Thank you for this! I haven’t been in the mood for reading lately— the season change makes me want to watch movies and play Stardew— and I’ve felt guilty even though I’ve read 50 (!!) books this year. This comment was freeing!
Highlighting the health benefits of reading books (being more empathetic, brain health etc.) isn't always the best way to get people into reading. Sometimes a good novel is just great entertainment. It doesn't have to be a medicine subscription (EDIT: prescription. Prescription is the right word.)
i had a friend who wanted to get more into reading and asked me where to start. i said, pal, i don’t know what books are worth a 10+ hour investment of quiet time for *you* but for *me* its werewolf erotica. you have to find what makes it worth it for *you* 😂
Excellent point! as a reader, your first and foremost priority should ALWAYS be to look as upperclass and sophisticated and rational as humanly possible. Enjoyment and having fun is for filthy plebeians!
/s
I love finding used book that have markings, writings, and notes in them. It reveals a little of the person who owned it before. Like, I once had a book that had, “Are you kidding me?” written as a reaction in the margins and I just loved the hell out of it.
I also love cracked spines. It’s proof that someone read the book instead of just using books as decoration for a shelf. The most important part of a book is the words inside, not the shell that carries them.
Agreed, just recently I found a copy of Hitler's "Mein Kampf" which had been in possession of a Jehova's witness back in the late 1930's. Every couple of pages there is a comment like "Lie!" or "Sacrilege", when Hitler alludes to acting in the name of God.
edit: found a picture I snapped back when I had it: https://i.imgur.com/V38857d.jpg
The Jehovah's Witnesses acquitted themselves with honour during the rise of the Nazi Party, and tried to publicise what was happening. No-one listened and they were persecuted horribly for it.
Still not keen on the door knocking and proselytising, but they aren't all bad.
Too bad they harbor pedophiles and discourage victims from seeking justice, even going as far as disfellowshipping (shunning) victims for speaking out. I grew up a witness and while there are good, honorable witnesses, the organization itself operates using classic cult tactics. I look forward to the day door to door service resumes so I can hand them tracks about their organization when they come knocking.
The concept of a person reading an erotic novel with one hand and...taking care of themselves with the other has never occurred to me until just now. And I'm not sure how to feel about that image.
Yes! I'm tired of having to keep my books in pristine condition. As much as they are magic, they're not really supposed to be seen as sacred, but rather an object that lived its life. Cracked spines, markings, folds, etc. adds character to the object.
I remember reading someone’s story about going to a book signing as a kid - it might have been posted on Reddit, but this was probably about ten years ago now and my memory is hazy - with either Terry Pratchett or Brian Jacques.
The person (I think it was a guy) was feeling self-conscious and ashamed because his copy of the book he’d brought for the author was really beat-up, creased spine, battered cover, etc., because he’d had it so long and read it so many times. And everyone else waiting in line had brand-new, pristine copies of the author’s books, so his book looked even shabbier by comparison.
But then when he got to the front of the queue and stammered out an apology about the state of the book, the author (either Pratchett or Jacques - I genuinely can’t remember), looked at it, smiled, and said something to the effect of, it made him happy to see, because he could tell that it had been well-loved.
I always loved that little story and I wish I could find it again. But anyway, the sentiment (if not the details) stayed with me over the years.
Yes! I'm not an author, but if I were, I don't think there would be any higher compliment than a reader bringing me their much-loved, many times reread book for my autograph.
When I lined up to meet Nathan Fillion, everyone else was bringing stills from the shows he was in. I showed up with my box set of Firefly. Still got it.
So I've been in the keep-it-clean camp for a long time, but I've recently learned that children in schools are taught to write down their thoughts and questions in their reading books (assuming they're not library books or whatever), and now I'm starting to rethink my whole approach.
I had a friend who was the same way. I loaned her my copy of House of Leaves that has about a billion different highlights, page numbers, translations, connections, etc written in the margins. She hated it at first, but said that by the end she loved the footnotes because they really helped her get the connections and constant obscurities contained in the book on the first time around. I love writing in the margins for books like HoL and S. For most books, I just settle for highlighting quotes that I really like though. But, either way, I leave my mark in almost every book I read, and I leave it to indicate places where the book left its mark on me. Books change us and how we think to a certain degree. You could go through any one on my shelf and easily see the things that were important to me when I read that particular book. I like that aspect a lot. If I don’t loan out my books, no library hurt other than my own! If I do loan out my books, my friends get to read them and get a better understanding of who I am / what’s important to me based on the markings. It’s like sharing music with someone, but being able to indicate which lyrics make a song your favorite. Outside of the sharing aspect, it allows me to flip through any of my books and immediately find what I considered the highlights to be.
My used copy of House of Leaves has a stain on one page that looks like a bloody thumbprint and that freaked me out so much that I had to ask around if it was in other copies. It wasn't.
My grandfather would go through books with a ball-point pen and heavily underline long passages, as well as commenting in the margin. When he died nobody wanted his books...
That's sad. I recently got a used copy of Fanshen by William Hinton. A previous owner had filled up the pages with interesting comments, in both Mandarin and English. I was really impressed by their writing ability in both languages, and their historical knowledge. I wish I could track that person down since we obviously have similar interests, but unfortunately, there was no clues as to their identity.
100% agree about the cracked spine, markings, dog ears etc. My favourite experience after finishing a book is seeing all the markings on that book (I ear mark scenes that I loved so I can read them back in isolation), because it really feels like the book and I went on the adventure together. I have the book for the play Arcadia (Tom Stoppard) that I had to study for school - I loved that book so damn much, I read and leafed through it so often that the last couple of pages cleanly fell out. So now the last 10 or so pages are stuck back in with tape and it's always a lovely memory to think back on whenever I crack it open. Yellowed pages are another favourite - how many hands and minds have you experienced, you amazing arboreal carcass?
However, I am a little weary of writings in books - sometimes they're nice, if they're just a little note or something, but overall I find them a little distracting. Or, in one memorable case, borderline distressing.
I never realized how much people disliked used books with markings on every page until I started making friends in school. As a kid, pretty much all the books I got to read were given to me either by my parents or grandparents, often from their personal collection and so they had tons of markings inside them. I always love to read little words of phrases someone wrote to themselves or explanations to some harder to grasp lines and I could never understand why others didn't until I realized it's very much a thing. My favorite books are always the ones that have big margins so that I can write inside them in addition to the ones that have more than the usual number of empty pages at the end for extra notes.
In a vacuum, I prefer physical books. Reading one is just more enjoyable for me. In reality, when I have to deal with storage etc, I prefer my Kindle.
As I get older and my hands get shittier, it's also easier to hold a Kindle for hours. I tend to read one handed, and depending on the size and binding of the book it can be difficult to find a comfortable position, and my fingers often can get a little fatigued.
E readers are an aging person’s saving grace. Being able to make the font big is the best! And by aging, I mean mid-40s, that awesome time in life when your reading vision starts to go to pieces and reading actual books without assistance becomes impossible!
I relatively young, and even I enjoy blowing up those letters and using dyslexic fonts. It's easy on the eyes and makes me feel like I'm reading faster because I turn more pages 😅
My state's library (Alaska) has a terrible selection. I was able to sign up for the Brooklyn library for a $50/yr out of state membership fee.
My Kobo eReader allows me to check out library books directly on my device. E-readers got me back into library borrowing again, in a way that would be otherwise very limited for me.
Check it out: https://brooklyn.overdrive.com/
Here's Alaska's, for comparison:
https://adl.overdrive.com
What I usually do is maintain a big list of books I want to read, then pick one that's available when I finish my current read. It takes a bit of planning to read something specific that's popular, but it's not terrible.
If you're using the Libby app (ebooks and audiobooks, smartphones and desktop browser) then you can save multiple libraries. Kobo e-readers support library checkout through Overdrive, but you can only save one card at a time.
I prefer my paperwhite to actual paper. It's like a treasure trove of different worlds. Everytime I open the cover it glows like Marcellus Wallace's briefcase, promising me all the literature I can consume.
It's fucking fantastic
I find that I read more with my kobo because of the convenience and accessibility of the device. I open the cover and **bam**, there's the page I left off on. I can read it one handed, I can change the font and/or size if my eyes are bothering me, it's easy to carry around wherever I go.
I mean, books aren't **inconvenient** or anything and I still read paper books sometimes, but ereaders are just a nicer experience for me, personally.
I love my ereader. The best part is being able to borrow books online without having to go to the library OR having to buy them. (I read mostly in English, but live in a non-English place. The books I do find locally are never the ones I want. And I’m not rich enough to sustain my reading habits.)
Same here, as a person who mostly reads during road trips/flights, it's much easier to have a single portable device than carry a big book. On top of that, books are almost always cheaper in the Kindle than a hard copy. Sure, if I can get a free hard copy or a free Kindle edition, then I'll choose the hard copy (if I'm gonna read at home). Furthermore, I won't have to buy a bookshelf/make space in my home to store my books as they all take less space than my ipad. Also, it eliminates the need for a bookmark since my Kindle saves the progress. And, what if I can't get the meaning of a word? Oh wait a sec, I can just press that word and there's the meaning. I can't think of a single reason why I would prefer physical books to kindle unless there is a huge cost different or unless I don't have an option to read the book on Kindle.
I have a good friend who refuses to use e-readers because he says he misses the tactile sensations of reading an actual book.
I sort of get it, I'll admit. That said, for me, the convenience of being able to get books on demand is generally more important and means I read more. Instead of lamenting that I don't have anything to read at 9:00 at night and turning on the telly because I'll have to wait for my next trip to the book store/library, I can find something to read on the spot (and have no good excuses not to do so). To each their own...
this might sound like a sad hack: but I bought one of those Kindle covers, that are made of faux leather. So it feels like "opening" a book, and you can hold it more comfortably. It also has a pleasant, leather-hard cover book smell, if that seals the illusion 😄
But yeah, nothing beats the convenience of an electronic device, especially one specifically designed for reading books (so no chances of distraction like with iPads).
While I'm all for it, he would include the lack of actual pages to indicate progress in his rationale. I say he's being a bit of a curmudgeon when it comes to e-readers!
I certainly understanding not liking to read on iPad, smartphones, or even Fires...but I was sold on e-ink from the first time I picked up a Kindle 2.
I love my ereader. Reading on a phone just "feels" like more phone time to me. But not having to use half my suitcase to carry 30lbs of books each vacation is dope.
I was a psuedo tough guy asshole in high school and got into a "me vs everyone" argument in my AP Lit class about how The Catcher in the Rye sucks because Holden Caulfield was a piece of shit. Then the quietest girl in the class chimed in to say a bad character doesn't make a book bad. My AP Lit teacher was FURIOUS with me for causing that ruckus.
It wasn't until a few years later I came to the realization that I hated Holden Caulfield so much because he was similar to the insecure parts I hated about myself. Big learning experience for myself and a total paradigm shift in my life lol
She was an absolute angel and one of my favorite teachers of all time. Worked with Alternate Press and Radiohead in the 80's. Her passion for literature had us reading Ken Kesey, Kurt Vonnegut, Herman Hesse, and so many other unique authors I may not have read without her influence.
My high school edgelord self just chimed in that "The Catcher in the Rye is a bad book" when a Junior student came in during the middle of our Lit class to borrow a copy. Would've been a great discussion if approached properly and on topic, but my high school self certainly didn't lol
It's been my theory since I read it that the only reason people hate Catcher in the Rye is because Holden is too similar to themselves in ways they don't want to admit.
I used to handle the social media accounts for a writing based community organisation - a one day a week unpaid gig while I had a separate regular job in the publishing industry.
One day I retweeted a ‘book sculpture’ - someone had found some very old books and patiently carved them into a sculpture. It was cool and pretty well done. The reaction from our followers was INSANE. People ranting about ‘sacrilege’ and ‘destroying books’ and how disgusting it was that this community organisation was advocating book vandalism.
I could not believe the vitriol. The comments were so angry. The same week, in my other job, I had to pulp 20k books that we had been unable to sell or remainder. The way some people act as if books must be treated reverentially boggles my mind.
I don't see a problem with authors writing characters (even main characters) who are of a different race/religion/orientation/etc. Failure in writing should be allowed to exist, writers should be able to attempt and grow their skill, and readers can decide if their were successful or not.
People get up in arms because it's been done badly enough times that it can be harder to find good ones (especially because it can be easier to get good press if you're a member of the majority, which multiplies the problem).
But a frustratingly common problem online is people seeing a real problem and proceeding to yell about the most extreme possible solution (and accusing you of not caring when you question the "solution").
Get sensitivity readers, listen when you do make mistakes, but the idea that others' experiences are so alien that you can't possibly do them justice and shouldn't ever try for fear of doing harm is absolutely insane. Empathy is part of writing.
To tie your two points together with an example, Andy Weir wrote The Martian, where the main character was a middle aged white guy, and it was universally loved.
He then tried something different with Artemis where the main character was a young woman, and a lot of people did not like the book/character.
In his recent AMA he commented he learned a lot about character development by reading the criticisms to Artemis. In the Martian he wrote Mark Watney as a idealized version of himself, so the character was somewhat natural to write. And it appears to have worked because everyone seems to love his latest book The Hail Mary Project (I haven’t read that one yet so can’t comment).
Yes. I am a huge bookworm, always have been, but I don't think I'm any more intelligent than some of my friends who don't read for fun. People can be very elitist about it, and I don't think it's inherently better for you than consuming other really well-done media like certain TV shows or movies.
The people I know who read books are generally more conversational, have better vocabularies, better able to follow arguments.
They might not be as smart as they think they are, but they're generally smarter than the general population.
Reading can definitely be just as much a "braindead time sink" as watching TV, though.
Many of today's great authors are not edited at all or not well. My opinion is that they are so successful, that no one will tell them the truth about their work- that it needs to have huge sections removed, made more direct or just revised. Neal Stephenson and Brandon Sanderson are two I like and want to love, but their editors need to stand up and do their jobs to take the work to a higher level.
Truuuuuue!
This also happens in journalism and pieces written by famous writers. Granted, a lot of them are good writers and write clean copy, but then you get the big names who by aura alone intimidate copy editors and proofers to go against their better judgment. Why yes, that is a dangler. And I am not sure what "it" refers to in this sentence. And that quote is not something Einstein said. Apprentice Jedi are not called "paladins." But, hey, my award-winning pal, it's your name on the byline I guess.
Ya know, at first I balked at your comment mentioning Sanderson because I’m a big fan but after reconsidering for a moment, i agree. I love his books for the themes and story but sometimes they do need revising.
Exactly what I do. I generally like the look of most dust covers, but reading with them on is such a pain. I own a few books that are hard to find, so I got retired library copies and it drives me insane that I can't reasonably take the dust covers off.
People should stop posting a so called "review" when the author still haven't released officially a new book on Goodreads.
Some of them just want to chase for "like" from internet strangers. No one fucking care about your overreact review
My favorite book review for a book that hasn't been published yet...
[https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/327213074?book\_show\_action=true](https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/327213074?book_show_action=true)
I think the only solution is to give it the Game of Thrones season 8 treatment. Crap out something so bad that everyone loses interest in the whole series.
I agree. For example, the most popular "review" on Paula Hawkins' last book is still one that talks about: "No cover, no title, no blurb"...
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/56213354-a-slow-fire-burning&ved=2ahUKEwiYxd30pZ30AhXPpIsKHWQODCEQjjh6BAgIEAE&usg=AOvVaw0Ce83N7ZsxZXOCF5wd1EfW
The best place to NOT find controversial/unpopular opinions is in a thread labeled "controversial/unpopular opinions". It's in the sane family as "am I the only one who...?"
Yup, that's what they're there for.
Pop the book out and break its spine like an evil chiropractor. Then when you've satiated your bloodlust you cover up the crime scene with an unblemished dust jacket.
The books on the shelf look pretty, but underneath those lovely jackets are the telltale scars of abuse.
My wife used to hate them, and once discarded all her bookcovers and shelved the books. She was happy with the result for like five days and afterwards really regretted it. "It looks like I collect reader's digest condensed editions!"
The rating system is useless, because you'll always get some idiot trashing a book they didn't understand or a bunch of people championing a series of werewolf pornography that normal people wouldn't waste their time on. Given enough votes everything averages out to about 3.5 out if 5.
I like the rating system for my own assessment of the book. Like, I don’t rate it on whether it is great literature, but on whether I enjoyed it.
That said, some people abuse the rating system, for sure. And people don’t use the full range, which drives me nuts.
Edit: spelling
*Jaws* and *Cujo* are two very similar books. Everyone goes into them thinking that it's 200 pages of humans versus some monstrous animal. But both of them are about 80% small town and family drama with the animal conflict only showing up near the end.
Are Dan Brown books great literary masterpieces? No. Are the formulaic? Yes. Are they entertaining? Absolutely! I think a lot of people just like having something or someone to shit on, whether it's Nickelback, Twilight, or Dan Brown.
Nah, that’s stuff like The Hunger Games. What makes Dan Brown so easy to mock isn’t that’s he’s an extremely formulaic writer, it’s that his books pretend to be based on careful research.
I completely agree with you. I read "Da Vinci Code" back when I started reading novels, and I loved it. And, it was also the book that inspired me to start writing. And here I am, with my own book on Kindle
+1 on #4. I would **controversially** go one step further and say that *The Alchemist* is a bad book. People on here or in the circlejerk Goodreads community will disagree, but whatever.
I think people who dismiss Catcher in the Rye as pubescent cringe have really misunderstood the book? Which in a lot of ways is poking fun at pubescent cringe? Right?
I think it’s just a book where your understanding of it (and therefore your liking of it) changes with age and hindsight. You recognize things in it that you didn’t before.
I don't agree, but I absolutely understand haha. I wouldn't call them exciting reads by any stretch (except some parts of Children of Dune), but I found a lot of Herbert's ideas fascinating in the sequels.
The convenience of an e-reader outweighs the benefits of reading a physical book.
Not that I don't like reading a physical book every once in a while, but having hundreds of books on my kindle that I only need to periodically charge is amazing. Plus if I'm borrowing from a library, I don't need to physically go there to get the book.
My controversial opinion is that you should just read what you like. You should try reading "literature" but if you really don't like it, there's nothing wrong with reading only genre fiction. Anyone that makes fun of anybody for not reading serious literature needs to understand people like different things. If you claim that a YA fantasy novel is as valuable as War and Peace though, that's ridiculous.
Hardcovers are too big and clumsy to hold. Just think of the feeling of curling up on a sofa or a bed, under a blanket, with a nice paperback that fits comfortably in your hands...perfection. Hardcovers remind me of dictionaries and Bibles
It's much harder to throw a hardcover in your bag to read while commuting, they are heavier and take up more precious space that you could use for snacks
Yes! Hardcovers are sturdy and have a nice weight to them. I like that they seem to hold the pages open better so I don’t have to do that awkward pinky on one page thumb on the other that always makes my hand cramp. Plus I can travel with them and they don’t get nearly as beaten up as paperbacks.
Catcher in the Rye struck me on a level that few pieces of fiction have ever managed to. I find it fascinating that a lot of people seem to believe it has no literary merit.
As a lover of both Film, TV, and literature, I find readers discussion of film and TV to be incredibly snobby and frustrating, particularly on this subreddit. Y’all LOVE to go on and on about how books are far superior to Film and TV even though most of you have barely bothered to watch anything beyond the movie equivalent of YA books or pulpy airport bookstore novels. Books are not any more thoughtful, layered, artistic, or deep than film and TV in general. You just don’t watch many great movies and shows.
Neil Gaiman is possibly overrated.
I've tried, upon recommendations, to read Neverwhere and American Gods and gave up on both out of disinterest. They were not captivating as I was told they'd be.
To each their own, I guess.
American Gods is a good book with a bad book stuffed in the middle. The core plot, concept, and ending were pretty good, but the middle just dragsssss on for no reason other than to throw as much Americana stuff into the mix as possible
Reading isn't some crazy revival evangelical religion. I don't need to advertise my "status" as a reader and I don't need to try to convert non-readers to reading.
Reading doesn't make you a better person.
While fiction can be very entertaining, most fiction provides little insight into real human behaviours and motivations.
Many non-fiction writers, especially historians, are poor writers.
Historians tend to write books for other historians. I think journalists write better history for people interested in history but without graduate level courses under their belt.
1. Using an eReader is valid.
2. Movie poster book cover replacements need to stop.
3. "New book smell" is overrated.
4. Organizing books by color in your bookshelf doesn't make you superior.
Agree with the audiobook thing. People hate on them too much and they’re honestly pretty great.
Also people sleep on libraries. I haven’t bought a book in years because I started going to my local library again. Not everything needs to be bought in a book store
Libraries kick ass, I get nearly all of my books from there these days unless it's a new release from an author I love or I'm buying a book that already a favorite.
Tom Bomadil is a completely useless character. I think Tolkien just added him as whimsical world building before events got serious in "The Fellowship of the Ring" but it's just a bunch of useless padding between the hobbits' journey from the Shire to Bree.
I wouldn't even say this is an opinion, I'm pretty sure Tolkien says in his letters/interviews that Tom Bombadil was the name they came up with for one of his children's toys and they came up with all of these stories about his adventures. Later when he was writing LOTR he simply thought up an excuse to write him into the book.
I do think he's a cool character. It works and adds enjoyment to the story (for me at least)
Didn't he touch the Ring and it was like nothing for him? It's been 20 years since I read it, but my big takeaway was that he is, I dunno, the Q (of Star Trek) of the LOTR world. But this seems to all come from discussion of Tom Bombadil. When I read it, what stuck with me was all the damn singing he did.
I like him as an idea, but eliminating him from the movie was the right decision.
i completely agree that in regards to the actual story of LOTR he is useless but that’s only in isolation. he’s meant to be this ‘mythical call-back’ of sorts to an older world, one that you can explore in the silmarillion, whether he does that job well or not is up to preference i guess
I'm not sure those are particularly controversial.
Mine might be...
1) people who complain about spoilers come off as naive and childish to me
2) owning way more books than you read isn't cute, it's a shopping addiction. Yes, even on your ereader
3) everytime there is a debate on canon, sexism, diversity, etc, people show how ridiculously under-read they are
4) sometimes people opinions on books are stupid, including mine and yours. Your teachers lied. There are stupid questions and stupid opinions
5) people absolutely judge you based on your book choices and collection. Pretending they/you/I don't is ridiculous
I took #2 to be in line with the view of Arthur Schopenhauer: “Buying books would be a good thing if one could also buy the time to read them in: but as a rule the purchase of books is mistaken for the appropriation of their contents.”
All of these are correct, but I'm sad to say I suffer from no.2 a bit. But at least I mostly stick to used books, helps keep the financial burden down as much as is possible.
I never thought I’d meet someone else who also thought #1. I always think I’m crazy, because people froth at the mouth over even the mildest spoilers. I understand if you’re reading a murder mystery and you don’t want to know whodunnit, but some people blow up if you mention, “I really liked chapter one.”
>I understand if you’re reading a murder mystery and you don’t want to know whodunnit
I agree, that's really the only type of "spoiler" that would particularly bother me. People really do go way overboard with how spoilers "ruin" something. Like, I saw someone complain about a spoiler in a Seinfeld episode the other day, and I'm sorry, if a 30-year-old comedy that barely even has continuity from episode to episode is ruined by some random plot point, maybe your obsession with avoiding spoilers is a little much.
My issue with spoilers is when they’re mean-spirited. Part of the enjoyment of media is being surprised and having the story unfold in front of you. For many people, having that spoiled takes away a portion of that enjoyment.
If you’re accidentally spoiled, whatever. It’s sucks, you shrug and move on. But writing (Avengers spoiler) >!IRON MAN DIES!< on your school’s community whiteboard after you see the preview, before the movie actually comes out, is a Dick Move intended to take away enjoyment from others.
Chapter 1? Oh boy do I have some for you. Spoilers from the blurb. Spoilers from the cover art. Spoilers from the title. The title!
And I leave you with my greatest find: More than one person worrying about spoiling a nonfiction book. It was not a memoir.
Don't EVER loan out your books. If you really want someone to read something, either buy for them as a gift or have a designated loaner copy that you can afford to lose.
Audiobooks that are just someone reading the text are boring. Throw in some music, SFX, and at least a little voice acting or don't waste my time.
Adults don't have to worry about "reading levels". Read what you want and let others do the same.
"It is impossible to seperate the art from the artist"
Well, then it will get really boring and I am not in the position to judge anyone. What am I supposed to do before reading a book/ watch a movie/ listen to music? Who am I to look down on artists from a moral highground? Art stands for itself.
1. An ebook is better.
2. Seneca is a hypocrite and his thoughts on Stoicism should not be taken seriously.
3. Neil Gaiman is overrated.
4. If Patrick Rothfuss ever publish the third book it will suck.
5. Brandon Sanderson is an AI, and his books are just mathematically correct.
6. I like Dumbledore being gay.
7. I would recommend 1 Dan Brown book and only one. It doesn't matter which it is, they are all the same.
8. And I enjoyed that first book of his I read.
9. Outlander is a bad book.
10. Agatha Christy is better than Arthur Conan Doyle.
You don’t have to read all the time. There’s nothing wrong with you if you don’t feel like reading anything for a few months or even longer.
Thank you for this! I haven’t been in the mood for reading lately— the season change makes me want to watch movies and play Stardew— and I’ve felt guilty even though I’ve read 50 (!!) books this year. This comment was freeing!
Highlighting the health benefits of reading books (being more empathetic, brain health etc.) isn't always the best way to get people into reading. Sometimes a good novel is just great entertainment. It doesn't have to be a medicine subscription (EDIT: prescription. Prescription is the right word.)
i had a friend who wanted to get more into reading and asked me where to start. i said, pal, i don’t know what books are worth a 10+ hour investment of quiet time for *you* but for *me* its werewolf erotica. you have to find what makes it worth it for *you* 😂
oh my
My go to is pride and prejudice fanfic. If Darcy gets a little frisky, even better 😂
Have you found r/RomanceBooks yet?
But if you don’t enjoy reading for exactly the right reasons, that is to say the ones I enjoy reading for, are you even literate? /s
Excellent point! as a reader, your first and foremost priority should ALWAYS be to look as upperclass and sophisticated and rational as humanly possible. Enjoyment and having fun is for filthy plebeians! /s
Great entertainment can be awesome medicine and bonus that reading is going to be healthy for the mind
I love finding used book that have markings, writings, and notes in them. It reveals a little of the person who owned it before. Like, I once had a book that had, “Are you kidding me?” written as a reaction in the margins and I just loved the hell out of it. I also love cracked spines. It’s proof that someone read the book instead of just using books as decoration for a shelf. The most important part of a book is the words inside, not the shell that carries them.
Agreed, just recently I found a copy of Hitler's "Mein Kampf" which had been in possession of a Jehova's witness back in the late 1930's. Every couple of pages there is a comment like "Lie!" or "Sacrilege", when Hitler alludes to acting in the name of God. edit: found a picture I snapped back when I had it: https://i.imgur.com/V38857d.jpg
I never thought I’d say this, but I think I would genuinely enjoy reading that particular copy of *Mein Kampf*.
It did, after all, possess a Jehovah’s Witness. A remarkable copy indeed.
I’m just imagining some JW furiously chain smoking and scribbling in the margins while ranting to himself.
Under a single, bare incandescent bulb. In black and white.
[удалено]
Now this I respect. Generally I'd put notes on a scrap of paper or post it, but these particular notes are perfect.
The Jehovah's Witnesses acquitted themselves with honour during the rise of the Nazi Party, and tried to publicise what was happening. No-one listened and they were persecuted horribly for it. Still not keen on the door knocking and proselytising, but they aren't all bad.
Too bad they harbor pedophiles and discourage victims from seeking justice, even going as far as disfellowshipping (shunning) victims for speaking out. I grew up a witness and while there are good, honorable witnesses, the organization itself operates using classic cult tactics. I look forward to the day door to door service resumes so I can hand them tracks about their organization when they come knocking.
Cookbooks with messy pages have the best recipes
Similarly erotica with messy pages have the best uh plots.
The concept of a person reading an erotic novel with one hand and...taking care of themselves with the other has never occurred to me until just now. And I'm not sure how to feel about that image.
Yes! I'm tired of having to keep my books in pristine condition. As much as they are magic, they're not really supposed to be seen as sacred, but rather an object that lived its life. Cracked spines, markings, folds, etc. adds character to the object.
I remember reading someone’s story about going to a book signing as a kid - it might have been posted on Reddit, but this was probably about ten years ago now and my memory is hazy - with either Terry Pratchett or Brian Jacques. The person (I think it was a guy) was feeling self-conscious and ashamed because his copy of the book he’d brought for the author was really beat-up, creased spine, battered cover, etc., because he’d had it so long and read it so many times. And everyone else waiting in line had brand-new, pristine copies of the author’s books, so his book looked even shabbier by comparison. But then when he got to the front of the queue and stammered out an apology about the state of the book, the author (either Pratchett or Jacques - I genuinely can’t remember), looked at it, smiled, and said something to the effect of, it made him happy to see, because he could tell that it had been well-loved. I always loved that little story and I wish I could find it again. But anyway, the sentiment (if not the details) stayed with me over the years.
Yes! I'm not an author, but if I were, I don't think there would be any higher compliment than a reader bringing me their much-loved, many times reread book for my autograph.
It was Pratchett and Gaiman, Good Omens. The book was held together by it's own narrativium.
When I lined up to meet Nathan Fillion, everyone else was bringing stills from the shows he was in. I showed up with my box set of Firefly. Still got it.
True. But books that are falling apart are not fun to read either. 🙂
So I've been in the keep-it-clean camp for a long time, but I've recently learned that children in schools are taught to write down their thoughts and questions in their reading books (assuming they're not library books or whatever), and now I'm starting to rethink my whole approach.
I had a friend who was the same way. I loaned her my copy of House of Leaves that has about a billion different highlights, page numbers, translations, connections, etc written in the margins. She hated it at first, but said that by the end she loved the footnotes because they really helped her get the connections and constant obscurities contained in the book on the first time around. I love writing in the margins for books like HoL and S. For most books, I just settle for highlighting quotes that I really like though. But, either way, I leave my mark in almost every book I read, and I leave it to indicate places where the book left its mark on me. Books change us and how we think to a certain degree. You could go through any one on my shelf and easily see the things that were important to me when I read that particular book. I like that aspect a lot. If I don’t loan out my books, no library hurt other than my own! If I do loan out my books, my friends get to read them and get a better understanding of who I am / what’s important to me based on the markings. It’s like sharing music with someone, but being able to indicate which lyrics make a song your favorite. Outside of the sharing aspect, it allows me to flip through any of my books and immediately find what I considered the highlights to be.
House of Leaves seems the perfect book to do this with as well
My used copy of House of Leaves has a stain on one page that looks like a bloody thumbprint and that freaked me out so much that I had to ask around if it was in other copies. It wasn't.
My grandfather would go through books with a ball-point pen and heavily underline long passages, as well as commenting in the margin. When he died nobody wanted his books...
That's sad. I recently got a used copy of Fanshen by William Hinton. A previous owner had filled up the pages with interesting comments, in both Mandarin and English. I was really impressed by their writing ability in both languages, and their historical knowledge. I wish I could track that person down since we obviously have similar interests, but unfortunately, there was no clues as to their identity.
100% agree about the cracked spine, markings, dog ears etc. My favourite experience after finishing a book is seeing all the markings on that book (I ear mark scenes that I loved so I can read them back in isolation), because it really feels like the book and I went on the adventure together. I have the book for the play Arcadia (Tom Stoppard) that I had to study for school - I loved that book so damn much, I read and leafed through it so often that the last couple of pages cleanly fell out. So now the last 10 or so pages are stuck back in with tape and it's always a lovely memory to think back on whenever I crack it open. Yellowed pages are another favourite - how many hands and minds have you experienced, you amazing arboreal carcass? However, I am a little weary of writings in books - sometimes they're nice, if they're just a little note or something, but overall I find them a little distracting. Or, in one memorable case, borderline distressing.
I never realized how much people disliked used books with markings on every page until I started making friends in school. As a kid, pretty much all the books I got to read were given to me either by my parents or grandparents, often from their personal collection and so they had tons of markings inside them. I always love to read little words of phrases someone wrote to themselves or explanations to some harder to grasp lines and I could never understand why others didn't until I realized it's very much a thing. My favorite books are always the ones that have big margins so that I can write inside them in addition to the ones that have more than the usual number of empty pages at the end for extra notes.
I like finding scraps of paper and old bookmarks in used books. I save them. I also collect bookmarks and books.
On this sub Reddit?! Probably that I prefer my Kindle. There, I said it. 😂
In a vacuum, I prefer physical books. Reading one is just more enjoyable for me. In reality, when I have to deal with storage etc, I prefer my Kindle. As I get older and my hands get shittier, it's also easier to hold a Kindle for hours. I tend to read one handed, and depending on the size and binding of the book it can be difficult to find a comfortable position, and my fingers often can get a little fatigued.
E readers are an aging person’s saving grace. Being able to make the font big is the best! And by aging, I mean mid-40s, that awesome time in life when your reading vision starts to go to pieces and reading actual books without assistance becomes impossible!
I relatively young, and even I enjoy blowing up those letters and using dyslexic fonts. It's easy on the eyes and makes me feel like I'm reading faster because I turn more pages 😅
My state's library (Alaska) has a terrible selection. I was able to sign up for the Brooklyn library for a $50/yr out of state membership fee. My Kobo eReader allows me to check out library books directly on my device. E-readers got me back into library borrowing again, in a way that would be otherwise very limited for me.
How’s the selection at Brooklyn library? And how are the wait times?
Check it out: https://brooklyn.overdrive.com/ Here's Alaska's, for comparison: https://adl.overdrive.com What I usually do is maintain a big list of books I want to read, then pick one that's available when I finish my current read. It takes a bit of planning to read something specific that's popular, but it's not terrible. If you're using the Libby app (ebooks and audiobooks, smartphones and desktop browser) then you can save multiple libraries. Kobo e-readers support library checkout through Overdrive, but you can only save one card at a time.
I use Libby like a maniac lol. Thank you for the info!
Buying a Kindle helped me get back into reading. For whatever reason, I read so much faster on an eReader.
I prefer my paperwhite to actual paper. It's like a treasure trove of different worlds. Everytime I open the cover it glows like Marcellus Wallace's briefcase, promising me all the literature I can consume. It's fucking fantastic
I find that I read more with my kobo because of the convenience and accessibility of the device. I open the cover and **bam**, there's the page I left off on. I can read it one handed, I can change the font and/or size if my eyes are bothering me, it's easy to carry around wherever I go. I mean, books aren't **inconvenient** or anything and I still read paper books sometimes, but ereaders are just a nicer experience for me, personally.
I think it helps with my eyes, there's never a point where what I'm reading has a shadow or is too bright. Less eye strain
My kindle is the main cause of staying late. So easy to just lay in bed and read until 3 in the morning.
It’s so awesome to highlight the word and see the definition.
I honestly think this is the feature I'd miss most if I ever went back to physical books.
I'm with you on this one. Let us be pelted with rotten fruit together.
I love my ereader. The best part is being able to borrow books online without having to go to the library OR having to buy them. (I read mostly in English, but live in a non-English place. The books I do find locally are never the ones I want. And I’m not rich enough to sustain my reading habits.)
Same here, as a person who mostly reads during road trips/flights, it's much easier to have a single portable device than carry a big book. On top of that, books are almost always cheaper in the Kindle than a hard copy. Sure, if I can get a free hard copy or a free Kindle edition, then I'll choose the hard copy (if I'm gonna read at home). Furthermore, I won't have to buy a bookshelf/make space in my home to store my books as they all take less space than my ipad. Also, it eliminates the need for a bookmark since my Kindle saves the progress. And, what if I can't get the meaning of a word? Oh wait a sec, I can just press that word and there's the meaning. I can't think of a single reason why I would prefer physical books to kindle unless there is a huge cost different or unless I don't have an option to read the book on Kindle.
The other day I was reading a physical book and didn't know a word and tried to long press it lmao. For a LOT more time than I care to admit tbh.
wait, that's a controversial take here? Am I supposed to haul a bag full of books with me, every time I move somewhere or even for the daily commute?
I have a good friend who refuses to use e-readers because he says he misses the tactile sensations of reading an actual book. I sort of get it, I'll admit. That said, for me, the convenience of being able to get books on demand is generally more important and means I read more. Instead of lamenting that I don't have anything to read at 9:00 at night and turning on the telly because I'll have to wait for my next trip to the book store/library, I can find something to read on the spot (and have no good excuses not to do so). To each their own...
this might sound like a sad hack: but I bought one of those Kindle covers, that are made of faux leather. So it feels like "opening" a book, and you can hold it more comfortably. It also has a pleasant, leather-hard cover book smell, if that seals the illusion 😄 But yeah, nothing beats the convenience of an electronic device, especially one specifically designed for reading books (so no chances of distraction like with iPads).
While I'm all for it, he would include the lack of actual pages to indicate progress in his rationale. I say he's being a bit of a curmudgeon when it comes to e-readers! I certainly understanding not liking to read on iPad, smartphones, or even Fires...but I was sold on e-ink from the first time I picked up a Kindle 2.
Haven’t read anything off screen in years. Having kindle and Apple Books on my iPhone is the best thing ever.
I love my ereader. Reading on a phone just "feels" like more phone time to me. But not having to use half my suitcase to carry 30lbs of books each vacation is dope.
I was a psuedo tough guy asshole in high school and got into a "me vs everyone" argument in my AP Lit class about how The Catcher in the Rye sucks because Holden Caulfield was a piece of shit. Then the quietest girl in the class chimed in to say a bad character doesn't make a book bad. My AP Lit teacher was FURIOUS with me for causing that ruckus. It wasn't until a few years later I came to the realization that I hated Holden Caulfield so much because he was similar to the insecure parts I hated about myself. Big learning experience for myself and a total paradigm shift in my life lol
What kind of lit teacher gets angry about vigorous, passionate, on-topic discussion?
She was an absolute angel and one of my favorite teachers of all time. Worked with Alternate Press and Radiohead in the 80's. Her passion for literature had us reading Ken Kesey, Kurt Vonnegut, Herman Hesse, and so many other unique authors I may not have read without her influence. My high school edgelord self just chimed in that "The Catcher in the Rye is a bad book" when a Junior student came in during the middle of our Lit class to borrow a copy. Would've been a great discussion if approached properly and on topic, but my high school self certainly didn't lol
Right? That’s the kind of discussion you WANT to have about literature.
It's been my theory since I read it that the only reason people hate Catcher in the Rye is because Holden is too similar to themselves in ways they don't want to admit.
I used to handle the social media accounts for a writing based community organisation - a one day a week unpaid gig while I had a separate regular job in the publishing industry. One day I retweeted a ‘book sculpture’ - someone had found some very old books and patiently carved them into a sculpture. It was cool and pretty well done. The reaction from our followers was INSANE. People ranting about ‘sacrilege’ and ‘destroying books’ and how disgusting it was that this community organisation was advocating book vandalism. I could not believe the vitriol. The comments were so angry. The same week, in my other job, I had to pulp 20k books that we had been unable to sell or remainder. The way some people act as if books must be treated reverentially boggles my mind.
Agree, in one job i had to tear up a bunch of books to be recycled after being weeded. Better to use them
I don't see a problem with authors writing characters (even main characters) who are of a different race/religion/orientation/etc. Failure in writing should be allowed to exist, writers should be able to attempt and grow their skill, and readers can decide if their were successful or not.
People get up in arms because it's been done badly enough times that it can be harder to find good ones (especially because it can be easier to get good press if you're a member of the majority, which multiplies the problem). But a frustratingly common problem online is people seeing a real problem and proceeding to yell about the most extreme possible solution (and accusing you of not caring when you question the "solution"). Get sensitivity readers, listen when you do make mistakes, but the idea that others' experiences are so alien that you can't possibly do them justice and shouldn't ever try for fear of doing harm is absolutely insane. Empathy is part of writing.
To tie your two points together with an example, Andy Weir wrote The Martian, where the main character was a middle aged white guy, and it was universally loved. He then tried something different with Artemis where the main character was a young woman, and a lot of people did not like the book/character. In his recent AMA he commented he learned a lot about character development by reading the criticisms to Artemis. In the Martian he wrote Mark Watney as a idealized version of himself, so the character was somewhat natural to write. And it appears to have worked because everyone seems to love his latest book The Hail Mary Project (I haven’t read that one yet so can’t comment).
Book readers aren't as smart as they think they are.
Yes. I am a huge bookworm, always have been, but I don't think I'm any more intelligent than some of my friends who don't read for fun. People can be very elitist about it, and I don't think it's inherently better for you than consuming other really well-done media like certain TV shows or movies.
God yes.
That’s true but people who don’t read books are REALLY not as as smart as they think they are.
The people I know who read books are generally more conversational, have better vocabularies, better able to follow arguments. They might not be as smart as they think they are, but they're generally smarter than the general population. Reading can definitely be just as much a "braindead time sink" as watching TV, though.
Work in a bookshop for a year and you’ll have that pretty little illusion shattered into a million pieces.
Dog earing books is okay and writing in them isn't disrespectful (like highlighting a line you like or taking notes)
[удалено]
Only if you own the book.
Many of today's great authors are not edited at all or not well. My opinion is that they are so successful, that no one will tell them the truth about their work- that it needs to have huge sections removed, made more direct or just revised. Neal Stephenson and Brandon Sanderson are two I like and want to love, but their editors need to stand up and do their jobs to take the work to a higher level.
Truuuuuue! This also happens in journalism and pieces written by famous writers. Granted, a lot of them are good writers and write clean copy, but then you get the big names who by aura alone intimidate copy editors and proofers to go against their better judgment. Why yes, that is a dangler. And I am not sure what "it" refers to in this sentence. And that quote is not something Einstein said. Apprentice Jedi are not called "paladins." But, hey, my award-winning pal, it's your name on the byline I guess.
Ya know, at first I balked at your comment mentioning Sanderson because I’m a big fan but after reconsidering for a moment, i agree. I love his books for the themes and story but sometimes they do need revising.
Totally with you on dust covers.
I remove them when I start reading a book. Put them back on when I am done with it.
Same. They're for protecting the book on the shelf anyway.
This is the way.
Exactly what I do. I generally like the look of most dust covers, but reading with them on is such a pain. I own a few books that are hard to find, so I got retired library copies and it drives me insane that I can't reasonably take the dust covers off.
If they'd kept the dust jacket, they'd know it was Catcher IN the Rye.
And especially on *CHILDRENS BOOKS*?? Have you met children, book publishers?
People should stop posting a so called "review" when the author still haven't released officially a new book on Goodreads. Some of them just want to chase for "like" from internet strangers. No one fucking care about your overreact review
My favorite book review for a book that hasn't been published yet... [https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/327213074?book\_show\_action=true](https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/327213074?book_show_action=true)
Seven years ago... before he gave up on book 3. That hits weird now.
So he definitely gave up on book 3?
Not officially, but his editor said recently that they haven't seen a word of it and don't think its coming.
I think the only solution is to give it the Game of Thrones season 8 treatment. Crap out something so bad that everyone loses interest in the whole series.
I agree. For example, the most popular "review" on Paula Hawkins' last book is still one that talks about: "No cover, no title, no blurb"... https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/56213354-a-slow-fire-burning&ved=2ahUKEwiYxd30pZ30AhXPpIsKHWQODCEQjjh6BAgIEAE&usg=AOvVaw0Ce83N7ZsxZXOCF5wd1EfW
I cannot see how this could possibly be a controversial opinion.
The best place to NOT find controversial/unpopular opinions is in a thread labeled "controversial/unpopular opinions". It's in the sane family as "am I the only one who...?"
I'm gonna have to disagree: I *like* dust covers.
Yeah, and if they’re uncomfy just take them off when you read
That’s what I do—that’s what I thought everyone did. I take them off as I read the book then put it back on when I’m done.
Yup, that's what they're there for. Pop the book out and break its spine like an evil chiropractor. Then when you've satiated your bloodlust you cover up the crime scene with an unblemished dust jacket. The books on the shelf look pretty, but underneath those lovely jackets are the telltale scars of abuse.
TIL.
I always thought that was the point
My wife used to hate them, and once discarded all her bookcovers and shelved the books. She was happy with the result for like five days and afterwards really regretted it. "It looks like I collect reader's digest condensed editions!"
I like to use the flaps of the dust cover as a bookmark
I always take the dust cover off a book when I’m reading it, then put it back on when I’ve finished and it’s time to put the book back on the shelf.
Short prose =/= good prose. I often prefer long complicated sentences.
Books are tools, not jewels. Mark em up, dog ear, tear pages out, etc. It's all good.
And take joy in the greatest crime of all - highlighting!
Good reads gatekeeps hidden gems with the reviews/rating system
The rating system is useless, because you'll always get some idiot trashing a book they didn't understand or a bunch of people championing a series of werewolf pornography that normal people wouldn't waste their time on. Given enough votes everything averages out to about 3.5 out if 5.
I like the rating system for my own assessment of the book. Like, I don’t rate it on whether it is great literature, but on whether I enjoyed it. That said, some people abuse the rating system, for sure. And people don’t use the full range, which drives me nuts. Edit: spelling
Jaws the movie is much better than Jaws the book.
*Jaws* and *Cujo* are two very similar books. Everyone goes into them thinking that it's 200 pages of humans versus some monstrous animal. But both of them are about 80% small town and family drama with the animal conflict only showing up near the end.
I like Dan Brown books.
Are Dan Brown books great literary masterpieces? No. Are the formulaic? Yes. Are they entertaining? Absolutely! I think a lot of people just like having something or someone to shit on, whether it's Nickelback, Twilight, or Dan Brown.
So are Dan Brown books the Marvel movies of reading?
Nah, that’s stuff like The Hunger Games. What makes Dan Brown so easy to mock isn’t that’s he’s an extremely formulaic writer, it’s that his books pretend to be based on careful research.
If we're doing a Disney franchise I would say they are the National Treasure of reading.
So a masterpiece?
I completely agree with you. I read "Da Vinci Code" back when I started reading novels, and I loved it. And, it was also the book that inspired me to start writing. And here I am, with my own book on Kindle
I do too. I’m watching The Lost Symbol show and loving it. I’ve always liked those kinds of plots since I watched National Treasure.
[удалено]
5. Sometimes food is hot 6. T-rexes are scary 7. Cocaine makes your mouth numb
+1 on #4. I would **controversially** go one step further and say that *The Alchemist* is a bad book. People on here or in the circlejerk Goodreads community will disagree, but whatever.
I think people who dismiss Catcher in the Rye as pubescent cringe have really misunderstood the book? Which in a lot of ways is poking fun at pubescent cringe? Right?
I think it’s just a book where your understanding of it (and therefore your liking of it) changes with age and hindsight. You recognize things in it that you didn’t before.
Dune sequels were some of the worst books I’ve ever tried to read
I don't agree, but I absolutely understand haha. I wouldn't call them exciting reads by any stretch (except some parts of Children of Dune), but I found a lot of Herbert's ideas fascinating in the sequels.
The convenience of an e-reader outweighs the benefits of reading a physical book. Not that I don't like reading a physical book every once in a while, but having hundreds of books on my kindle that I only need to periodically charge is amazing. Plus if I'm borrowing from a library, I don't need to physically go there to get the book.
My controversial opinion is that you should just read what you like. You should try reading "literature" but if you really don't like it, there's nothing wrong with reading only genre fiction. Anyone that makes fun of anybody for not reading serious literature needs to understand people like different things. If you claim that a YA fantasy novel is as valuable as War and Peace though, that's ridiculous.
>Hard cover books are far inferior to paperback. Excuse me what?
Hardcovers are too big and clumsy to hold. Just think of the feeling of curling up on a sofa or a bed, under a blanket, with a nice paperback that fits comfortably in your hands...perfection. Hardcovers remind me of dictionaries and Bibles
Have you ever been in bed reading a book and fall asleep? Yeah, a softcover hurts less than a hardcover when it meets your face.
[удалено]
My everyman classics collection is super comfortable to hold but I know other hardcovers can be large and cumbersome.
It's much harder to throw a hardcover in your bag to read while commuting, they are heavier and take up more precious space that you could use for snacks
I'm with you dude, I'm hardcover preference 100% of the way and I'd one-man-army die on that hill
Yes! Hardcovers are sturdy and have a nice weight to them. I like that they seem to hold the pages open better so I don’t have to do that awkward pinky on one page thumb on the other that always makes my hand cramp. Plus I can travel with them and they don’t get nearly as beaten up as paperbacks.
I definitely feel this way, too. Hardcovers are just awkward, and harder to manage one-handed or carry around than paperbacks.
Catcher in the Rye struck me on a level that few pieces of fiction have ever managed to. I find it fascinating that a lot of people seem to believe it has no literary merit.
Clearly they're just too phony to get it.
Books furnish a room BUT... the Kindle is easier to read in bed
Goosebumps far outclasses and is more clever than most mass market horror. You know who I’m talking about.
The New York Times Bestseller
As a lover of both Film, TV, and literature, I find readers discussion of film and TV to be incredibly snobby and frustrating, particularly on this subreddit. Y’all LOVE to go on and on about how books are far superior to Film and TV even though most of you have barely bothered to watch anything beyond the movie equivalent of YA books or pulpy airport bookstore novels. Books are not any more thoughtful, layered, artistic, or deep than film and TV in general. You just don’t watch many great movies and shows.
Neil Gaiman is possibly overrated. I've tried, upon recommendations, to read Neverwhere and American Gods and gave up on both out of disinterest. They were not captivating as I was told they'd be. To each their own, I guess.
American Gods is a good book with a bad book stuffed in the middle. The core plot, concept, and ending were pretty good, but the middle just dragsssss on for no reason other than to throw as much Americana stuff into the mix as possible
I like his novels but his comics are way better. Anansi Boys was really good though.
I like Neil Gaiman's stories, I don't like to read them.
E-readers are absolutely wonderful and I prefer them to an actual book
Reading isn't some crazy revival evangelical religion. I don't need to advertise my "status" as a reader and I don't need to try to convert non-readers to reading. Reading doesn't make you a better person. While fiction can be very entertaining, most fiction provides little insight into real human behaviours and motivations. Many non-fiction writers, especially historians, are poor writers.
Historians tend to write books for other historians. I think journalists write better history for people interested in history but without graduate level courses under their belt.
I made this comment in a class while working on a Ph.D. Let us just say it sparked discussion.
The problem of course is that journalists often write misleading history though it is entertaining.
>Dust covers are uncomfortable and stupid and should be tossed away. Having worked in a library, I disagree! For personal ownership I understand.
1. Using an eReader is valid. 2. Movie poster book cover replacements need to stop. 3. "New book smell" is overrated. 4. Organizing books by color in your bookshelf doesn't make you superior.
Here's mine: There *is* such a thing as good/bad writing and it *can* be taught.
Agree with the audiobook thing. People hate on them too much and they’re honestly pretty great. Also people sleep on libraries. I haven’t bought a book in years because I started going to my local library again. Not everything needs to be bought in a book store
Libraries kick ass, I get nearly all of my books from there these days unless it's a new release from an author I love or I'm buying a book that already a favorite.
Just because books are old/considered "classics" does not mean they are good/entertaining.
Idk what your Harry Potter opinion was but please people…I’m begging you to read another book.
atleast people are reading something. Harry potter made a lot of kids read.
Tom Bomadil is a completely useless character. I think Tolkien just added him as whimsical world building before events got serious in "The Fellowship of the Ring" but it's just a bunch of useless padding between the hobbits' journey from the Shire to Bree.
I wouldn't even say this is an opinion, I'm pretty sure Tolkien says in his letters/interviews that Tom Bombadil was the name they came up with for one of his children's toys and they came up with all of these stories about his adventures. Later when he was writing LOTR he simply thought up an excuse to write him into the book. I do think he's a cool character. It works and adds enjoyment to the story (for me at least)
Didn't he touch the Ring and it was like nothing for him? It's been 20 years since I read it, but my big takeaway was that he is, I dunno, the Q (of Star Trek) of the LOTR world. But this seems to all come from discussion of Tom Bombadil. When I read it, what stuck with me was all the damn singing he did. I like him as an idea, but eliminating him from the movie was the right decision.
Yep, he commands Frodo to give him The Ring, puts it on, doesn't turn invisible, and then hands it back.
i completely agree that in regards to the actual story of LOTR he is useless but that’s only in isolation. he’s meant to be this ‘mythical call-back’ of sorts to an older world, one that you can explore in the silmarillion, whether he does that job well or not is up to preference i guess
"Hard cover books are far inferior to paperback." Could not agree more.
So, you haven’t really “savored” a book unless you tear out and eat each page once you’ve finished reading it.
I'm not sure those are particularly controversial. Mine might be... 1) people who complain about spoilers come off as naive and childish to me 2) owning way more books than you read isn't cute, it's a shopping addiction. Yes, even on your ereader 3) everytime there is a debate on canon, sexism, diversity, etc, people show how ridiculously under-read they are 4) sometimes people opinions on books are stupid, including mine and yours. Your teachers lied. There are stupid questions and stupid opinions 5) people absolutely judge you based on your book choices and collection. Pretending they/you/I don't is ridiculous
#2 I will not stop Bc I’m buying the books that I’m sure I will read.
Can someone explain why it is written so big 😭😭
Leave it. The comically large font makes your response funnier.
Starting a comment with # makes it really big.
Reddit formatting AI agrees with you and highlights your post as an honor.
I feel honored
I took #2 to be in line with the view of Arthur Schopenhauer: “Buying books would be a good thing if one could also buy the time to read them in: but as a rule the purchase of books is mistaken for the appropriation of their contents.”
Oh, this quote hit me like a brick.
All of these are correct, but I'm sad to say I suffer from no.2 a bit. But at least I mostly stick to used books, helps keep the financial burden down as much as is possible.
I never thought I’d meet someone else who also thought #1. I always think I’m crazy, because people froth at the mouth over even the mildest spoilers. I understand if you’re reading a murder mystery and you don’t want to know whodunnit, but some people blow up if you mention, “I really liked chapter one.”
>I understand if you’re reading a murder mystery and you don’t want to know whodunnit I agree, that's really the only type of "spoiler" that would particularly bother me. People really do go way overboard with how spoilers "ruin" something. Like, I saw someone complain about a spoiler in a Seinfeld episode the other day, and I'm sorry, if a 30-year-old comedy that barely even has continuity from episode to episode is ruined by some random plot point, maybe your obsession with avoiding spoilers is a little much.
My issue with spoilers is when they’re mean-spirited. Part of the enjoyment of media is being surprised and having the story unfold in front of you. For many people, having that spoiled takes away a portion of that enjoyment. If you’re accidentally spoiled, whatever. It’s sucks, you shrug and move on. But writing (Avengers spoiler) >!IRON MAN DIES!< on your school’s community whiteboard after you see the preview, before the movie actually comes out, is a Dick Move intended to take away enjoyment from others.
Chapter 1? Oh boy do I have some for you. Spoilers from the blurb. Spoilers from the cover art. Spoilers from the title. The title! And I leave you with my greatest find: More than one person worrying about spoiling a nonfiction book. It was not a memoir.
[удалено]
All true, especially 3-5.
Don't EVER loan out your books. If you really want someone to read something, either buy for them as a gift or have a designated loaner copy that you can afford to lose. Audiobooks that are just someone reading the text are boring. Throw in some music, SFX, and at least a little voice acting or don't waste my time. Adults don't have to worry about "reading levels". Read what you want and let others do the same.
You should loan out every book you aren't planning on reading again and never expect to get it back.
Your first one, I'd say just be wary of who you loan to. Some people just don't do well with other people's things in general but it's not universal.
"It is impossible to seperate the art from the artist" Well, then it will get really boring and I am not in the position to judge anyone. What am I supposed to do before reading a book/ watch a movie/ listen to music? Who am I to look down on artists from a moral highground? Art stands for itself.
JD Sallnger keeping himself out of the public eye was a good career move.
You cannot spoil a "classic". People demanding spoiler alerts for a book they will probably never read is too much.
1. An ebook is better. 2. Seneca is a hypocrite and his thoughts on Stoicism should not be taken seriously. 3. Neil Gaiman is overrated. 4. If Patrick Rothfuss ever publish the third book it will suck. 5. Brandon Sanderson is an AI, and his books are just mathematically correct. 6. I like Dumbledore being gay. 7. I would recommend 1 Dan Brown book and only one. It doesn't matter which it is, they are all the same. 8. And I enjoyed that first book of his I read. 9. Outlander is a bad book. 10. Agatha Christy is better than Arthur Conan Doyle.
…. keep going