I've never read to find an escape from anything, so I don't ever have much sympathy for any arguments in which this theme features - ie, that reading is good/bad because it offers escapism. (I do, however, read because I enjoy the pleasure of discovery and exploration.)
My problem is that reading is so ingrained in who I am as a person that I find it difficult to develop cohesive arguments in its favour. I find it necessary but that is not likely to convince someone to take up reading themselves.
I've begun reading "The Case For Literature" I'll see if I have something more informed to say when I finish it.
So, we must find some magical way to access 'what readers want' like JK and Dan? Writers must somehow tap into public consciousness and produce books that people want to read. Well gee, if it was that simple all along.....
Anonymous said…
I often read to escape, although there are other reasons. I like to read about heroes, because there are so few of them in reality. I like to read about things that feel inspiring, or that make me think, or that remind me of my heart, or that make me want to be better.
That article really doesn't say much. What does 'bad' actually mean in this context? Harry Potter is hardly edgy, neither is Dan Brown. Is he saying that in order to be successful, a book must have capture the zeitgeist? Isn't that kind of obvious?
Comments
I've begun reading "The Case For Literature" I'll see if I have something more informed to say when I finish it.
That article really doesn't say much. What does 'bad' actually mean in this context? Harry Potter is hardly edgy, neither is Dan Brown. Is he saying that in order to be successful, a book must have capture the zeitgeist? Isn't that kind of obvious?
(wolfish thinker pose)