"The pillars of the earth" by Ken Follett or "The wind's shadow" Zafón are just two examples of the many that I could mention right now to talk about what is currently understood as "Bad literature" o "Junk literature". And I say today because years ago these books were bought as "churros" and for that reason they became best sellers.
But aren't you wondering the essentials of all this? Who decides what is bad or good literature? What scale of parameters is it used to tell if a book is good or not? Are the simple books to read and assimilate for uneducated people and those more ornate and "baroque" for the elite and superior society? Let's not get confused.
El taste for literatureAs with the taste for other arts, be it cinema, music or painting, it depends solely and exclusively on something as subjective and relative as the personal taste of each one. The fashions for reading a certain type of book, fortunately or unfortunately, vary as the fact that one year one color in fashion or another is worn.
But what is really important here? It just matters that it is read, and the more the merrier. It matters little what. The only requirement to choose a book is that you like his reading, be it from a prestigious author or someone who publishes himself, be it a 99-page or 1.111-page book, be it a 7-euro pocket book or a hardcover that costs 22 euros at El Corte Inglés ... What does it matter ?
As he wrote Arturo Perez Reverte in an article in the ABC newspaper in 2010:
«To say that what many people read is not good literature is like saying that a book cannot be good if it causes a lot of desire to read it. A true writer has nothing other than his craftsmanship. And a writer without readers disappears. The only possibility that this craftsman has is to read it. What you have to give the reader is something that really interests him.
Greek tragedies were the entertainment of the masses, weren't they? To me the literary quality, frankly, I don't give a damn; in addition, who judges who has or does not have that "literary quality." I write to tell stories that make people live lives they haven't lived. The literary quality is for me that the reader reads your pages and cannot stop reading your book. The rest are milongas. »
Well, that: Let's stop judging what is good or bad literature or what each one reads. There each one with their literary tastes and with their way of enjoying reading.
Amen! I think your article is magnificent and I'm really going to apply it to myself like a slap on the wrist. And if on top of that, he initiates it with the words of my beloved and admired countryman Arturo Pérez Reverte, it is better not to continue and enjoy that reading and at the time of his writings. Long live books!
Thank you very much for your comment Jaime. It is good to look within oneself and make self-criticism. We have all "devalued" the odd book, it is normal ... Either because we did not like the author, because we did not like the subject of the book, and so on. But for this reason we should not "devalue" the readings of others. Everything is a matter of taste, and in this as in colors, there are countless of them. Thank you again!
A greeting.
A clear and objective article because, of course, qualifying a book as bad literature is also disqualifying its readers. Borges said something like that a literary work became classic after 100 years. Regardless of our tastes, there are books that continue to be sold after half a century, and others that disappear after six months. Although currently there are many influencing factors, but it is a parameter.
I liked your article. Brief, but forceful.
Greetings.
Of course, who will we give the right to define the good and the bad of literature? I don't think anyone ... since reading with real intention is genius - others just don't read.
Without a doubt, that each one reads what they want, it would be missing more. But there is good and bad literature. Just as there is good and bad cinema, good and bad music, etc.
It is that there will always be people who want to implant their philosophy in you. I always say that each person understands ONE book of differences forms
I don't understand the article, is the quality of a book irrelevant? Is it indifferent to read Garcilaso to Proust, Rilke than the Main Kampf or Ambitions and Reflections of Belén Esteban? I suppose it is for the publishing industry, of course for those of us who love literature and do not have it as a mere business, the simplification, the vanalization of the universal equality of all books, produces a certain despair. If we are passionate about literature it is precisely because we care a lot about what we read, because we like to discern, admire and enjoy something that in principle cannot be found outside of good books, whether they are classics or humble works made with effort and passion. If we don't exercise our analytical skills, what good will a good book do us? I modestly believe that Pérz Reverte's article supports a completely different thesis than that of the author of this article. Y