Book snobs
I'll admit it, right up front, I'm a book snob. Da Vinci Code -- trash! James Patterson books -- drivel! Though I'm sure I have been guilty of both sins I'm going to rant about, most of the time I have read a book (or at least other works by the same author) before I trash it. Now to my rant ...
According to this story in The Guardian, book snobbery is the new "black". That is:
Books are the new snobbery, ... Social competitiveness about which titles we read has become one of the new mass forces of the era and only middle-aged people are relatively free of it.
Okay, lots of folks have accused me of being "born old", but I really don't think I'm middle-aged, am I? Anyway, according to the story, more than one-in-three consumers in the London-area survey admitted to buying a book "solely to look intelligent." Yes, statements such as, "Bookshelf contents are fast becoming as studied and planned as outfits as a way to impress others," do reflect a certain amount of snobbery, but I don't think it's a bad thing if folks are buying and READING certain books because they are perceived as intelligent. That's how a little thing called learning occurs. No, what bugs me is the rest of the story:
Yet the results indicate that "reading" is a relative term. When asked about specific titles, only one in 25 people turn out to have read the novel chosen as the best in the Booker prize's 25-year history, Salman Rushdie's Midnight's Children - and half these had failed to finish it.
Only one in 100 had read Andrew Levy's Small Island, picked earlier this month as the best of all Orange prize winners. Not a single reader had yet opened this month's Booker winner, John Banville's The Sea.
Other strongly publicised titles endorsed by literary panels fare only slightly better. One in 20 members of the public has read Zadie Smith's White Teeth and only one in 25 Yann Martel's Life of Pi or Paulo Coelho's The Alchemist.
Furthermore:
Some consumers hedge their bets by keeping two titles on the go - one an impressive book to show other people, the other an escapist work to enjoy.
C'mon folks, we're not sheep! If you're reading something just because others are reading it, well that's trendy but at least you're READING. If, though, you simply buy the book to look intelligent, then you're just killing trees and wasting money!
This whole thing reminded me of an experiment the Wall Street Journal , I think, ran back when the John Adams biography was such a runaway hit. The way I remember this, they went to various bookstores in town and put a certificate that could be redeemed for $20 (or maybe it was the full cost of the book) at their offices. They put these certificates toward the end of the book and I assume they were inserted in such a way that they wouldn't accidentally fall out. Anyway, the point of the experiment was to see just how many people were reading this book that everyone was buying. The story I read was written a good long while (6 months? a year?) after the book hit the shelves to much acclaim and they had yet to have a single certificate redeemed!
In a way such behavior really disappoints me. I take books and reading very seriously and it pains me to see books treated as fashion accessories. On the other hand, I'm sure this is not just a modern trend. I'd be willing to wager a few minas (I had to look that one up) that the ancients walked around with unread copies of Antigone rolled up under their arms. I know the behavior of others should not bug me, but it does. One day I'll learn to let such things go.
Of course I do recognize that this book snobbery cuts the other way as well. I'm sure lots of folks would not deign to read The Da Vinci Code just because it was so popular with the masses. Now I'm not a huge fan of pop culture and I do tend to be skeptical of the latest hot book, but at least I read them before coming to such judgments. I was reminded of this while talking to my cousin, Chris, at the family's 4th of July get together. Chris is a PhD candidate in English or Lit or not sure what exactly they call it at Purdue. Somehow Da Vinci came up and I gave him my take on the book [not positive -- too predictable, lots of confusing detail that served no purpose, and an ending that really invalidated the whole life-and-death mission of the book!]. He said he was glad to have an outside perspective because all his friends soundly denounced the book, yet none of them had read it. News flash guys -- that's just as bad as buying "smart books" and not reading them.
Regardless, I like the article's close:
"We seem to have lost sight of the fact that reading a book should be a personal, enjoyable and relaxing experience, not one dictated by social pressure."
I think that sums it up rather well.
Hat Tip to Marginal Revolution.
posted by St. Caffeine @ 11:37 AM
8 Comments:
I actually did read Life of Pi and LOVED it! Great book. I love a book with a good ending and this one certainly lived up to it. My husband did in fact read the John Adams book and I don't think he was all that impressed.
Yes, Ang, I remember that you liked Life of Pi. I read part of it, but I had to stop when they started doing bad things to the animals. I seem to recall that was very near the beginning, so I keep meaning to go back and try again. Just haven't gotten around to it.
So I guess I do own "smart books" that I haven't read, but I really didn't buy it for that reason. No, I found it on the cheap table at Mike's Merchandise or somewhere like that.
Oh, also not surprised that Rog read John Adams. Did he read the big Alexander Hamilton book? I wanted to read that because I've always admired his role in the development of the early American economy, but it's just a little too imposing. What is it, something like 1200 pages? Anyway, just wanted to know what Rog thought if he did read it.
No, winemaker, I'm not criticizing anyone's READING habits. I was criticizing non-reading habits. I too sometimes pick up a hot book that's getting a lot of buzz, but I usually do so because I want to read it not because I want folks to think I read good books.
I agree with you about Tipping Point, but I think that might be because we both had a little knowledge of the subject before hand. I got the same sort of feeling while reading Freakonomics. Still, I think the ideas in Tipping Point and Freakonomics are valid and I think it's a good thing if the general public learns a little bit about that stuff. On the other hand, if the general public simply buys Freakonomics and never cracks it open, well that doesn't accomplish much.
By the way, you are a bad reader, but it's just because of the trash you DO read. I am, of course, kidding.
Oh, winemaker, can't believe I forgot this. The survey's definition of middle-aged was over 50, so I am NOT middle-aged!
The thing about London is that you actually see people reading books all the time on the Tube or the bus. So you do pick up what titles are "hot".
I have succumbed to that a time or two, including Da Vinci code. I actually enjoyed Da Vinci, but it was pretty trashy.
But I usually don't go out and buy books 'cause I see them on the Tube - because I'm cheap. I remember them and pick them up later at second hand book shops or library withdrawals.
And I do usually keep a couple of books on the go at once, and if one of them is trashy - then I don't read it in public. I did read Da Vinci in public (everybody else was doing it), and some drunken Irish fellow accosted me over that in the Tube
"ahrwhgh, what do you think of that book?" he said
"it's pretty good for an airport novel" I say
"yeah, you're right" he says
What kind of trash won't I read in public? - even blogging anonymously, I won't own up!
I couldn't care less what people think about what I'm reading. If there are people buying books not to read to but to look "intelligent" or "cool" or whatever word you wish to call it, how pathetic.
There was a rash of this, I remember, when Eco's Name of the Rose came out. It was a huge best seller yet few people seemed to know much about it. That was when I first realized that some people buy books just to show that they have a certain book. I guess I really shouldn't be too naive, they do it with just about everything else, don't they?
I read the Da Vinci Code recently, after figuring I'll never get over hearing about it til I read the damn thing. I was not impressed, the transitions were poor, his writing wasn't really that great, predictable, and, just, eh.
And just because some Joe Schmoe who writes for Time magazine or whatever "big" media outlet says something is one of the "best books of all time" doesn't make it necessarily so. But it is funny how these lists mark the trends.
People make comments all the time about various sorts of literature. People make fun of F. Scott Fitzgerald and his excessive adverb use. People make fun of Faulkner and his stream of consciousness. People make fun of southern writers because the writing is all so melodramatic. When you come down to it, show me anything that has ever been written and I can find a way to make fun of it. So what? Literature is a matter of taste. I think some things suck that millions of people adore (Da Vinci Code, Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince) and I think some things are brilliant that people think suck (Faulkner, Fitzgerald, etc).
I'll read what I want to read, whenever I want to read. And I'll read it in public if I have cause to.
So ridiculous.
I can't add much to what others have said except I've noticed no one has mentioned anything about content people. Some are high content and others are low. I happen to be a high content person who likes long, sprawling, epic stories and that is how many people chose books. I think that's tends to be a cultural/familial thing.
Yes, Crystal, I also prefer "high content" in general, though I do like a "simple" story if it's well done. I don't bother with a lot of "low content" stuff because I know from past experience with that author (I've read 2 Dan Browns and I'll NEVER read another) or other similar books that I'll not be satisfied with it, but I am annoyed by "high content" folks who simply dismiss "low content" stuff out of hand without even trying it.
Sorry, your comment came in too late for today's continuation of book blogging.
Post a Comment
<< Home