ellen.louise
Member
nichhhole said:i'm stereotyping..
but people who arent generally avid readers, tend to read mainstream books, which are predominately things like dan brown, etc etc....
so avid readers [who think they're better than the occasional reader,] dont want to be seen reading the same book as those occasional reader as they view the occasional reader as uncultured, and mediocre haha... reading only what popullar culture tells them to read, because they're not intellectual enough to investigate other, less mainstream books...
i read alot.. and i know a few of those.. occassional readers who tend to like 'jody picoult' or something? and for that reason.. i will not touch those books... its horrible and judgemental.. but i just refuse to.. [also because they sound kinda soppy from what the comfam girls have told me.. best friend dies? car crash?? letters?]
i read dan brown's da vinci code, for the only reason that other people were reading it.. [i had taken a stand for about 2 yrs...]
and i didnt particularly like it at all.. it was very fast paced and adventurous but i didnt really see any amazing writing style in there at all...
i read... 1. because i like how reading can take youplaces.. [and god that sounds cliched] but its true...
2. to be 'cultured'... alot of people refer to books to further their arguements/ discussions.. and i want to be one of these peopleso for that reason, i generally read alot of classics.. ie jane eyre, wuthering heights, catch 22, catcher in the rye, perfume.. et al...
Yeah. Sure it's stereotyping, or 'intellectual snobbery' as the legendary Mrs Buxton (one of the best english teachers who ever lived) calls it. But it's true. Books targeted to the generic masses normally DO NOT stimulate higher brain function. My sister calls me a book snob all the time, because I refuse to read a lot of the shit she wants me to (mostly trashy romances).
I don't think people who don't read much are uncultured, because there are plenty of other outlets for creativity. It's just that I don't get anything from books that tell a story and nothing else. They've got to relate to you somehow, and be a bit clever. And I'm sorry but what the fuck is so clever about the age-old theme of dissing christianity? Or Indiana-Jones style action? (I'm referring to Dan Brown obviously).
I love stuff like Thomas hardy. Sure, I haven't read one yet that isn't a bit morbid, but the way he writes... When you read it out loud it just rolls off your tounge like music. He writes beautifully, he's clever about it, and he actually has something to say. The man didn't write for the money: he wrote because he had a beautiful talent for it.
That's why I read. Because it 'takes you places' and, call me corny, but it teaches you how to think for yourself.
People who do that are kinda pathetic. There's nothing wrong with reading popular books. And those people probably just go home and read them.jhakka said:
Also: people who will not read outside their favourite genre, especially when said genre is fantasy. Sometimes it's good to read the more popular books, to see what makes them so well-read. A lot of the time you get disappointed, but sometimes you stumble across a brilliant novel that every second person has read.
Last edited by a moderator:
