Majority rules...
Sep. 4th, 2008 08:58 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fajrdrakoFrom September 4, 2008: Peer pressure: I was looking through books yesterday at the shops and saw all the Twilight books, which I know basically nothing about. What I do know is that I’m beginning to feel like I’m the *only* person who knows nothing about them.
Despite being almost broke and trying to save money, I almost bought the expensive book (Australian book prices are often completely nutty) just because I felt the need to be ‘up’ on what everyone else was reading.
Have you ever felt pressured to read something because ‘everyone else’ was reading it? Have you ever given in and read the book(s) in question or do you resist? If you are a reviewer, etc, do you feel it’s your duty to keep up on current trends?
I'm such a happy nonconformist, I've never in my life read anything because everyone else was reading it.
On the other hand, when 'everyone' is reading a book, I get curious. I want to know what it's like, and understand the conversations about it. This is why I've read the Harry Potter books, and Dan Brown, and... other stuff. I have not read Twilight, though for a while I thought I wanted to. Then I heard more about the story end decided against it.
The thing is, I often don't like the same things that 'everyone' likes. Though X-Men is still popular in the world of comics, it isn't a mainstream thing. Not even the movies, though they're better known. Dorothy Dunnett will never be to the popular taste - I am, in fact, always suprised when anyone besides myself loves the Lymond books, since I feel as if they're my personal domain. But not in a possessive sense.
This applies to the past, too. The classics that 'everyone' reads, or at least, gets assigned in school. I fell madly in love with Shakespeare - well, with Hamlet - as an adolescent - and then Dickens. But I never loved Jane Austen, or Isaac Asimov, or Andre Norton. I sample these things, all of them. And sometimes I'm glad I did. Tolkien, for example, though when I read Lord of the Rings I had no idea it was popular or famous, and no one called it a classic back then. I quite like the Harry Potter books, though not to the extent of feeling fannish about them. I hated The Da Vinci Code , but I'm not sorry I read it. Sometimes it's fun to hate a book for its absurdities and still half-admire it for its money-making properties. Now, that's alchemy - turning words into gold.
I used to review books (and comics) professionally, and enjoyed it. But it never made me want to read things I wouldn't otherwise have read. Writing style is, for me, the most important thing, and I wouldn't expect others to share my stylistic tastes. It's very individualistic, and very subjective.
I've never wanted to 'keep up' with what other people are reading. Sometimes because it looks boring. Mostly because I've always thought of myself as ahead of that curve anyway - I often read such books before other people do.
The important thing is having read the books and authors I love, not just Dorothy Dunnett but also Elizabeth Knox, Ellen Kushner, Megan Whalen Turner, Karin Lowachee. I don't care what's popular, I want to find what's good.
Yeah, I'm a book snob. Or perhaps an inverse book snob. I'm happy that way.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 05:08 pm (UTC)Not if they're actually good. I know we'll never agree on this, but my view is just because something is popular with women doesn't mean it's any good and should be supported because of some pseudo-feminist principle. Look at the crappy celeb mags (obsessing over which z-lest 'celebrity' has cellulite/stretch-marks/whatever) that were devoured by my former colleagues at the dental office. A large number of women adore them; it doesn't meant they're not tacky, brain-deadening bilge. With genre romance, formulaic fiction that deals in clichés and gender stereotypes is not, and will never be, great literature.
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 05:13 pm (UTC)I don't think anything that isn't good should be supported. My point is that many things that are actually good are dismissed or denigrated because they don't fit masculine tastes. Actually quality is beside the point - the people judging them aren't judging them becuase they're bad, but because they aren't to their tastes.
And I agree that there's a lot of bad stuff out there.
My current assessment of the Twilight books is: best ignored till it goes away. I agree with
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 05:50 pm (UTC)I'm honestly not sure if it's any worse for people to be completely illiterate than to read rubbish.
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 05:59 pm (UTC)I like to think there's hope for anyone, but a case can be made for illiteracy - if not book-burning!
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 06:07 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 07:30 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 12:51 am (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 02:12 am (UTC)And every once in a while there's something I don't expect to like, but I do. It's a nice surprise.
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 12:50 am (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 02:14 am (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 02:21 am (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 12:37 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 05:08 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 06:06 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-05 10:32 pm (UTC)My poor Rupert.
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 05:53 pm (UTC)I honestly can't think of anything that is actually good that falls into this category.
Or maybe you think I'm too masculine?!
Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 05:58 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 06:05 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 07:32 pm (UTC)Re: Twilight...
Date: 2008-09-04 08:06 pm (UTC)