I have always refused to like something just for being popular, and I'm equally adamant to not dislike (yowsa double negative) for the same reason, and at the end of the article, it seems like that's what it boils down to -- why would students read popular fiction rather than something "challenging, annoying, offensive"?
To which, a) since when does one book or genre automatically negate any or all others anyways? On my bedstand right now, I have L.J. Smith, Kim Harrison, Ian McEwan, and Jane Austen. I love my Stephen King every bit as much as I love my James Joyce. And b) as you've pointed out, it's pleasure reading. No one claims they were particularly well-written (even Stephenie Meyer doesn't claim that). I think they were a good story, and I enjoyed them well enough.. they set out to be fun, and succeeded. But more importantly than that, they captured the imagination of so many people, of all ages and cultural backgrounds.. it's just flat out dismissive and insulting to chalk a phenomenon like that up to "dim reading" habits.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2009-03-12 10:46 pm (UTC)To which, a) since when does one book or genre automatically negate any or all others anyways? On my bedstand right now, I have L.J. Smith, Kim Harrison, Ian McEwan, and Jane Austen. I love my Stephen King every bit as much as I love my James Joyce. And b) as you've pointed out, it's pleasure reading. No one claims they were particularly well-written (even Stephenie Meyer doesn't claim that). I think they were a good story, and I enjoyed them well enough.. they set out to be fun, and succeeded. But more importantly than that, they captured the imagination of so many people, of all ages and cultural backgrounds.. it's just flat out dismissive and insulting to chalk a phenomenon like that up to "dim reading" habits.