|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:12 am
 |
|
|
 |
I'll add another comment.
Now, when you read the books, you say, "These are pretty good!" but once you're done and start reading other books again, you say, "WHAT THE ********?! THIS BOOK IS SO MUCH BETTER!" and then you start to see the major flaws and just that it's not really well written.
The author didn't work hard on it. Now if the story had been written by someone else with a better way of writing it, it would be great! But she really didn't put enough effort into it. And was with the ending to the 4th book?! NO FIGHT! WHAT THE HELL?! I WANT TO SEE AT LEAST A PUNCH THROWN!
And what really pisses me off, though this has nothing with the books, it just really pisses me off that this would happen. Fangirls who beat people up for their poor fictional boyfriend. Seriously, if you are one of them and are reading this now, you need to get a life! Go out and find a real boyfriend!
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:15 am
|
|
|
|
dark and demented Oooohkay because I feel the need to contribute an opinion on this topic here it goes.
As has been said before one can only judge a book once they have read it. Therefore I would not advice anyone to forgo reading the novel because any dislike they express for it comes from secondhand sources and is invalid.
I don't like "young adult" *cough cough* novels in general. I'm not a fan of vampires. I don't like books where romance is the central plot and theme. Pray tell me why my opinion that I should not read this book because I would likely not enjoy it is 'invalid'.
I agree that I may not say that I dislike her writing style without having read it. But if someone gives me a plot summary, I can form an opinion on whether I like that kind of plot or not. And, depending on how detailed that plot summary was, I can decide whether it's actually a well constructed plot or not (at least according to certain Aristotelian conventions). How would my opinion on the construction of the plot then be invalid?
I agree that I cannot say I do not like the literature contained within the covers without having read it, I cannot comment on her style without reading it, but I can say that I do not like the amount of idiocy it tends to generate in young girls - ss it invalid of me to say I don't like the book for that reason?
I guess my point is: not every single opinion formed about this book requires the book to have been read to be valid. Some do, of course, when you're commenting on the quality of literature itself. But the idea that no opinion about it is valid.
Can you imagine if someone followed you round a bookstore, and, after each book you looked at and then put back on the shelf, said "why did you put it back?" and when you tell them you don't think you'll like it, they respond with: "That's not a valid opinion, because you haven't read it!" <_< We'd all waste a lot of time reading books we don't like just to "validate" our opinions.
Humm. Sorry, I'm not trying to rant at you, so please don't interpret it that way, and I agree with you to some extent, I guess I'd just like people to be aware that not every opinion on a book requires validation through reading. Also, I find it quite an interesting topic that I've seen come up a lot recently (in relation to other things, especially films as well) If I think I'm not going to like something, do I really need to waste my money finding out for certain, therefore providing money and support for people spouting ideas I actively disagree with? *flees* |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
