Of me and shallowness
I don't want to write this post. I really don't. But DAMN it's been a while since I've ranted.
There are tastes and tastes. There are tastes in books, different tastes in msic, in movies, and of course there's chocolate but that's nt the kind of taste I want to talk about right now. (I just want to eat it).
So, why do I feel defensive when people ask me whih are my favorite books, or films are? Why, -even though I feel no regret in loving my books and films- do I feel ready to cringe as I answer Pride and Prejudice, the BDB or Bridget Jones' diary?
I can already tell you why. It's because most people out there think that surely a being that likes such unsophisticated and ''light'' stuff could never appreciate the more serious stuff and/or have no depth, no aspiration of furthering their knowlesge and expanding their intellect through ''serious'' and ''deep'' books.
GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!
Okay, I'll put it more eloquently. I am 3 classes short of graduating as a librarian. I've read stuff, from Arundhati Roy, Baudelaire and Elytis (Nobel prize winning Greek poet) to Jane Austen, Sherrilyn Kenyon, JR Ward and JK Rowling and found that I most enjoy the latter than the former. Why. Now that is a question. I won't use my usual explanation and say that reading for leisure does not include imersing myself even more in reality. I can point out that boos shouls allow you to escape the confines of your everyday life and expand your imagination to worlds that you haven't known and probably never will. I should say that books and films should take you to journeys of faraway places, unexplored depths and never-before felt emotions. But I won't say that.
Instead I'll tell you what my chic-lit films and my shallow romance novels -if one could include Austen to that- are to me.
The mastery of Austen's words flowing in such a way that even the most insignificant sentences make up for a world of emotions of their own. She escaped the -then- confines of society and was the cause of much controversy among the readers back then. A rich man with a poor woman? How dare they? Oh, yes. Austen was a radical. As for the depth? Well to me one would have to be inexplicably dumb, not to grasp the depth in Austen's writing. Some would say that it's just a love story. Deal with it.
Oh but my dear, fellow book lovers...You would all be first class hypocrites to claim that love is shallow. That a love story has no meaning. It's what every sinle one of you is secretly or openly search so desperately for in life.
I'm making this long but I don't care much. I want to get this out. About the romance novels? Well, I could argue in this that a lot are written by people with little to none talent. I concider myself among them. It's the easiest thing to write, right? Throw in two people, some sex, some adversities, the man ends up a misunderstood saint and the woman can do no wrong by him so they fit.
Yes, those are romance novels. They sell. Cheap paperbacks thrown on a shelf for us poor, naive, dreamy females.
Ever pick up one? No, not one of the thin ones with the hunky guy on the cover. I mean the other ones. The ones with admittedly lame titles, but those who have a slightly less conventional cover. Now THOSE are called romance novels as well, but mostly they're not. They're love stories. Love stories by writers who actually have talent and prove it in every page. You probably won't read it. If you do you'll get sucked right in. But then..oh, I know. You'll just dissmiss them even though you've enjoyed them and tell people they're crap. Because it's not your style. It's not ''deep'' enough to claim a spot on your bookshelf. God forbid anyone learns you read them...they're sex books aren't they? But of course if a ''deep'' book mentiones someone pissing, it's all good. It's a metaphor.
I'm actually impressed by those people's ability to selectively find offence in sex and not give a damn about other more important stuff.
*sighs* I'm getting tired of this. I really am. I think, to wrap this up I only need to sy this. People who think ahuge part of readers around the world is shallow should get their effing heads out of the sand and stop being the pretentioun assholes they are -in addition to sexists since the whole of their arguement is mostly targeted towards us women who mostly read love stories.
I don't think I lack depth and sophistication. However I DO think I lack that chromosome that should have mediated my tastes towards more earthly and serious stuff. I believe I may lack the serious-gene altogether.
I have a perpetual pink cloud hovering above my head, and then librarianship, curation of digital materials, industrial psychology and the Dublin Core occupying half my mind.
If my tastes to you sound shallow, well I AM shallow then. Air-headed, stupid little girl, her head in the clouds. Color them pink and you have a case. Just for you I saved these two quotes for the end. One I was reminded of -how couldI have forgotten it I have no idea by a great book I read recently: Eclipse.
"Some say the world will end in fire. Some say with ice. From what I've tasted of desire, I hold with those who favour fire."
-Robert Frost
It suits me to break the verse there, so :-P.
As for the last thing I want to say? I'll alter Jane's words a bit, but the meaning is very very obvious.
"A person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good [romance] novel must be intolerably stupid."
-Jane Austen
[/rant]
P.S. I'm ot attacking anyone personally with this one. At least not an online person. I just read a post and then went to work and had another ''deep'' convo about this and I had to get it out.
There are tastes and tastes. There are tastes in books, different tastes in msic, in movies, and of course there's chocolate but that's nt the kind of taste I want to talk about right now. (I just want to eat it).
So, why do I feel defensive when people ask me whih are my favorite books, or films are? Why, -even though I feel no regret in loving my books and films- do I feel ready to cringe as I answer Pride and Prejudice, the BDB or Bridget Jones' diary?
I can already tell you why. It's because most people out there think that surely a being that likes such unsophisticated and ''light'' stuff could never appreciate the more serious stuff and/or have no depth, no aspiration of furthering their knowlesge and expanding their intellect through ''serious'' and ''deep'' books.
GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK!
Okay, I'll put it more eloquently. I am 3 classes short of graduating as a librarian. I've read stuff, from Arundhati Roy, Baudelaire and Elytis (Nobel prize winning Greek poet) to Jane Austen, Sherrilyn Kenyon, JR Ward and JK Rowling and found that I most enjoy the latter than the former. Why. Now that is a question. I won't use my usual explanation and say that reading for leisure does not include imersing myself even more in reality. I can point out that boos shouls allow you to escape the confines of your everyday life and expand your imagination to worlds that you haven't known and probably never will. I should say that books and films should take you to journeys of faraway places, unexplored depths and never-before felt emotions. But I won't say that.
Instead I'll tell you what my chic-lit films and my shallow romance novels -if one could include Austen to that- are to me.
The mastery of Austen's words flowing in such a way that even the most insignificant sentences make up for a world of emotions of their own. She escaped the -then- confines of society and was the cause of much controversy among the readers back then. A rich man with a poor woman? How dare they? Oh, yes. Austen was a radical. As for the depth? Well to me one would have to be inexplicably dumb, not to grasp the depth in Austen's writing. Some would say that it's just a love story. Deal with it.
Oh but my dear, fellow book lovers...You would all be first class hypocrites to claim that love is shallow. That a love story has no meaning. It's what every sinle one of you is secretly or openly search so desperately for in life.
I'm making this long but I don't care much. I want to get this out. About the romance novels? Well, I could argue in this that a lot are written by people with little to none talent. I concider myself among them. It's the easiest thing to write, right? Throw in two people, some sex, some adversities, the man ends up a misunderstood saint and the woman can do no wrong by him so they fit.
Yes, those are romance novels. They sell. Cheap paperbacks thrown on a shelf for us poor, naive, dreamy females.
Ever pick up one? No, not one of the thin ones with the hunky guy on the cover. I mean the other ones. The ones with admittedly lame titles, but those who have a slightly less conventional cover. Now THOSE are called romance novels as well, but mostly they're not. They're love stories. Love stories by writers who actually have talent and prove it in every page. You probably won't read it. If you do you'll get sucked right in. But then..oh, I know. You'll just dissmiss them even though you've enjoyed them and tell people they're crap. Because it's not your style. It's not ''deep'' enough to claim a spot on your bookshelf. God forbid anyone learns you read them...they're sex books aren't they? But of course if a ''deep'' book mentiones someone pissing, it's all good. It's a metaphor.
I'm actually impressed by those people's ability to selectively find offence in sex and not give a damn about other more important stuff.
*sighs* I'm getting tired of this. I really am. I think, to wrap this up I only need to sy this. People who think ahuge part of readers around the world is shallow should get their effing heads out of the sand and stop being the pretentioun assholes they are -in addition to sexists since the whole of their arguement is mostly targeted towards us women who mostly read love stories.
I don't think I lack depth and sophistication. However I DO think I lack that chromosome that should have mediated my tastes towards more earthly and serious stuff. I believe I may lack the serious-gene altogether.
I have a perpetual pink cloud hovering above my head, and then librarianship, curation of digital materials, industrial psychology and the Dublin Core occupying half my mind.
If my tastes to you sound shallow, well I AM shallow then. Air-headed, stupid little girl, her head in the clouds. Color them pink and you have a case. Just for you I saved these two quotes for the end. One I was reminded of -how couldI have forgotten it I have no idea by a great book I read recently: Eclipse.
"Some say the world will end in fire. Some say with ice. From what I've tasted of desire, I hold with those who favour fire."
-Robert Frost
It suits me to break the verse there, so :-P.
As for the last thing I want to say? I'll alter Jane's words a bit, but the meaning is very very obvious.
"A person, be it gentleman or lady, who has not pleasure in a good [romance] novel must be intolerably stupid."
-Jane Austen
[/rant]
P.S. I'm ot attacking anyone personally with this one. At least not an online person. I just read a post and then went to work and had another ''deep'' convo about this and I had to get it out.