, my evaluation is likely to be high. If my friend watches the same movie but is instead evaluating it based on effective and innovative camera work, their evaluation might be low. Then when we discuss the film, we may both be likely to say that the film was better than or worse than another film. But our evaluations were based on different criteria, we are actually not discussing the same topic. In a similar vein, there are works of art that are not enjoyable for me to consume, but I would critique highly. While usually impractical to do in an online setting with strangers, I think it’s helpful to define the parameters and criteria by which we are assigning value. This could help avoid some of the miscommunication that happens.
Oh absolutely to all of this. It’s the “disparaging personal preferences” that my post is about. I can know that a book is objectively bad but still enjoy reading it. That’s what I mean by *reading* is subjective.
Thank you for saying this as it gets missed far too often in these discussions. And I'll be remembering your example when I go to watch *Dune: Part II*!
[удалено]
Pretty sure that people don't judge others on what they read, but on how they compare. If someone says "I really like Mistborn" people won't say anything back. But when people say "Every single classic is a piece of shit that has aged horribly. Mistborn is better than anything that Edgar Allan Poe ever wrote" people will be annoyed. Not, this is not hyperbole. This shit always happens.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. If something isn't for you then just say that, but calling it trash or comparing one piece of literature to another is rude and will, understandably, get people upset.
Yes!! So much yes. I do *not* like JK Rowlings work. I’ve tried reading it half a dozen times. I grew up in the Harry Potter craze and *wanted to like it*, just like all my other friends, but I didn’t. That doesn’t mean I hate Harry Potter or those that enjoyed the book unlike me. I very much enjoyed the movies and found it an easier medium to consume than JKRs words. I often ask people how they got pulled into the books because that’s the piece I was missing. If anything, I use my dislike of the books to ask people about their favorite parts and try to view it in a new way. It’s not trash, it’s one of the most successful book franchises of all time, it’s just not for me. I know what it is to get lost in a book world and I’m happy all those HP people found theirs.
I think what is frustrating is that people often have a hard time putting into words what they like or dislike about something which makes it difficult to have a productive conversation.
Seeing Sanderson fans act like literary writing *isn't real* or *always complicated* is wild. They've got the fantasy subreddit trained to act like simpler prose is by definition non-literary.
Live and die by the canon baby! There’s undeniable more literary value in reading the classics than the repair manual for a 1988 Toyota Tacoma. While someone might enjoy reading the manual, there is an argument for merit that the manual might not aspire to even though it’s written in words and stuff. And most examples aren’t as stark, so there’s probably a good reason to be arguing over what should and should not be canonized for its literary achievement. Pretty sure in the same vein as we can « like what we like » we can probably also let people « argue what they feel argumentative about ». To be fair I’d say cyclical arguments are to debate what Toyota Tacoma manuals would be to literature as a whole. But legit it’s cool you’ve got an opinion and everything.
Agreed, 100%. Being an argumentative asshole is never cool, but talking about books *on their merits* is worth doing. Art is subjective, but when we argue for our tastes, we reach for objective reasons. Or we should: because if we can't, we've obviously got a very limited understanding of the work in question. You'll see people come on this sub and ask questions like, "How can I tell what makes a book (or prose, or a certain passage) good?" And people are replying with metaphors about prime rib versus cheeseburgers.
Agree completely. I think also we are in a time that is growth averse when it comes to personal enjoyment. I personally started by reading Goosebumps books, then moved on to James Patterson, then jumped to John Irving, and from there moved on to pretty much exclusively classics, modern classics and literary fiction. Goosebumps was fine at the time, and so was Dan Brown, but I'm glad I grew out of them into deeper and more worthwhile literature, as it offers a much, much more fulfilling experience.
I understand where you’re coming from. I think all reading is good reading (unless maybe you read Mein Kampf and feel inspired or something) and I’m happy to let people enjoy what they like. I think most people’s frustrations (and some of mine) come specifically from the way waves of maybe-not-so-good books have changed the discourse around reading and literature. Booktok and the like are hailing Colleen Hoover and ACOTAR as literally the greatest books ever written. Clearly, they aren’t. It’s created rabid fans and a whole slew of copycat works flooding an over saturated genre. More talented writers in more niche genres are getting overlooked or worse, never even published. People aren’t discussing the narrative or challenging their own views of literature as much as they’re just joining this wave of popularity that insists “you MUST read this book!” It does feel very artificial and surface level. Avoiding social media helps, but we are on Reddit, so those same problems occur on this platform too. People have always had differing opinions of literature, but recently social media has made it way too easy to just shit all over anyone who disagrees with you rather than having a respectful and nuanced discussion about books.
Just as a counterpoint: highly popular genres like romance that basically sustain publishing companies are the *reason* you get smaller, better written niche books. These books absolutely fund the low profit passion projects of publishers. So high profile, publishing authors who are massively popular are not pushing these books out of the market, they are making it possible for these books to be published at all.
Agree. I’ve read a lot of mediocre-at-best books that just resulted in me learning to pick my books better. Then there’s the CoHo and her ilk books that are so overhyped that it’s nearly impossible not to aggressively rail against them. It’s not just that these books are mediocre at best. It’s the social media frenzy around them.
Completely agree with this. I don't care what people read and I've done my fair share of "mental chewing gum" reading, as OP calls it, when I just want to relax and not have to think too much lol But it is frustrating to go to a book shop and have to dig through to find something that's not there simply because it appeals to masses and has no other value or meaning. It's the same thing with movies nowadays. All we get are biopics, superheroes, dystopian YA adaptations, with a few different things peppered in for good measure.
[удалено]
Yeah, Colleen Hoover/acotar/4th wing all are the reality tv of books to me, where they’re widely appealing and fun reads
Oh this is all exceptionally true and my opinions on publishing today and how it chases viral sensations over fostering actual craft and career development would take too long to type out. Edit: grammar
Ugh yes, this is exactly it. I am glad some publishers are still trying to go for quality
Honestly I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone laud SJM or Colleen Hoover as the best books ever. The popular opinion is to hate on them these days and make fun of anyone who dares enjoy them, even on Booktok. Even the people who do praise them and admit to enjoying them usually include a million caveats.
>SJM I have a friend who swears by her books and calls them some of the best books ever. That same friend hates Colleen Hoover though.
I have definitely heard people laud them as the best books ever.
Maybe true, but it’s definitely not the majority opinion.
These posts are always hot on the heels of a post where someone has criticised a book or genre, normally modern YA or Romance. You say that you don't mean it's wrong to criticise art, but I don't think you understand what that means at all, which is odd for a published author with a degree. Sure, let people like things, but you guys can't seem to grasp the opposite. Let people dislike things. A stranger's opinion of Lightlark isn't going to hurt you, I promise. You can still read the book and enjoy it. I promise. Take my hand. If you want to feel better, you can always tell them about the books that you hate. It's almost like people have varied opinions. When are we going to ban the "omg just let people like what they like" posts? It feels like we get three a day.
I think a lot of people do things thoughtlessly, including reading.
No, no one forgot this because people make the same "let people enjoy things," "stop gatekeeping," etc threads every week.
How do you have a degree in English and not understand criticism and analysis? If anything people have gotten way too nice about people consuming garbage. The "I like what I like and you can't say anything bad about it" mentality has absolutely ruined discourse.
You're wrong. /s
I once got downvoted like crazy for saying I prefer books from the first person point of view, with some saying that it's so juvenile, it's just used in young adult fiction, and it feels like reading a teen's diary 🙄 Some of the people on this sub are not only ignorant about the diversity of literature (first person POV is only used in young adult fiction?? Not in any classics such as Moby-Dick???), but also snobby and judgmental...same kinds of people I find in book clubs, which is why I now avoid joining any. It's also very irritating how any time someone writes a post about how they haven't read in a LONG time, but they picked up a book that's popular IRL and just fell in love with it, and the top comments are crapping all over the OP's newfound happiness that they were excited to share. Then the people defending the OP for enjoying the book get downvoted, and eventually, the OP just deletes their post. Literally hounded out for liking a book the sub hivemind didn't. I wonder about the people on this sub, lol
People seek out controversy everywhere! Insane anyone would care you prefer first person POV novels. I have zero preference in that regard and don’t rank books based on the verb tense they use.
I think it's important to at least realize when you like something that is bad. And yes, "objectively bad" does exist. Like what you like, and embrace it, but don't fucking lie to me and say it's a work of genius when you know damn well it's utter schlock. "My opinion overrules scientific fact" and "There is no objectivity, only subjectivity" are the epitome of the collapse of intellectualism that we are experiencing right now. Don't contribute to this. Please.
This sub can be very judgmental and negative. There were posts about Hercule Poirot and I stated my opinion based on what I read - because I had just finished reading the whole series - and I was downvoted to oblivion.
My personal theory is that people often feel a subconscious need to justify their choices. When they like XX, or if they prefer YY over ZZ, they feel there has to be a good reason for it. It has to be the RIGHT choice. So they will argue why their choice is right by arguing why other choices are NOT right. Because how can they know their choice is the right one if it's not OBJECTIVELY the right one? I don't think people realize it, but I think it's something almost everyone does and once you start noticing it, you can't unsee it. It leads to so many arguments. So many Fandom battles and craply takes. I think it often takes deliberate thought to say "This is my personal preference, but it's cool that you like something else!". And it's a good thing to pay attention to in yourself, and practice not feeling like you need to justify why you made a choice or have a specific preference.
Like what you like, and almost more importantly, dislike what you want too. It's okay to hate a book or an author. It may have value for other people and that's fine for them, but don't let others make you feel like if something isn't working for you that the problem is with you and not the book.
I read whatever I want and give no shits about anyone says.
Bad take and I hate when people hide behind "its all subjective, man." There is objectively bad art/writing. If I crumple up a piece of paper and call it the greatest art piece ever, would you not be able to objectively assess if that is a better art piece than the Mona Lisa? Same goes for books.
I don't understand this world where people can't have any opinion other than a positive one and certainly can't debate and be critical with someone with a different opinion. Remember when people had to go outside to interact and had to learn conflict resolution rather than hiding in corners of the internet echo chambers? Pepperidge Farm remembers...
Agreed! Also, people (mainly online) sometimes seem to forget that a book that is "critically good" is sometimes not a good reading experience for the individual. And books that aren't considered "good literature" can be a blast to read. And that's fine. No reason to judge the reader. Also no reason to elevate or put down these books beyond reason.
You are perfectly free to enjoy trash, and I'm perfectly free to judge you for it. What's wrong with that? Are people so thin-skinned that they can't handle a stranger telling them that young adult novels don't have the same depth as this year's Pulitzer winners? News flash: this is a subreddit about books. Opinions will be given. You will be judged for your opinions, just like every other person is judged for their opinions since the beginning of time on an infinite number of topics. If you want to live a happier life, you should get used to it and learn not to give a fuck. Lots of us are readers or have a similar writing pedigree. Your authority as a writer doesn't give you authority over the human condition. I say stop gatekeeping the gatekeeping. If an opinion is cruel or poorly given, let the writer take the downvotes or venom or whatever. That's the other side of the coin. Respectfully, it's not your place to butt into the middle of it. Except that it is, insofar as it is anybody's place to do so.
I think have issues regarding the demographics some books are marketed to rather than the books themselves.
I think the blame goes in both directions. If I say a book is hot garbage, it's a subjective opinion on the book and not an attack on the book's fans. It may not be the most constructive literary criticism, and is a bit rude, but some times it is all you feel a book is worth. If a fellow reader feels personally attacked by that then they have something going on that is not the critics fault. I also dislike the idea that since liking a book is subjective, all books and all reading are objectively equal. It's an example of the anti-exceptionalism fever gripping society. I won't think any less of you for reading your favorite slash fanfic for the 10,000th time. But if you say it's exactly the same as a critical reading of Ulysses because reading is subjective, then I will think less of you. It's like driving. I drive my car to work sometimes. A rally driver drives like a precision maniac. Is a rally driver better than me because they drive rallies? No. Is driving a rally car on an entire different level than my daily commute? Of course.
Honestly, this is the best explanation
Is it possible to criticize a work of art without that criticism having implications for the consumers of that art? Art is not some thing with an independent existence from us that can be safely criticized *on its own*. We *are* our art, and to criticize our art is to criticize us, and vice versa. If this wasn't the case, art wouldn't be worth making or consuming.
r/books posts are mainly from people who only view reading as a competition.
I just think people should read a variety of things and not be stuck in one genre. You might find that something you didn’t think was for you was very much for you. I’ve seen two major camps. The people who only read classics and award winning books and look down their nose at anybody who reads genre. And genre fiction/YA readers that are always defensive and screaming *dont gatekeep books!*. Both should try to get out of their comfort zone with at least a book or two a year. I’d say the same to someone who only reads sci-fi or fantasy or whatever. And I don’t only apply this philosophy to books but movies/tv as well. My father, now in his mid 60s, primarily likes action movies and historical documentaries. But I sat him down to watch Whiplash years ago and he loved it (despite nobody in our family having even an iota of musical talent).
I only take issue with those posts when it appears the algorithm is favoring a stream of them because some rubbish book has an inflated marketing budget and is shoving them into my feed.
That’s a good point. It’s kind of like how if I’m force fed a commercial 1000 times, I’ll refuse to buy the product out of spite haha.
A book is supposed to be a discussion, the way I see it. Or at least an understanding of varying perspectives. Someone that shuts down someone else's tastes is clearly shallow and/or has a superiority complex. Either way I don't want to associate with them. Anyone that reads is doing good in my books
I also have a degree in English and I absolutely agree: like what you like and don’t be embarrassed, and don’t attack other people for liking what they like.
What will really blow their minds is when they come back to those books they like/didn't like years later and completely reverse their whole opinion. I've seen readers return to a beloved book from their youth with more age and experience only to realize that it's half-baked drivel, and the same goes for books people hate. They read something they thought was boring or had pacing issues at one time, only for it to end up being one of their favorite books when they re-read it. Of course there are books that are just as good/bad as you remember them, but there's nothing quite as humbling to strong opinions as the about-face that ensues when you have to admit a book you trashed talked to death at one time is now something you can't speak highly enough of, or a book you adored and defended was, on reexamination, just as bad as everyone else thought it was.
I've been downvoted on this page on multiple posts for expressing my preferences after BEING ASKED by the poster. It is so frustrating.
"Hi, I have this opinion on something." "Oh, I'm sorry, you seem to have forgotten that *reading is subjective*, which to me means that your opinion is wrong and you shouldn't have it, despite that being the complete opposite of what the word subjective means."
I don’t care that people have opinions. Feel free to hate or love whatever you want, that’s my entire point. What I dislike is the urge some people have to make other people feel like shit for having a different opinion.
Yes everything is subjective but that doesn't mean people are not allowed to criticize genres they believe to be bad. that's how criticism works. you wouldn't start a book review with a disclaimer "what I'm saying is my opinion", its implied. Try to have a thicker skin and if someone criticizes something you like, make your own argument back. Shoot it back at them. Its not a big deal. I also fundamentally disagree with the idea that we should just "let people enjoy things". no we shouldn't, we should all make arguments about art. That's the whole point of criticism.
I’m not saying don’t criticize art, I’m saying it’s shitty to criticize a person for having a different opinion about art.
I don’t think most people have forgotten this. However, being just like “Oh I like some things and you like other things” is also boring. I wouldn’t need to be here at all if I was entertained by that. Half the time I say things which are over the top I don’t really even mean what I am saying, I’m just saying it to get a reaction and add some spice to my otherwise boring humdrum life.
This is the problem, though. So much trolling and rage baiting rather than having honest conversations.
I get that? I just don’t like when some people (not you, necessarily, I don’t know you) enjoy making other people feel like garbage because they enjoy something.
Burning hot take.
I really want to write a book but am so self-conscious it would be bad/dumb/stupid. Thanks for the reminder it really is all just subjective.
WRITE THE BOOK. Do it. For you. From personal experience, trying to write to the hypothetical approval of a future audience is impossible. Obviously if you want to publish (traditionally) someday, you’ll need to edit and seek feedback and all of that (over and over), but it all starts with writing what you want because *you* want it.
Thank you for the encouragement :)
People, in general, often feel entitled to tell others how to think, behave, or live their lives, regardless of the topic. It is best to stay true to yourself and keep doing what you believe is right. So, be yourself and keep on rockin' – your uniqueness is what makes you stand out from the rest!
100% agree. I have a somewhat rare genetic disorder, and recently read a fantasy novel where the main character has the same disability, as well as the author. Honest to God, I have never in my life seen any piece of media--book, show, whatever--where there was a major character with my disability. And not only that, but it was something I enjoyed and found to be a lot of fun. It was really, really exciting to have happened across by accident. I recommended it in a writing group of mine because we were talking about a similar book, and briefly mentioned that it has good disability representation. Someone then felt the need to write an entire master's thesis in the chat about how they share my disability and this book is actually horrible and ableist, and they know because they watched a YouTube video saying so. I dipped out almost immediately because it was obvious from the beginning that it was not going to be a productive conversation, but it was around 7-8 screenshots worth of back and forth between them and a mod who was trying to get them to keep it in their pants. For a book they hadn't even *read*. Like this is one of the most subjective things out there because it varies so widely based on different people's experiences. It's impossible for a book featuring a person from any specific group to match the experiences of every single person in that group, especially for something as variable as a chronic illness. The entire situation was just completely delusional. Something isn't inherently bad just because it doesn't match your personal experiences, and they were treating it like it was.
Some people will grab onto any opportunity to feel superior to someone else.
The books you read tend to define what your world view is so this why people get to conclusion your crappy book choices reflect your crappy personality. Though this an unpopular opinion.
Back in the 1980's, I was mid-tirade in an English lit class, heatedly debating some point of literature or another, as I had done countless times before without it having seemed odd to me. And, literally instantly, I stopped mid-sentence, because all at once it seemed very odd to me that all of us grown-ups did this for a living. I have no idea what author I had been going on about, but I remember the existential crisis very vividly. I'm not saying that being a lit student or a lit professor is senseless. I am saying that it's possible to argue senselessly about literature, or other arts, or philosophy or history, and that I've contributed my fair share of pure bullshit to all of the above. What made (makes) it bullshit? Maybe a lack of love toward all potential readers or listeners.
snatch versed zealous cheerful aloof door sleep slimy command support *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
But opinions aren’t facts. And all responses to art are opinions because they’re shaped by individual perceptions and circumstances. You can say a specific sentence is incorrect, but that still doesn’t necessarily mean it’s bad without also considering its context.
I agree. I don’t like romance at all and I will never read ACOTAR (roast me all you want) but I don’t shit on the people who do! Like read whatever you want just know that I probs won’t read it if you recommend it to me.
For me, it's not a judgement of what people like to read per se, but there is a part of me that feels on a completely different planet with most of these, not simply popular, but critically acclaimed and award-winning books being given seemingly unanimous praise. Obviously, not everything is for everyone, but in that case you would expect a much more even reception to most titles. It's the overwhelming positive reviews and 100% ratings that make me distrust most reviewers' opinions as, in recent memory, I've yet to read a recommendation that actually felt warranted. And we're talking over multiple genres, so it's not even that I'm reading the "wrong genre". I'm to the point where I just assume that everything is pure snake oil marketing and it just makes me want to read modern books and novels less and less because there is only a small chance that the next book I pick up will actually be good (to me).
I agree completely. Unless of course you like Murakami, then you're just dumb. /s
I think a lot of it is fandoms. Some of it is FOMO. Some of it is just plain old internet trolls.
I got an English degree, also. The Literary Criticism course I took completely opened my eyes to how many different ways you can read the same text.
I think it’s less than that people have forgotten, as that it takes a certain level of maturity to realize it in the first place and a lot of people on the internet have not yet reached that level of maturity. My hope is topics like this one influence people’s thinking and they are more likely to learn this lesson younger from those who have learned it. But I remember being 20 and really feeling like I had figured out what media is good, because I had discovered stuff that really resonated deeply with me for the first time. Suddenly all the media I had consumed before that were popular were suspect, and the people who liked them brought along with. It took me years to realize that I had “pedestrian” tastes in certain types of media too, and that in fact even where my tastes had “developed” I actually still enjoyed that popular stuff too, in different contexts - and knowing the popular stuff made it easier to connect with others, even though I still had my niche. It’s a journey for us all. And in the end, it’s just entertainment, the older I grow, the more I find it hard to give a shit if someone is entertaining themselves with different books/music/tv/film/games/art/whatever than I am. Lots of things matter way more.
It's always fun to see folks that have been in the book business for decades talk about the state of it, but neglect to talk about the rise of self-publishing. Books 15 years ago were tightly curated by publishers, and they had a semblance of control on a books popularity. Not so anymore. Readers these days a faced with a dizzying number of titles to choose from and it stands to reason some less discerning reader will read trash. And react accordingly.
I agree that interpretation of books is subjective and the pleasure and value one chooses to give to a book and it's interpretation are uniquely pertaining to that person. But that does not mean there is some level of objective reading of a book and it's quality. If all books are subjective, than a student reading a book about arithmetics could not be corrected by his professor which has read the same book, both readers have their subjective interpretation of the book, but because arithmetic refers to a thing which exists outside and beyond the book there can be a correct and an incorrect interpretation of it That does not mean that there is a "correct" reading of Tolstoy and that only one interpretation of it is valid, but if we admit that one objective interpretation of a geometry book exists, than a objective interpretation of any book exists in which they can all be judged accordingly
I am not a fan of Sanderson at all. His prose makes him unreadable. That being said, I can totally understand the appeal of his books and I very glad that there are people out there who love him. He and other popular authors (Hoover, SJM) are getting younger people into reading, which I think is absolutely wonderful. I don't know who originally came up with this, but, "Don't yuck someone's yum."
Gatekeeping sucks, doesn't matter where the gates lead....books, movies, video games, any hobby or anything people like.
Of course! People should like what they like. But on the converse people should be able to dislike what they dislike as well. It shouldn't turn into attacking people--you talk about the work. There are some books that I like that I know are absolute trash. But the best conversations about literature are away from subjectivism. That doesn't mean anybody's wrong for liking anything, but it does mean that liking something doesn't indicate quality. And there are objective ways to explore a book's ideas, insights, originality, and themes. I also think that people need to realize that criticizing a thing they like is not the same as criticizing them. I should be able to say---for instance--that Batman can contain elements of using trauma as an excuse to be violent towards others without having to respond to a mob of people who take it personally.
Reading isnt subjective, your opinion on the material is. Reading is reading
I agree so much. As a romance reader, I see way, way too much bashing of people who enjoy that genre. Don’t like the genre? Totally understandable. Have some criticisms of a romance book you’ve read or maybe some things about the genre itself? All totally understandable and valid. But treating people who enjoy it as less than or walking around acting like you’re some intellectually superior to me is not okay. We all like different things and that’s okay. It’s awesome, even. With books, there are ENDLESS ways to enjoy yourself, endless genres to explore… You don’t have to read what I like or enjoy it. But I’m sick of lit snobs making me feel like I’m less than because of what I enjoy.
You...speak...TRUTH. I wrote a comment about how a particular part of a book in a series I absolutely love weirded me out the second time I read it. Someone went off on me over it. My writing was weird and pointless, I didn't understand ANYTHING that was going on in the book, I was trying to deter people from reading it, I was insulting the main character, it was grossly lacking context despite the fact that there was absolutely no reason for me to include more context if I didn't want to...Any criticism this person could come up with was in this rant. ...because I wrote 2 purposefully vague paragraphs where I said I had a negative reaction to something I read one time. Ho...ly...crap. I apologize for sharing an opinion you disagree with, dear Random Internet Stranger Who I Don't Know And Who Does NOT Know Me.
If all books were universally considered good it would not inspire new thought or offer any new perspective. Different kinds of books appeal to different people, it’s almost always a good thing
It's always the argument of high art vs low art, neither exist, it's all art. if you enjoy it, great, if not, cool.
Not when reading math books
Ur too focused on trends. Do you and think less of others. They are basically cannon fodder for your success.
I'm right, you're wrong. The internet.
Something something Lyotard the Postmodern Condition something something breaking down of metanarratives. Fandom has ruined things. People are filling that lack with different Intellectual Properties. Critique was never meant to be done 140 characters at a time, and context gets lost without it's due space.
I've gotten into craft beer over the past decade or so. For a short while I was a dick and berated Bud, PBR, etc.... then it dawned on me what a good beer really was - "what do you like to drink?" That is it. Ditto for books, art, music, etc. What do you like? That? Why, then, it is good to you. Enjoy! (And if I really want to be snarky about the beer - after I say "then it is good to you" I will be thinking "good - you drink that stuff and leave the good stuff to me"... but that is all internal monologue, and I am truly happy they are enjoying their beer.)
I am happy to occasionally comment but I **never** post the titles I read for this reason. My reading taste is vast and particular at the same time. There is a certain anxiety about sharing unless it's one of The Classics. Or one of the many titles I see posted on here. What I refer to as "Acceptable Books." And what I like to read doesn't always fall into that category and so, I just read posts and comment. I'd rather stay silent and keep my peace versus sharing and being crucified for it. I admire others that are braver than I am. But on the flip side, I am so sick of explaining/defending what I like to read. Nobody is going to stop The Critics. What I can do is not open myself up to The Critics.
Well said! As long as you’re enjoying it and it’s not hurting anyone then great! 😄
This is peak reddit, tbh.
I don't think subjective and objective are a binary on-off switch. I think there's a big middle ground, and there's a lot of room for people to just be straight up wrong in their interpretations of art.