MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - Is it ever okay to condemn a book without even attempting to read it?

hildea · 08-16-2017, 04:19 PM

Some clarifications to my last post:

The slavery novel in my example was about Sally Hemings and Thomas Jefferson. If it had taken place in ancient Rome or among the Dohtrakis, my opinion would have been different.
I don't wish that publishing these novels were illegal, and I don't wish that they had been stopped from publication because of "twitter mobs" (also known as "grassroot movements"). I wish that the author, agent, and the editor who picked up this manuscript from the slush pile -- everybody who decided that "yes, this concept is worthy of my time and creativity" had had the wits and moral sense to see that these ideas are harmful, and had chosen some other concept instead.
I think the main harm stories like these cause isn't because some readers are offended or hurt. The main harm is those readers who don't get offended, who read and like the books, sympathise with the protagonists (because that's what we usually do, if the book is competently written), and whose ideas about that part of history gets influenced, just a little bit, by what they have read. I think the world would be better if noone had read those books.

And a question to those of you who don't see a problem with these books: Can you really say, with a straight face, that stories which romanticise nazis, trivialise the horror of slavery in the US, and make light of racism and antisemitism, don't hurt people? Truly?

08-16-2017, 04:19 PM	#131
hildea Wizard Posts: 1,315 Karma: 67561852 Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Norway Device: PocketBook Touch Lux (had Onyx Boox Poke 3 and BeBook Neo earlier)	Some clarifications to my last post: The slavery novel in my example was about Sally Hemings and Thomas Jefferson. If it had taken place in ancient Rome or among the Dohtrakis, my opinion would have been different. I don't wish that publishing these novels were illegal, and I don't wish that they had been stopped from publication because of "twitter mobs" (also known as "grassroot movements"). I wish that the author, agent, and the editor who picked up this manuscript from the slush pile -- everybody who decided that "yes, this concept is worthy of my time and creativity" had had the wits and moral sense to see that these ideas are harmful, and had chosen some other concept instead. I think the main harm stories like these cause isn't because some readers are offended or hurt. The main harm is those readers who don't get offended, who read and like the books, sympathise with the protagonists (because that's what we usually do, if the book is competently written), and whose ideas about that part of history gets influenced, just a little bit, by what they have read. I think the world would be better if noone had read those books. And a question to those of you who don't see a problem with these books: Can you really say, with a straight face, that stories which romanticise nazis, trivialise the horror of slavery in the US, and make light of racism and antisemitism, don't hurt people? Truly?