Other people might feel it doesn't, not want another thread, hate the idea of book clubs or whatever shrug But without going as far as Hec or hayden would, I don't find a lot of the discussion in here useful to me.
I can't begin to express how much I agree with this, except possibly from the opposite side of the spectrum. I feel like most of the discussion in this thread concerns books that I've never read, barely heard of, and consequently have no ability to offer an opinion. This thread also makes me feel incredibly uneducated sometimes, and I doubt that I'm alone in this. But I certainly don't wish that everyone
Farenheit 451
their conversations to make me feel better about myself, on the contrary, I wish that I had read more of the books that people are discussing so I could contribute and learn something at the same time. That's why I would embrace a book club thread wholeheartedly, if only as an opportunity to read some of 'dem smarty books y'all are blatherin' on about. And to discuss them in such wonderful company.
I'd like to point out that there is a calm, thoughtful, and--dare I say it?--intellectual discussion on the merits and pitfalls of identification with literature going on right now.
I would probably do that.I've no idea what sort of book, though.
Typically, the response I get when I mention Moby-Dick is identical to one of the responses on this board: "Oh, I tried to read that in high school, but it was soooo boring. What's the point?"
Anti-intellectualism = the denying of the validity or marginalization of intellectual pursuits. Like reading and critical thought.
Finding one book boring isn't anti-intellectualism. Finding ALL books boring is.
Just because I don't like one specific book that's considered by many to be part of the canon doesn't make me anti-intellectualism. Or anti-reading.
In fact, saying that about me is pretty damned funny. Because I read all day long. More than just pharmacy articles.
Because I read all day long. More than just pharmacy articles.
Yes. There are also Bat-comics!
"I didn't like this particular intellectual book, and here's why," is not, and it seems to me that I've been seeing much more of that here than actual anti-intellectualism.
Hil says what I was struggling to find words for.
There is a difference between "I didn't enjoy <famous book here>" and "High-brow books aren't worth the time."
I am a high-brow. I read high-brow books. There are quite a few books in the canon I didn't enjoy. Doesn't make them less great necessarily; doesn't make me less great, either. It's a book. It cannot speak to all people at all times.
Finding one book boring isn't anti-intellectualism. Finding ALL books boring is.
Yeah, but you did specifically argue that life's too short to read books that don't slide readily into your soul. And others said essentially the same thing. Critical reading
presumes
you need to read stuff that requires work, because the more complex and demanding books will be (as Typo put it) outside your weight class. You're not going to stretch unless you push yourself.
What got my dander up is the fact that I never said I thought it was difficulty or that gave up on it. I read the whole thing, which is why I feel qualified to express my opinion in answer to your "What's not to love?"
Steph, I wasn't responding to you in particular, or anyone in particular when I posted my original post. However, sure, you're qualified to respond to the question. What's not to love?
Deb, you can have your visceral love of the book. I'm not negating your internal take on things. To tell you the truth, I'm not sure why you think that my position negates yours.
"I didn't like this particular intellectual book, and here's why," is not, and it seems to me that I've been seeing much more of that here than actual anti-intellectualism.
Maybe so, but the implication of "I hate this particular literary book" combined with the argument that canon is useless or malevalent certainly meets your definition of anti-intellectualism.
