The Ugly Truth - Reading Snobs

[BelleZora]

Several of my friends (all elderly like me) speak disparagingly of any book popular with young people now although none has ever read any of these books. Perhaps the only reason I have never become part this variety of snobbery is because I have an unusually good supply of granddaughters who have urged their favorite books upon me. I have read every one given or loaned to me just to understand what may be going on in their heads.

I am delighted with the strong, compassionate role model of Katniss Everdeen of the Hunger Games trilogy. I read the Harry Potter series as each came out and enjoyed them. I have heard a couple girls discuss the Twilight series, but none has ever suggested I read it, presumably because they don't want me disillusioned with their taste. I was recently invited to attend a 16th birthday party which involved going with a gaggle of girls to the latest Twilight movie. The squeals when Taylor Lautner took off his shirt were fun and brought happy memories of being sixteen.

I am very relieved that, if they ever read 50 Shades, they will most likely never wish to discuss it with me.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by BelleZora

Several of my friends (all elderly like me) speak disparagingly of any book popular with young people now although none has ever read any of these books.

"Everything was better in the old days", probably.

Try telling that to my (late) grandma, who lived through World War I, AND World War II (both in The Netherlands, a few miles from the German border). She was born in 1906, and died in 1994.

If one of us (or other young people) who thought that they knew the past dared to say "Everything was better back then", my grandma would reply "Only if you were not there".

I'm glad I didn't live between 1914-18 and 1939-45, to start with. For me, "Everything was better back then" is mostly about computers (that were new to me in the 80's, and now are just commonplace), and music from the 50-60's. That's about it.

There's so much stuff available now that was not there back then, *including* stuff to read. So, I just pick the things I like, both from "back then", and "now".

The squeals when Taylor Lautner took off his shirt were fun and brought happy memories of being sixteen.

Lautner? *googles* Uhm... Yeah. I can imagine. That's one good looking guy at just 22; and that's coming from a man.

I am very relieved that, if they ever read 50 Shades, they will most likely never wish to discuss it with me.

I can see my grandma purposfully reading 50 Shades and ask my sister if that's the normal way of doing "things" nowadays; had she lived at this time and been around 80 or so...

She might step into a roller coaster at 85, just because you said she shouldn't, so don't even *think* about suggesting *not* to read 50 Shades of Gray. She was that kind of a woman. She refused to get old ("What? Ask to sit in a bus? Ask help filling ou tthis form? Only old people do that!"... at 84...), and did new stuff as much as possible, but her aging body caugt up with her in the end.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by voracious71

Teen girls who like Twilight don't bother me so much, it's the grown women who squeal over it that worry me.:

I squeal over new Bujolds and I am *coughoverfortycough*

I admit that vampire romance has a very limited appeal for me, but suspect I'd enjoy Twilight just fine if I happened to be bored and have nothing else to read. Books like that are incredibly readable and there is nothing wrong with reading them or liking them--it's not great literature, but most books out there aren't, and tastes vary.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by Latinandgreek

I've heard a lot of negative comments about my reading over the years. Most of these negative comments were of the "reading so much will make you crazy" followed by a silly anecdote and "grow up, when you get married you won't have time to read because you will have to deal with real life". I've been married for years and I have always made time to read every day - I even got my husband reading! These sorts of comments don't bother me in the least, and I will generally not hesitate to make a snappy remark in return.

I still clearly remember my grandmother calling me about a year after I got married, and she said, "Now that you're married you're not still reading, are you?" I assured her that I still was. This went on every now and then for a few years. Then she finally faced reality told me I read so much I ought to capitalize on it by writing something. That's when I pulled out the story I published right after I married.

[Joykins]

Originally Posted by Fat Abe

3. Poor writing + Interesting Plot = Average bestseller

Well, there's poor writing and poor writing. Really poor writing won't make the bestseller list (and good writing can). The thing that makes a book a bestseller, besides the interesting plot, is a style of writing that is really easy to read; usually it's a style that propels you through the book quickly and unless you are very attentive to such things, the problems are only obvious in retrospect. This style of writing can be extraordinarly good, average, or poor, but you can trust that it won't be boring.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Here's a question I pose:

Does location play a part in reading snobbery?

My answer is 'Yes,' at least in my experience.

Perhaps your experience verifies this, as well? Or perhaps not for you?

Don

I think it's too easy to stereotype by location.

I grew up in a town of about 50,000 in a state that is not particularly wealthy. However, my father was a professor. Most of my friends' parents were professors, and those that weren't tended to have graduate degrees. This meant that every house I went to was filled with books, and almost everyone I knew read. When I was 15, we all decided to read Jane Austen because one of my friend's mothers had written her MA thesis on her. NPR was pretty much all you heard on the radio, and PBS was mostly what we watched. That was my high school experience, and it was defined by the people I associated with.

However, there were only about 600 professors in the town, and of course a huge percentage of the population had a very different teenage experience than I did. But the difference does not depend on the location in particular as much as it did on my social group.

Now, obviously, if you don't live in a college town you won't encounter a lot of professors. And if you live in a town of 10,000 in the middle of farm country and work at a tractor dealership, you are probably less likely to encounter people who read than if you live a town of 2 million and work at a college. But even a poor farm state is going to have places where a lot of people read, and there are plenty of rural areas in, say Ohio, where readers will be few and far between, even if they are very common in, say, Cincinnati.

[applesauce]

Only thing I can say made me cringe was Shades of Grey. Not the subject matter but how bad it was. Hmm having only just come back to reading and diving back into old favourites, I have found some authors cringe worthy now. It is like how on earth could I have ever loved their works.

I am very set in what I like to read, I would not read a bodice ripper or anything YA, as I like my books damn right vicious and nasty.
I tend to ignore what others read, but having said that it does creep me out when 40 year old women swoon or gush like love struck 13 year olds over edward. That is far to close a teen association.
So not what they read but how they react to what they read. As I said I love vicious nasty stuff, but do not act that way, in the same way I expect grown women not to act like love struck teens over teen characters.
Maybe i worded that right this time

applesauce

[Kirtai]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

"Everything was better in the old days", probably.

Try telling that to my (late) grandma, who lived through World War I, AND World War II (both in The Netherlands, a few miles from the German border). She was born in 1906, and died in 1994.

If one of us (or other young people) who thought that they knew the past dared to say "Everything was better back then", my grandma would reply "Only if you were not there".

The best thing about the "Good Old Days" is that they're gone.

Originally Posted by Katsunami

"Everything was better in the old days", probably.

Try telling that to my (late) grandma, who lived through World War I, AND World War II (both in The Netherlands, a few miles from the German border). She was born in 1906, and died in 1994.

Gack! Reading about the "good old days" is enough to churn my stomach.

The world has progressed a lot over the past century. Much of the world has figured out that peace brings more prosperity than war; that tolerance and acceptance reduces civil disorder; that educating everyone is a necessity for economic growth; that accessible health care is a necessity for a productive workforce; that innovation improves the quality of life. The list can certainly go on. More importantly, there is a strong case for rewriting the list in terms of compassion. (Alas, we need to progress somewhat further until our governments consider compassion as reason enough.)

Just take a look at something that we all take for granted: literacy. Punch "literacy rates historic" into an image search engine and you'll get graphs of increasing literacy rates from around the globe. Do we really want to return to the good old days when most of the world was illiterate? Do we really want to return to the good old days when a large fraction of the people in our own nations were illiterate? Remember, no literacy means reduced opportunities for education and (in many of our cases) entertainment.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

This year they very likely will stay in the wild card hunt till the Fourth of July, maybe even the All-Star break. Epstein *is* a certified genius, after all.

Yes, but even Theo says they won't be contending until 2015. In a spurt of huberist, I bet my daughter, who disses the Cubs, $1000 that they would win the World Series by 2015. I am saving up for it.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Sounds like our hubbys would get along. Does your hubby watch TVs and movies as much as you read? Mine does.

He rides his bike. He is a mountainbike finatic. I do 45 minutes on the eliptical, and call it a day. He also sleeps - goes to bed at 10 and is asleep 3 minutes later. I go to bed at 11 or 12, and am up for at least 2 hours, unless I take a sleeping pill. Thanks for Ambien!

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by alucarda

My point is choices a person makes in reading does say something about who they are. (I guess we have to agree to disagree here) Is that such a radical idea? It doesn't explain them 100% but if someone is reading only one type of books chances they will have much more to talk about (regarding these books) with someone who does the same thing then me. Providing I never read their type of books, or that I simply don't appreciate that genre.

And I appreciate you saying that people personalities are complicated, but I think our choices do say something about us.

I don't think I have ever discussed a romance book I was reading, except to read a really eye-rolling passage to my husband.

It is "than" not "then" I learned that in my romance books.

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

I can keep my snobbery aimed at the book rather than the reader. Sometimes I even envy their ability to get past bad writing enough to enjoy the story, as that's often more than I can manage.

There are certain books I never could get into. The Hobbitt for example. I admire anyone who could read that, but I might suggest their brain is wired a little differently than mine. Or maybe it is when. Just like love, if you meet the love of your life at the wrong time, you may never connect. I couldn't stand the Hobbitt, but I love reading the Internal Revenue Code. Thinking back, the ability to retain previous characters is just what the Hobbitt, and the IRC, are about. Maybe I should retry it!

[Sydney's Mom]

Originally Posted by applesauce

Only thing I can say made me cringe was Shades of Grey. Not the subject matter but how bad it was.
applesauce

Exactly. The fact that such a book rose to the top of the bestseller lists proves those lists are worthless.

Oh, I finally remembered a book that qualifies as female porn. The Anne Rice books.

[Katsunami]

Originally Posted by Sydney's Mom

There are certain books I never could get into. The Hobbitt for example. I admire anyone who could read that, but I might suggest their brain is wired a little differently than mine.it!

What's the reason you couldn't read that book? It's a children's book. Can you also not read Lord of the Rings, or is that different?

That you can't read The Silmarillion or The History of Middle-Earth is understandable. That's more like reading The Bible of Ancient Fantasy, and an encyclopedia. Those works are for the die-hard-can-never-get-enough fans. (IMHO.)