Quote:
Originally Posted by Pulpmeister
One reason is that there is no objective measure of greatness in literature. All the usual criteria are subjective. (Which is why literary awards are not infallible guides to literary greatness.)
My own view is there is an objective measure of literary greatness--possibly more than one.
(snip)
If, when Agatha's books finally enter the public domain 70 years after her death, they are still selling in outrageous numbers, it could be very hard to deny that she is a great writer.
Literary snobs will of course have no trouble denying it.
|
The problem with this, in the context of what we're discussing, is that it assumes a defense is required or even desirable, which often plays right in to what the snob wants - placing the burden of validation on the person they are dumping their opinions on. It gives their position more weight than it deserves.
Yes, as was already mentioned, history shows us that works once sneered at are now held aloft as classics, but face-to-face snobbery rarely comes from a position of reason. It usually comes from a need for self-validation - "My choices are the correct ones". We humans often have trouble accepting that what is right for us is not universally correct, and the things that we value are not of value to all.
Of course, there is also the chance that someone once told them, "Fiction will rot your brain," and they believed it. Judging others for reading fiction is easier than admitting your whole reading life is a lie.
The most humane thing to do is to let them see that you simply don't care if others judge your reading choices, and that you are happy reading whatever the heck you want to.