Books, And The People Who Read Them

Books are good.

As far as I'm concerned, pretty much any book has some kind of merit, even if I happen to personally dislike the contents.

That said, I want to talk about the phenomenon of people being embarrassed about something they read and (gasp!) enjoy.

I do not understand why some people seem embarrassed to read books about, say, brilliantly white magical horse-like creatures, or perhaps vampires stalking a small town in Maine, or a kid who goes to a magical school. Did the book bring you some kind of joy? Did it entertain you? If it did, then why the shame?

Now, I will be the first to admit that some writers are, perhaps, more talented than others. Some are more skilled at plotting, some can craft witty dialogue, while others can describe a scene so well, you really are there (at least in your mind). But just because you enjoy an author who others sneer at is no cause for shame. Honestly, if you, the reader, liked the book, why should you let some third party make you feel bad because you enjoyed it?

I suppose I feel so strongly about this because I refuse to be bullied (especially on an intellectual level). Just because all my professors walked around with things like "Waiting for Godot" hanging out of their pockets, and looked down on my love of Speculative Fiction, doesn't mean I'm going to let them force me to accept their ideas of what is True Literature.

I'm going to tell you a little secret about Michael. I don't really care for most of what passes for Great Literature in academia. Faulkner? Never cared for the guy. The Russians? Heavy, broody, and depressing to a man. Even within SF, there are Great Writers I don't care for, such as Arthur C. Clark. I could go on. On the other hand, there are Great Writers I really admire. Steinbeck, for example, and Dickens, and the guy from Stratford-upon-Avon. Within the SF field, Asimov and Heinlein.

I also get my back up when people look askance at me because I'm a Speculative Fiction writer. There is this implied attitude that I'm not a Serious Writer, whatever that may be. Sure, I could write about self-absorbed, trendy New Yorkers, who work in advertising and whine about their lives while sipping espresso and cheating on their spouses.

But I don't care about that kind of story.

A defining moment for me in the argument about what is Good And Serious Work happen while I attended College. I was taking a poetry class, and the instructor and I couldn't see eye to eye on, well, just about anything. He was a huge proponent of free verse, to the exclusion of everything else. Any structured verse written by a student was unacceptable and held in contempt. I like structured verse. I like building a Spencerian Sonnet. I enjoy crafting a set of well-mated closed couplets. However, my Professor was determined that, while structured verse was historically important, Serious Modern Poets do not (well, should not) write in anything but free verse.

Then I sold some pieces of lyric poetry to a couple of well-respected magazines. His response was that money didn't prove anything. I, of course, disagreed. It proved that I could sell my work the way I wanted to write it.

So the next time someone gives you 'tude because you like fantasy books with white horse-like creatures, point out that the author has sold a lot of those books, so people must enjoy them. Any author who sells that many books is doing something that resonates with the reader. And isn't that what we all want, as both readers and a writers? We want to connect.

Now, the naysayer might counter with the argument of "Well, if they sell that many books, they must be a hack who panders to the lowest common denominator of the masses." My advice if you run into one of these people is to smile politely and find someplace else to be. This person suffers from a form of intellectual snobbery, and you can't argue with them. They are one of the self-proclaimed Guardians Of What Is Culturally Correct (at least to them) and usually cannot be reasoned with. (I should take this opportunity to admit that I get snobby about television and beer, but I try not to deride others for enjoying things like Fox News and Bud Light. Although I guess I just did.) Anyway, all I can say to the Guardians of Culture is, well, here's a story Stephen King tells:

There was this author who wrote genre fiction (detective stories, if memory serves) and churned out book after book in his chosen field. Now, this author got a lot of flack for not being a Serious Writer. So one day he sat down and wrote a story that was considered Serious Work and sold it to a Prestigious Magazine. The critics hailed him as the next Faulkner. The author cashed his check and, with a smirk at the critics, went right back to writing the genre stories he loved so well.

So I guess that's my advice. Read what you want, and read it proudly. Judge for yourself what is good and bad. Not every book needs to be High Art (whatever that is). Sometimes all you need is something enjoyable to you.

And if you're a writer, that advice goes for you too. Write what you enjoy, not what some nameless, faceless, so-called Guardian of True Literature thinks you should.

So, did I make any sense, or am I just wasting bandwidth?

Peace and love
Michael

Books, And The People Who Read Them

Books are good.

As far as I'm concerned, pretty much any book has some kind of merit, even if I happen to personally dislike the contents.

That said, I want to talk about the phenomenon of people being embarrassed about something they read and (gasp!) enjoy.

I do not understand why some people seem embarrassed to read books about, say, brilliantly white magical horse-like creatures, or perhaps vampires stalking a small town in Maine, or a kid who goes to a magical school. Did the book bring you some kind of joy? Did it entertain you? If it did, then why the shame?

Now, I will be the first to admit that some writers are, perhaps, more talented than others. Some are more skilled at plotting, some can craft witty dialogue, while others can describe a scene so well, you really are there (at least in your mind). But just because you enjoy an author who others sneer at is no cause for shame. Honestly, if you, the reader, liked the book, why should you let some third party make you feel bad because you enjoyed it?

I suppose I feel so strongly about this because I refuse to be bullied (especially on an intellectual level). Just because all my professors walked around with things like "Waiting for Godot" hanging out of their pockets, and looked down on my love of Speculative Fiction, doesn't mean I'm going to let them force me to accept their ideas of what is True Literature.

I'm going to tell you a little secret about Michael. I don't really care for most of what passes for Great Literature in academia. Faulkner? Never cared for the guy. The Russians? Heavy, broody, and depressing to a man. Even within SF, there are Great Writers I don't care for, such as Arthur C. Clark. I could go on. On the other hand, there are Great Writers I really admire. Steinbeck, for example, and Dickens, and the guy from Stratford-upon-Avon. Within the SF field, Asimov and Heinlein.

I also get my back up when people look askance at me because I'm a Speculative Fiction writer. There is this implied attitude that I'm not a Serious Writer, whatever that may be. Sure, I could write about self-absorbed, trendy New Yorkers, who work in advertising and whine about their lives while sipping espresso and cheating on their spouses.

But I don't care about that kind of story.

A defining moment for me in the argument about what is Good And Serious Work happen while I attended College. I was taking a poetry class, and the instructor and I couldn't see eye to eye on, well, just about anything. He was a huge proponent of free verse, to the exclusion of everything else. Any structured verse written by a student was unacceptable and held in contempt. I like structured verse. I like building a Spencerian Sonnet. I enjoy crafting a set of well-mated closed couplets. However, my Professor was determined that, while structured verse was historically important, Serious Modern Poets do not (well, should not) write in anything but free verse.

Then I sold some pieces of lyric poetry to a couple of well-respected magazines. His response was that money didn't prove anything. I, of course, disagreed. It proved that I could sell my work the way I wanted to write it.

So the next time someone gives you 'tude because you like fantasy books with white horse-like creatures, point out that the author has sold a lot of those books, so people must enjoy them. Any author who sells that many books is doing something that resonates with the reader. And isn't that what we all want, as both readers and a writers? We want to connect.

Now, the naysayer might counter with the argument of "Well, if they sell that many books, they must be a hack who panders to the lowest common denominator of the masses." My advice if you run into one of these people is to smile politely and find someplace else to be. This person suffers from a form of intellectual snobbery, and you can't argue with them. They are one of the self-proclaimed Guardians Of What Is Culturally Correct (at least to them) and usually cannot be reasoned with. (I should take this opportunity to admit that I get snobby about television and beer, but I try not to deride others for enjoying things like Fox News and Bud Light. Although I guess I just did.) Anyway, all I can say to the Guardians of Culture is, well, here's a story Stephen King tells:

There was this author who wrote genre fiction (detective stories, if memory serves) and churned out book after book in his chosen field. Now, this author got a lot of flack for not being a Serious Writer. So one day he sat down and wrote a story that was considered Serious Work and sold it to a Prestigious Magazine. The critics hailed him as the next Faulkner. The author cashed his check and, with a smirk at the critics, went right back to writing the genre stories he loved so well.

So I guess that's my advice. Read what you want, and read it proudly. Judge for yourself what is good and bad. Not every book needs to be High Art (whatever that is). Sometimes all you need is something enjoyable to you.

And if you're a writer, that advice goes for you too. Write what you enjoy, not what some nameless, faceless, so-called Guardian of True Literature thinks you should.

So, did I make any sense, or am I just wasting bandwidth?

Peace and love
Michael