• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Literature as a Pleasure Read?

Sure I can. I just haven't encountered too much Literature that is also fun for me. Modern literary fiction (which I consider Literature) is a good example. White Noise by Don DeLillo, anything by Salman Rushdie, and anything by Barbara Kingsolver are all extremely enjoyable for me :)
 
How can one NOT read literature for pleasure? If its a chore, its not pleasure, and I'll look for something else. If one book doesn't work for me, there's more where that one came from. I know that I have had mental blocks about certain books and authors, and then been pleasantly suprised when I enjoyed them when I was a tad older. Those 10 years between 16 and 26 really made a difference for me. And the older I get the more I see that being true about other reading ventures.
 
We need the people that don't to speak up. I want to know why. Not to berate. I'm curious. I think the answer to this is also the answer to why some books that should not do well do.
 
ions said:
Can you read Literature for pleasure? Why not?
Click to expand...
I think you need to explain what you mean by literature, as your question seems to be differentiating between that and fiction in general.
 
Kenny Shovel said:
I think you need to explain what you mean by literature, as your question seems to be differentiating between that and fiction in general.
Click to expand...

My assumption was that he intended Literature as something other than genre fiction.
 
mehastings said:
My assumption was that he intended Literature as something other than genre fiction.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I fully understand the boundries between the two. I'd like clarification so I could answer the question.
 
Kenny: genre fiction at its broadest could I suppose be defined as anything which is filed under a specific category (Crime, SF, Horror) in the bookshops, as opposed to plain old 'fiction.' Of course where I live, the Fiction shelves contain plenty of genre stuff too: chick-lit, historical romance, all that.

The fact that bookshops do segregate fiction - or some fiction - by subject matter suggests that most people are influenced by the subject matter in choosing what to read. I don't understand that, but that's a topic for another, existing, thread.
 
If literature means fiction with a few specialist categories like crime missing, then the definition is still so broad as to make the question nonsensical.

“Can you read Fiction for pleasure?” Well, yes I can, and do, that’s probably why I’m browsing an internet book forum!

I'm not sure the OP meant to be this broad. I await clarification...
 
The line between Literature and genre fiction is not that grey as to cause this much confusion. In fact if you read a lot of Literature you see how well defined the differences are. If you're not sure of the differences...I can't finish this nicely other than to say if you don't know the differences how can you comment?

Let me expand on what this thread is about.

I do not wish to mention authors because the thread will then degrade into a fan pissing contest. It is not my intention to slight author nor reader. Recently I posed the question "can you be spoiled by literature?" Can you get so used to the characters with greater depth, the better use of devices such as symbolism and allegory. The better writing that genre fiction becomes less enjoyable? Maybe even intolerable? Some responded that they had felt or do feel this way. I have to admit it's a new discovery for me. WoundedThorns stated that she read genre fiction more for entertainment. I responded as many have here that I read Literature for entertainment as well. That thread is here. She brought up something interesting worth discussing so I created this thread. Not to single her out there have been other posters on here and others I have talked to that have said Literature is too much work. I was curious where this thought comes from. During school when you had to read Literature and you could only read the horror and lawyer books on your time?

Edit: sorry for the slow edits.
 
ions said:
The line between Literature and genre fiction is not that grey as to cause this much confusion. In fact if you read a lot of Literature you see how well defined the differences are.
Click to expand...

Oooookay, you mean the good stuff vs. cotton candy

I think we all like the good stuff, and can't see why we can't read it for pleasure. The pleasure is in being challenged and allowed a glimpse of the world through another's eyes.
 
ions said:
The line between Literature and genre fiction is not that grey as to cause this much confusion. In fact if you read a lot of Literature you see how well defined the differences are. If you're not sure of the differences...I can't finish this nicely other than to say if you don't know the differences how can you comment?
Click to expand...

I was seeking clarification/definition of what you believe constitutes ‘Literature’, as I was interested in exploring some of the imbedded notions that could be argued to exist in the North American/West European understanding of that term: namely that ‘Literature’ tends to have more elaborate language, more serious subject matter, and perhaps even a more ‘post-modern’ take; whatever that means.
I tend to read quite a lot of East European and Japanese writers and have the impression that things can differ in those traditions.
The Czechs, who along with the Russians have one of the most impressive literary legacies of the 20th century, voted ‘The Good Soldier Svejk’ as their greatest work from that period; a book riddled with humour, that seemingly lacks any kind of pretension to greatness, but never-the-less achieves exactly that by just being itself.
The Japanese have a number of writers who create wonderfully engaging stories with the sparsest of language, the lightest of touches. I’m thinking of writers like Akira Yoshimura, Yasunari Kawabata and to a lesser extent perhaps Kenzaburo Oe.
The Russians have writers like Vasily Grossman who can produce wonderfully direct, easy to read, yet incredibly moving and powerful books like ‘Life and Fate’ that IMO make all the clever-clever stuff western writers of the same period came up with look overwritten and pointless.

I’d of liked to have elaborated on that, but as you so delightfully pointed out, I’m not well read enough to comment.

Regards,

K-S
 
Heh. OK, you're that well read yet ....actually nevermind. The concept is simple and I stand by that. Regardless, I have no interest in following this discussion and have more interest in the actual purpose of the thread.
 
obviously you can. I do, and I think it's very important to take pleasure and delight in doing what we do. I mean, everyone (at least here I suppose) feel happy just reading engaging and fashinating stories. The delight will be surely even more agreeable if you feel fashinated by a well written story, not only for its plot but also for the way it's written.
just my opinion :)

Celeste
 
War and Peace, To the Lighthouse, Ulysses, The Scarlet Letter, 1984, Grapes of Wrath--Yes, these were a pleasure to read.

I think the difficulty with literary classics is in metaphor. Light reading usually isn't figurative. It's perfectly suitable for when you're not in the mood to ponder deeper layers of a novel.

The difference can be seen in Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn. The first is an adventure; the second is an allegory on the failure of America's Reconstruction era. Reading Tom Sawyer is a romp. Reading Huck Finn is a deeper experience. There's a place for both.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top