(Also, Libba Bray totally responded to one of my tweets today! Made my morning!)

 Reply

Honestly, the whole "big name books bankrolling publishers so smaller books can get published" thing made Twilight's popularity a lot easier to swallow for me.

 Reply

Also, I would offer that sometimes books that are initially deemed "trashy" or "common" end up being those inspiring and beautiful books. Probably not this one in particular, but just because something is considered trashy now doesn't mean it will always be considered trashy. There's plenty of books in the canon that were not critically acclaimed when published, and plenty of books that should be in the canon that are not (yet).

One woman's trash is another woman's treasure...

 Reply

Just looking at the history of reading, it seems pretty short-sighted and arbitrary to put this high culture/low culture label on any kind of reading. In the 1800s, any kind of novel (Austen and Dickens included) was considered low-culture because they wanted girls to be reading history and religious sermons. In the 1950s, Nancy Drew was considered trash fiction, but nowadays parents love it when their little girls read Nancy Drew. I read trashy fiction like Sweet Valley High voraciously in my youth, but it was that that gave me the reading comprehension and love of reading that allowed me to read Thackeray and Joyce, yo. And now we have this ongoing debate about how people are wasting their time reading blogs and stuff online when they should be reading books--fuck that, you'll probably learn more from a blog than from Dickens. The definitions of what's worth reading have always been blurry and our perception has changed over time. (Not that I'm arguing that LA Candy will ever be considered a Great Novel, simply that, at one point, ALL novels were considered "guilty pleasures" and inferior forms of lit.)

Great novels don't have the transformative properties that most people imbue them with. And while they are great to read when somebody is interested in stretching their mind that way, a lack of them in your literary diet isn't going to do all that much damage beyond your inability to understand cultural references.

(And I say this as a former English major and aspiring author, for what it's worth.)

 Reply

@whynotshesaid: @rake_my_day: As I said above, it is possible to read books that are uplifting and fun and exciting and are actually well-written. Those things are not mutually exclusive, and I don't know why we view literature in this way. If you are reading a book because it has received good reviews but you are finding it a chore, then stop! Chances are, it's just not worth it - and probably not actually that good.

 Reply

(BTW, you hang in there. I'm sending crazy fellow as-of-yet-unpublished writer vibez your way.)

 Reply

And like, LC's clothing line and US Magazines!

Like, ZOMG, that is so awesome.

 Reply

Excuse me while I go get another finger. Mmm, chocolate fingers. With sparkles.

Someone please shoot me in the face.

 Reply

...Sad to say, Twilight. Because vampires make it easier to emphasize that this is fiction. Whereas I never would want my child to see reality TV as an ideal to strive towards. Or to think it's okay for people to orchestrate your life around making the most drama for you (and money for them).

 Reply

My boyfriend (a computer programmer) and I have a running joke that all of our children will be jocks and totally non-academic and we'll have no idea how to raise them.

 Reply