This question has me wondering for a while, why many people are choosing poorly written fiction books over some classics or books with some true meaning, also I have this dilemma, I’ve talked to a person bragging about how many books they read (like 70 in a year) which is quite alright but non of this books hold any true value, so it can not be equal to reading less books but from appreciated authors in academic community.
Let me know guys how you feel about this
​
Edit: Thank you guys for all the replies, you made me realize I sound pretentious and that was not the point. I can now better understand different motives for reading. I’m sorry if I offended anyone.
by NoRecord8989
44 Comments
What’s a book?
Stanley Kubrick told of doing so to enhance his mental stamina.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Different strokes for different folks.
There’s no accounting for taste.
Whatever floats your boat.
To each their own.
Some read for different reasons than you perhaps. 🙂
Because it’s fun. Let people do whatever they want, it doesn’t affect you.
Seriously, no one goes up to people who watch TV shows all the time and talks about why they aren’t watching documentaries as much as people in this hobby trying to criticise others for not reading heavier topics.
It’s okay if someone reads “bad” books, classics, both or neither. Frankly, read what you like. If it’s an escapism, a form of relaxation, a palette cleanser, a genuinely enjoyed book, a very thought provoking one – literally it is no one’s business but the readers.
Because most people just want to read something fun after being tired from work and aren’t interested in something super thought-provoking.
I also would hesitate with calling a lot of the popular books bad in that they generally achieve the goal the author set out to have them fulfill just because a book isn’t super deep and allows for a lot of analysis of its writing doesn’t mean that it is bad.
What is your definition of “bad”? Value is what enriches your life. Both entertainment and education do so, but some prefer one of these two over the other.
I dont understand the concept people have of ” a book is only worth reading if its a classic or by some author who has been dead 30 years”.
A book is worth reading if you enjoy it!
As long as you enjoy yourself, you like what you are reading and you dont feel like you are wasting time, then imo it’s perfectly fine.
They either think that those books are genuinely good.
Or
For the same reason people watch the room. They are cult classics and “so bad they are good”.
When did reading books become a contest? Let me ppl read what they like and stop judging them.
There are some incredibly bizarre ideas about what reading is or should be in this sub.
What is ‘true value’? There are plenty of books with flowery prose that I got nothing of value from other then entertainment and there are plenty of books that some wouldn’t consider real books that I had a deep emotional connection with or influenced how I view a certain topic or the world in general.
Writing is an art form it all has value in some way. Is graffiti any less art then a Da Vinci or Van Gogh? Maybe to some but others get much value out of the graffiti.
And just because a book is considered a classic and important now doesn’t mean it was when it was originally written, was it any less important then?
>but from appreciated authors in academic community.
Please consider that for many readers, ‘academic communities’ are overrated.
People don’t have to be literati to have good taste, and they don’t have to read literary fiction or classics to be well-read.
Because not every book is for everyone.
Just because you think it’s good doesn’t mean I do.
Just because I love it, doesn’t mean my bestie won’t hate it.
Stop being a gatekeeping snob and let people like what they like.
You aren’t as smart as you think you are
Most people read books for entertainment. People find different things entertaining.
Sometimes it really feels like this sub is circling the drain.
Why would people focus on just reading things that they aren’t particularly interested in?
I find it a bit silly to brag about reading a certain number of books a year, but I also find it silly to ignore that books are merely a medium and to claim people are reading books that don’t hold “true value”.
Academic or otherwise informational texts and classical literature can be enriching and interesting, but many people just want to switch off their mind and get carried away by a great story. That can have plenty of value.
Let people enjoy what they enjoy and be careful of taking on snobbish attitudes. They can blind you and cause you to miss things you might otherwise greatly enjoy.
People read books for different reasons, and people like different things in books. Some people love a book that’s high paced and action filled, other people like a slow burner that spends a lot of time on world building. What you might see as a bad book, might be someone’s escape from reality, or little moment to themselves on a busy day. What you might see as a good book, might be boring and pretentious to someone else. It’s all fine, read what, why and when you want and let others do the same.
I feel like we shouldn’t be gatekeeping reading.
I hope you know that if you got your wish, were these “bad books” weren’t published anymore, reading would go from a nice little hobby to an outdated activity of the past very quickly.
Why do people ask bad questions
I would like to know who defines what “good” and “bad” books are. I would also like to know what exactly the “true meaning” of a book is supposed to be or what a “true value” is.
What if for me “true value” means good entertainment and escapism and nothing more? What if I think a “good book” has to offer diverse perspectives that are often missing in the very white male dominated world of “classics”?
Why do you care and what are bad books? Let people read what they want.
i’m not going to lie, and i really don’t want to be mean since this is just an opinion, and i don’t know you as a person, but this post makes you sound incredibly pretentious. reading for many people is a hobby– an activity that they enjoy doing. who are you to judge the true value of a book? the way we perceive books is subjective, and just because a book does not hold “true meaning/value” to you, does not mean that it does not have value to someone else. making people feel bad about what they read because of some hold ups YOU have with what THEY are reading is… yeah. and that’s not to say that that’s what you’re trying to do, but that’s definitely how it will be perceived if you were to say this out loud to someone you’re talking to. if someone wants to brag about a reading goal they’ve hit, let them brag lol. it was clearly something they set their mind to and feel pride in having accomplished it. in short, don’t be miserable.
Since when did you become the arbiter of what does and doesn’t have value?
People read “bad” books that hold “no true value” for the same reason they eat “bad” food that hold “no nutritional value.” Because it’s yummy
And I make it especially good by reading a bad book while eating bad food sitting with bad posture in a bad chair for reading.
Somewhere along the way people have forgotten that reading is a hobby and that the point of hobbies is to relax and have fun… The real question is why do you care that other people are reading books you don’t like? This isn’t a question of why people enjoy worthless things but rather why you think things have no value if you personally don’t enjoy them. Somehow despite only reading books with “true meaning,” you’ve failed to develop something as simple as an understanding of perspectives outside your own.
GRR GRR, ONLY WHAT *I* THINK IS VALUABLE HAS REAL VALUE. MY OPINION IS OBJECTIVE FACT.
“I want to be entertained, distracted, and feel happy” is exactly as valid a reason to read a book as “I want to show I have big super big mega brain and stroke my chin thoughtfully”.
Some days I want to read Wuthering Heights, some days I want to read the Kaiju Preservation Society. Both are valid.
within two days of trying to read Ulysses I stopped caring what anyone said about literary value. my reading life has improved dramatically since then, because I read what I enjoy and feel absolutely no self-consciousness about it. it sounds like your deepest wish is that I *did* feel self-conscious about it. what kind of person do you think that makes you?
Either that people like different things, or they don’t know that a book will be bad, or they just think it’s so bad it’s good
I agree. Read Superfudge last year and it took me all year to get through. I am still thinking about it weeks later. Judy Blume is the Tolstoy of our time. I think anyone who brags about reading more than five books is skimming through some YA trash.
I enjoy reading low effort books when I’m too stressed to think about anything, they’re relaxing and a good way to escape reality.
I do believe some books are objectively bad, but we’re not comfortable talking about it because we take it personally, as if the quality of the media you consume is directly related to your value as a person.
Sometimes I read for spiritual enrichment, sometimes I read for intellectual stimulation, sometimes I read for purely entertainment, most of the time it’s for some combination of the above factors and more. I wish we could get over judging others reading tastes. I find it narrow and trite and it’s just generally such a tired topic. What I consider a bad book is almost certainly someone’s favorite. And I know plenty of people hate the books I consider my favorites. Good and bad are subjective.
Oh hey look, the snobbery that makes me hate this sub. People read whatever they want, and value is derived from each person’s individual experience, not from the age of the book or its designation as a classic.
Some people just want to have fun, not ponder philosophy. You sound pretentious. By the way, sometimes fiction can be really good at having deeper stuff hidden inside the fun, like the Discworld books, but I’m sure something like that is beneath your exacting standards.
I remember watching a lecture by sir Alan Moore, and there was this idea:
If you are trying to learn writing or start writing you should read bad books almost as often as good books. Because “holy sh*t, even I could write this better!” is the best source of inspiration you would ever find. Because bad books have no shortage of good ideas that are poorly executed and you can build upon them without any fear of plagiarism.
No books hold any true value. Read what you want. Stop being a dick.
I love well-written books. When there’s a passage or quote that is so gorgeous that it makes you pause and appreciate how beautiful it is, that’s a great feeling for sure.
But I think you’re minimizing how important reading for fun is, and how great it feels to be completely sucked into a story, well-written or not.
I recently had that experience with Home Before Dark by Riley Sager, or The Housemaid by Freida McFadden, or the Bridgerton book series, or No Exit by Taylor Adams, Turn of the Key by Ruth Ware.
These books won’t win any literary awards, and I 100% know that, but I was totally immersed, sucked into that story, not wanting to put the book down, needing to know what happens.
That moment where you completely forget you’re even reading at all! It’s an amazing feeling, and that does show the author’s ability in storytelling. That’s an art in itself!
Who gets to decide which books are which? What you find to be of value is not the same as the next person. I don’t get this idea of yucking other peoples’ yum, let people enjoy what they enjoy.
If you define bad so broadly, then of course a lot of people will read bad books cuz by your definition, most books are bad.
I’m honestly sorry that it sounds like you don’t consider “fun” a worthwhile pursuit.
I also think most academics are quite out of touch, so I tend not to use them as an authority on what has meaning.
Because subjective taste =/= to objective quality.
It’s ok to enjoy something poorly written. It’s also ok to not enjoy something well written.
That’s the beauty of art.
Value is relative only to the reader.