|
|
Post by chonies on Jul 27, 2014 16:10:38 GMT -4
What bugs me about this is all the snobbery; people saying, "Ugh, how could anybody read this?" And there is a bit of sexism in there as well, like what turns women on is stupid as opposed to what turns men on. I just detest intellectual snobbery, the books were badly written and the third book was boring as all hell but people read them. Maybe instead of bashing stuff, people should ask themselves why these books did so well, what is it about these books that moved people? I mostly agree with you, and I think it's an important question relevant to all sorts of other reading topics. This flared up a few weeks ago when someone wrote derisively about adults who read YA, and is a constant loop with Genre X being an infinitely elastic and moving target. Where I disagree is the idea that bashing them is off-limits. I don't have a general problem bashing them, or with people who do, but like with other critiques, some analysis is insightful, articulate, well-grounded, blar blar blar, but a wholesale dismissal without actual thought is not useful. I know this isn't technically the same as bashing, but to some degree, I think this should go both ways, and readers should think about why they like what they like. I don't have a problem with an adult woman who loooooves Twilight, but I do have a problem with an adult woman who huffs "just because, ok?!" and stomps off. And the same thing with "good" media. |
|
|
|
Post by Hamatron on Jul 27, 2014 16:15:43 GMT -4
I get why people would be into a book like this. I mean, it's all about an insecure young woman who manages to change a handsome millionaire from a controlling abuser to someone who will to commit to a real marriage and kids. Changing a man -- even a controlling and abusive man -- into the dreamboat you always wanted is a powerful fantasy.
If it had been a run of the mill trashy romance novel, I might have high fived its success. Or thought it was harmless fun. But this particular novel is offensive on so many levels that I think it elicits a variety of anger from all sorts of groups be they feminists, folks from battered women's groups, BDSM enthusiasts, Christians, literature snobs, etc. and that means that the range of criticism directed at this novel is very varied and broad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Neurochick on Jul 27, 2014 17:55:23 GMT -4
But why should an adult woman have to justify to me or anybody else what they like? Isn't that their business? It's not my business what someone else might like in a novel; if I don't like it, then it's fine. People are different, and if everybody liked the same thing, life would be boring.
I wonder about all the anger about this book; I seriously don't get it. To me, it's not an abusive relationship; so if you say it is and I say it's not, what does that mean? We have different opinions. Yes, it's a dumb ass fantasy for a woman to think she can change a man to be what she wants him to be; it's fantasy pure and simple, it doesn't happen in real life.
Look, I watch "Black Sails" I love that show. A friend and I were talking about Captain Flint's hotness. We both said, "sure, he's fucking hot, but he's also coo coo bananas; so we agreed, that he's hot and coo coo bananas. It doesn't mean that either of us would want to be with a dude like that, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't think he's hot either.
I think the real elephant in the living room about this book and movie is people criticize it because it was so damn successful. If the book had bombed, if no one had read it, nobody would have given a rat's behind. But it was very successful and when anything is successful, it gets dissected and analyzed. Maybe it has to do with other writers feeling jealous, maybe not. All I know is that Barbara Cartland made millions of dollars basically writing the same shit over and over again, just changing the names and people kind of laughed at the stuff but really didn't take it seriously.
ETA: Another thing I wonder about the book/movie, I wonder if people would have been so upset about it if it had taken place say in the 18th century. Maybe that's why Barbara Cartland's books never really upset many people. This story takes place today and maybe that's what's wrong with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by chonies on Jul 27, 2014 18:04:47 GMT -4
But why should an adult woman have to justify to me or anybody else what they like? Isn't that their business? It's not my business what someone else might like in a novel; if I don't like it, then it's fine. People are different, and if everybody liked the same thing, life would be boring. I didn't say anything about justifying--that's still a case of sliding scales. You can think Captain Flint is hot and coocoo bananas--that's a reason. I can like watching the same episode of Law & Order for the 20th time because it reminds of how I watched it in college and went WTF the first time, and now I have chance to think about it. People can like reading whatever because it makes them feel X. The only thing I'm suggesting is that people think about why they like what they like. Maybe my 30 something friend who loves Twilight likes it because she thinks it's innocently romantic. I don't care if I agree with her or not, if she's going to bang on about how excited she is about the movie opening and going to the adult show, I don't think it's outrageous for me to inquire why she thinks it's interesting. Lots of people like things because their peers do, or because they're expected to. I see it as an extension of not being a snob, and this idea: in practice. How the hell am I supposed to know why someone likes 50 Shades/anything else I don't read or watch if I don't ask them? |
|
|
|
Post by Neurochick on Jul 27, 2014 18:28:12 GMT -4
I said that I thought Flint is hot AND that he's coo coo bananas, he's not hot BECAUSE he's coo coo bananas, he's just fucking hot, period.  But I see your point. I would probably ask someone once why they, at age thirty something like Twilight, and if they didn't give me an answer, I'd just think, "okay, I guess you just like Twilight." |
|
|
|
Post by Ninja Bunny on Jul 27, 2014 19:01:00 GMT -4
Why should I have to justify why I don't like something?
For the record, I think the book is stupid, poorly written, and a horrible representation of the BDSM community (of which I'm not a part of but I know people in it and they're disgusted by this book because it perpetuates wrong stereotypes about those who are involved).
Oh, and Twilight stinks too.
I agree too. Plus, the "you're just bashing it because it's popular" argument comes off as the fallacious "yer jus jellus!" One way or another this book came to my attention, I looked at it, and I chose to comment on it.
I'm not jealous of the success of this book. I'd be deeply embarrassed if I wrote and published something so laughably terrible.
|
|
|
|
Post by FotoStoreSheila on Jul 27, 2014 19:20:18 GMT -4
I'm not jealous of the success of this book. I'd be deeply embarrassed if I wrote and published something so laughably terrible. Hear, hear! BTW-- I read your entire post in the voice of Jebediah Atkinson and thoroughly enjoyed it! |
|
|
|
Post by chonies on Jul 27, 2014 20:00:08 GMT -4
FWIW, I'm differentiating between 'justify' and 'explain' in the sense that with the latter, a person is just expressing a POV, but with the former, it's a full-on debate tournament with a necessary winner. I don't think someone should have to justify why they *don't* like something, but when asked, I don't think it's unreasonable to have a discussable opinion. My mom dislikes Indian food because the spices confuse her palate, but I love Indian food because I love the spice profiles and the heat and that I can order a hearty vegetarian dish. We see each other's point of view, but we still think the other is kind of wrong Anyway, topic? I personally found the books to be a cure for insomnia but I'm strangely intrigued by the movie. To build on what Ninja Bunny said upthread, I wonder how they're going to make a sexless Ken doll seem sexy. I don't think I'll go unless I can find someone fun to see it with so we can analyze it to smithereens. |
|
|
|
Post by Coffeecakes on Jul 28, 2014 1:02:08 GMT -4
Why should I have to justify why I don't like something? For the record, I think the book is stupid, poorly written, and a horrible representation of the BDSM community (of which I'm not a part of but I know people in it and they're disgusted by this book because it perpetuates wrong stereotypes about those who are involved). Oh, and Twilight stinks too. I agree too. Plus, the "you're just bashing it because it's popular" argument comes off as the fallacious "yer jus jellus!" One way or another this book came to my attention, I looked at it, and I chose to comment on it. I'm not jealous of the success of this book. I'd be deeply embarrassed if I wrote and published something so laughably terrible. Exactly. It's a piece of shit and I will express it's a piece of shit and I will continue to side eye any woman that likes such shit. I don't need to explain why and or analyze why people like it. |
|
|
|
Post by Mutagen on Jul 28, 2014 7:40:47 GMT -4
I don't think anyone has to justify what gets them off. If that's 50 Shades, so be it.
However, the book has entered popular consciousness at this point, so on that grounds, I think it's fair to speak up and challenge some of the themes of the book. Personally, I'm kind of resentful of the idea that 50 Shades is what all women secretly REALLY want, or that this is how BDSM works, or that anyone who has a problem with the abusive themes of the book is just a prude. I think you can be understanding of the fact that people's fantasies can be kind of dark and messed up and that's OK, while also being critical when a particular fantasy is seen as THE epitome of kinky fun for women.
|
|
