The Benefits of Reading a Book You Don't Like has been making the rounds on the internet. It was insightful considering I've recently finished one of the worst books I've ever read. How a story is told versus what the story is are different things.
The 'Feminist' and The Cowboy could be very compelling prose in other hands. Alisa Valdes' writing style was too casual with a variety of irrelevant non sequiturs. The reason memoirists do that is to feel friendly and familiar but Valdes was trying way too hard. The tactic was painfully obvious and made the writing look cheap.
Another issue is that at no point does Valdes acknowledge that her idea of feminism is radical and extreme. Despite a personal reworking of what feminism means to her, she never makes it clear to uninformed readers there's different levels or other schools of thought. Thanks for perpetuating negative stereotypes Miz Valdes.
There are also a lot of things in her relationship that are clearly unhealthy. I'm still shocked that she can't see past the blatant manipulation of him being contrite about his infidelity but ending their relationship the second he has a reason. It made me appreciate that Christian Grey acknowledged he was screwed up.
This article gives me a reason to go back and reread Catcher in the Rye. It has to be a classic for a reason, right? I'll get to it someday, maybe, ever.
You can dislike something but if you can't articulate why, it doesn't help anyone. Lena Dunham is a very talented woman. Girls is compulsively watchable. I don't watch it because I find the characters to be insufferable narcissistic screw ups. I'm not devoting my limited TV to watching people I wouldn't tolerate in real life.
Experiencing things you don't like helps you appreciate the things you do like and it gives you a better vocabulary to understand why. There is a benefit to consuming media you don't like but not all media is inherently worth consumption.
No comments:
Post a Comment