I've had many people assume that writers whose works I adore are works I read only to somehow make other people feel stupid. Ummm, no. I read them because I adore them. I don't castigate other people for their failure to come up with a similar adoration
Yeah but plenty of other people DO castigate people who fail to enjoy them. Or worse, they castigate people who enjoy the very genre you write in. I think the response to literary fiction comes because too often literary fiction kicks sand in the face of genre, and tells it is is lesser, tries to degrade the audience because it IS so much more popular by the numbers. So genre responds by saying literary fiction is snotty because no one likes to be told that your tastes are common. ;)
My only problem with the NYTR is that the idea that something is "better" or "smarter" can be a problem when you're not wholly in control of your reading choices. I knew a guy at work with a 12-year-old daughter who apparently has the same taste in books that I do. He's an immigrant, and he was concerned about what she was reading. He'd ask me, "Is this okay for her to read?" and I'd reply, "Why not? What's the nature of your concern?" I thought perhaps he was concerned about violence, or sex, or whatever subject matter being too mature for a 12-year-old. So when he'd say, "Well, shouldn't she read classics? You know, better books?" I'd be a bit irritated. I felt I was doing her a solid by insisting to her father that genre books are no better or worse than classics and what she should read is whatever entertains her and keeps her reading. (For the record, this guy was sort of weird about a lot of things. I also had to tell him I thought it was perfectly fine that she played sports, and it wasn't unladylike at all.)
I think this is the slightly dangerous notion that the NYTR sells to people, that somehow some books are inappropriate to read because they're not challenging enough. The same way that people scorn mindless action movies that are just plain fun and entertaining, people scorn genre books that are entertaining. (I love mindless actions movies. And sometimes, they're not as mindless as people generally assume that genre to be.) I dunno why so many people feel that reading should be work and you should always be slightly unhappy doing it, like its homework. I certainly was mocked and ridiculed by my peers for liking to read AT ALL, and reading fantasy was like the touch of death in high school. Seriously UNCOOL. When frankly, a lot of fantasy is very well-written and can teach a lot. But plenty of people assume that you have to read certain books to build vocabulary to learn to think critically.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2010-08-31 07:20 am (UTC)Yeah but plenty of other people DO castigate people who fail to enjoy them. Or worse, they castigate people who enjoy the very genre you write in. I think the response to literary fiction comes because too often literary fiction kicks sand in the face of genre, and tells it is is lesser, tries to degrade the audience because it IS so much more popular by the numbers. So genre responds by saying literary fiction is snotty because no one likes to be told that your tastes are common. ;)
My only problem with the NYTR is that the idea that something is "better" or "smarter" can be a problem when you're not wholly in control of your reading choices. I knew a guy at work with a 12-year-old daughter who apparently has the same taste in books that I do. He's an immigrant, and he was concerned about what she was reading. He'd ask me, "Is this okay for her to read?" and I'd reply, "Why not? What's the nature of your concern?" I thought perhaps he was concerned about violence, or sex, or whatever subject matter being too mature for a 12-year-old. So when he'd say, "Well, shouldn't she read classics? You know, better books?" I'd be a bit irritated. I felt I was doing her a solid by insisting to her father that genre books are no better or worse than classics and what she should read is whatever entertains her and keeps her reading. (For the record, this guy was sort of weird about a lot of things. I also had to tell him I thought it was perfectly fine that she played sports, and it wasn't unladylike at all.)
I think this is the slightly dangerous notion that the NYTR sells to people, that somehow some books are inappropriate to read because they're not challenging enough. The same way that people scorn mindless action movies that are just plain fun and entertaining, people scorn genre books that are entertaining. (I love mindless actions movies. And sometimes, they're not as mindless as people generally assume that genre to be.) I dunno why so many people feel that reading should be work and you should always be slightly unhappy doing it, like its homework. I certainly was mocked and ridiculed by my peers for liking to read AT ALL, and reading fantasy was like the touch of death in high school. Seriously UNCOOL. When frankly, a lot of fantasy is very well-written and can teach a lot. But plenty of people assume that you have to read certain books to build vocabulary to learn to think critically.