Issue with this forum

The Sparrow

Callan57 wrote: »

but I don't think I'll call any literature.

silvine wrote: »

Not sure if he belongs in the literature forum though.

I noticed these quotes in the John Grisham thread and it reinforced the problem I have with this forum and why I think it gets less traffic than it should. There is no other forum about general fiction or non fiction etc so if anyone wants to post about those genres they have to do so in Literature. I know technically literature covers a lot but to most people it denotes a certain type of more 'artistic' writing that is also called literary fiction. And that is fine but there should be also a place to discuss thrillers, chick-lit, non-fiction and every other genre of books.

I didn't want to go OT in the Grisham thread so decided to start a new discussion to see if anyone agrees. I would much prefer if this forum was simply called books in the same way that films have the film forum and TV has the television forum and then all types of books can be discussed without anyone saying it is not literature and doesn't belong.

And then if there is a demand perhaps sub fora for thrillers or biographies or literary fiction or whatever. I'd love a really vibrant books forum and this is just not it and I think that the name puts a lot of people off. Does anyone agree?

PS this is not a go at the posters above. The quotes just reinforced my opinion and inspired me to say something.

Eliot Rosewater

Though I can get a bit snobbish myself sometimes, I think that respecting one another's literary tastes should be an important enough rule on here. It works both ways too: readers of "literary fiction" are often dismissed as snobs. It doesn't make the literature forum a comfortable place to post.

(Well, it's fine for me because I'm not afraid of posting, but I know that a lot of people are nervous that their opinions will be dismissed, and his is obviously more pronounced if there's slandering going on.)

As regards the title, this has been discussed before, as far as I know. There really is no better alternative, I think. The problem is that "books" is more broad and would include even history and philosophy books, while "fiction" is too shallow because it would leave out important writings like Orwell's essays or any other kind of non-fiction.

And the sub-forums suggestion wouldn't work, I think, because the literature forum simply does not have enough traffic to go fragmenting it like that.

I know that sounds all negative, but I do see the conundrum; I'm just not sure if there's any satisfactory solution to it that beats the status quo.

The Sparrow

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The problem is that "books" is more broad and would include even history and philosophy books, while "fiction" is too shallow because it would leave out important writings like Orwell's essays or any other kind of non-fiction.

Why would that be a problem? So what if history and phiosophy books are discussed? It would open the forum up to more posters who may be encouraged to post in existing threads on fiction or whatever. And if others don't want to read about history or non fiction then just don't click on those threads. Non-fiction topics do pop up here from time to time and that is welcome but the name of the forum discourages it. I think anything to get more posters in and more discussion on all sorts of books is a good thing and it doesn't matter if they are history, philosophy or Orwell's essays.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

And the sub-forums suggestion wouldn't work, I think, because the literature forum simply does not have enough traffic to go fragmenting it like that.

Yes I agree at the moment. That was more of a suggestion for the future if traffic increased and there were more diverse threads.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I know that sounds all negative, but I do see the conundrum; I'm just not sure if there's any satisfactory solution to it that beats the status quo.

In my opinion it is not a satisfactory solution at the moment so hopefully something will eb doen to improve it.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

It doesn't make the literature forum a comfortable place to post.

That is really the bottom line as far as I'm concerned.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Valmont

This forum is perfectly fine. It's one of the reasons I joined boards all those years ago so that I could ask people what they thought of A Hero of our Time. Personally, I like the mix of topics, both high and "low" brow as I sometimes find something entertaining to read that I might have otherwise overlooked.

Travel is good

This is my favourite forum on boards. I've got loads of good book recommendations here and other great information. I'm happy with the title, as it encompasses all types of literature. I know some discussions can be a bit high-brow but hopefully people aren't afraid to post. I love to hear everyone's opnion.

Eliot Rosewater

Basically what donegalfella said. I think a sticky on the issue of mutual respect for one another's views could be good.

Regarding the title, the only viable one I could come up with was "Literature & Reading", but I don't really like it.

Valmont

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Regarding the title, the only viable one I could come up with was "Literature & Reading", but I don't really like it.

I'm not sure about that one. We might end up with threads like this:

"OMG Who read dat buzzin stry in da Sun today?"

Come to think of it, I don't know who the moderator is on this forum for all the time I visit it. That's a good thing.

sceptre

Valmont wrote: »

Come to think of it, I don't know who the moderator is on this forum for all the time I visit it. That's a good thing.

Herro:p

Hey guys. This should really be in Feedback but I reckon more regular users of the forum itself will see it here so I'll leave it here for, say, a week and then move it to Feedback to get views from people who aren't such regular users but might be if the forum was a bit different to what it is. And the general views are always good anyway.

(interpret what follows as a regular user's view by the way, I like the reading too)

Literature as a name might seem a bit high-brow at times but it encompasses what the forum was originally supposed to be - a place for people to discuss all sorts of books, though mainly fiction. Most of the time a non-fiction book will fit far better into any of the specific forums about the topic of the non-fiction book - history, politics, gardening, make and do, whatever! Which donegalfella's already said and he's on the nose there. We get the odd thread just looking for a general recommendation on non-fiction books and if it doesn't slot more neatly into another forum I tend to just leave it here for the convenience of everyone. The forum name isn't set in stone, it's whatever works best.

As for the "Grisham as on-topic as Tolstoy", well, it is. Plenty of people don't like reading classics and just prefer to read whatever's popular these days. And that's fine, it goes the other way too. We had a thread on Dan Brown which was a little derailed by a few people making the case that it was the Literature forum and that Brown's books don't count or shouldn't be here or whatever. I've no time for that sort of thing (no offence to those that were involved in making that case but not everyone likes Evelyn Waugh) - it's easy to ignore threads you're not interested in. I'll sort out something for the charter on that. Besides, a mix of high-brow and "low-brow" rarely hurt anyone. The charter here's pretty simple as there's very little mod intervention needed apart from moving the odd thread to Creative Writing and a smaller number of oddly-placed thread elsewhere.

It's all about mutual respect and generally here that's given in spades. I'm reading this thread so don't be shy about offering views, they're all welcome.

Denerick

I posted on the Grisham thread and feel it is relevant. I confess to having once complained in a Stephanie Meyer thread... But really, it seemed like we were getting inundated with teenybopper stuff at the time.

I agree that 'literature' is alienating to people who like to read thrillers by writers such as Jeffrey Archer and Grisham (As do I, on occasion) and that 'fiction' would dismiss the literary, non fiction writings of critics and thinkers like Orwell, Huxley, Tolkien etc.

So what is to be done? Though alienating prospective users is obviously not a good thing, I feel the literature forum is a neat enough compromise in that it encompasses most kinds of books.

And lets be perfectly frank here; the reason that the literature forum doesn't get as much traffic as say.. the films forum is because people by and large don't read anymore. Reading has become a minority interest over the last 50 years, and us little nerds will have to live with that.

Though loathe to introduce a literary allusion to this discussion, am I detecting shades of Fahrenheit 451?

Eliot Rosewater

Denerick wrote: »

I posted on the Grisham thread and feel it is relevant. I confess to having once complained in a Stephanie Meyer thread... But really, it seemed like we were getting inundated with teenybopper stuff at the time.

I can see your concern but, in fairness, the presence of a few threads on popular fiction doesn't force threads on literary fiction out. And though I don't generally subscribe to the "it's good that people read anything because they might end up reading Tolstoy" school of thought, I think a busier Lit forum - even if the extra traffic isn't something you'll engage with - would make a better Lit forum.

Denerick wrote: »

Reading has become a minority interest over the last 50 years, and us little nerds will have to live with that.

I'm quite happy being in the minority. It makes me feel superior to everyone else.

(Joke, by the way; for those on Boards that think I'm a condescending psuedo-intellectual. )

Valmont

Denerick wrote: »

Though loathe to introduce a literary allusion to this discussion, am I detecting shades of Fahrenheit 451?

What a coincidence! I finished it on Tuesday and was thinking the same thing. They only banned books after everyone had already stopped reading. It's an especially creepy book considering people do seem to be reading less. I wonder is that true though? Are there any studies outlining the decline of literacy? Or is After Hours evidence enough?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Eliot Rosewater

Well, that's the matter decided. May as well just shut down the forum.

Valmont wrote: »

Are there any studies outlining the decline of literacy? Or is After Hours evidence enough?

You'll get some fiery answers to that when the thread's move to Feedback I'd say. :eek:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

i-digress

I agree with the OP. I read a lot, my favourite books are The Bell Jar and Nineteen Eighty-Four. But I read popular, genre fiction too, and the reason I don't check this forum as often as I should is because I think it's geared more for literary fiction. I think the name should be changed to be honest.

Dades

I'm not convinced anything needs to change other than perhaps a polite reminder in the charter that this is not a forum for the self-appointed literary elite, and all works of fiction (and indeed, non) are open for discussion.

I speak as someone who hasn't read a Dan Brown for many years but has on several occasions jumped to the rescue of a poster on the wrong end of a "this isn't literature" attack.

I thought "Books & Literature" might be a better name but that might be a mouthful.

The Sparrow

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But often times the same subjects are discussed in different forums. For instance a movie on football may be discussed in the soccer forum but it can also be discussed in the films forum. The difference being that in the film forum you are more likely to get discussion on the direction and acting of the film and the script etc. So I don't see why a book can't be discussed in more than one forum if the emphasis in the Books forum that I am proposing is on the writing style and ability of the book to tell an engaging story.

sceptre wrote: »

Herro:p

Hey guys. This should really be in Feedback but I reckon more regular users of the forum itself will see it here so I'll leave it here for, say, a week and then move it to Feedback to get views from people who aren't such regular users but might be if the forum was a bit different to what it is. And the general views are always good anyway.

Thanks, that is a good idea as now that I think of it this thread is really aimed at people who are not regulars on this forum. My central argument is that this forum would be a lot more active if the scope of it was expanded to include all types of books and the best way to do that is to change the name and encourage as many people as possible to post here about whatever type of book they like to read whether it is Tolstoy or Dan Brown.

Denerick wrote: »

And lets be perfectly frank here; the reason that the literature forum doesn't get as much traffic as say.. the films forum is because people by and large don't read anymore. Reading has become a minority interest over the last 50 years, and us little nerds will have to live with that.
?

I don't buy that. I also post on a very popular football forum and there are huge threads concerning books. And that is football fans who traditionally would not be viewed as big readers. Sure there is a general decline in book reading but I would imagine that decline is less so in Ireland and even if it is declining there must still be may more people on boards that read at least semi regularly than the amount of posters who frequent this forum.

And also if it is accepted that there is a general decline in reading surely you have to try and open the forum up to as broad an audience as possible by making it more inclusive to attract more posters?

Dades wrote: »

I'm not convinced anything needs to change other than perhaps a polite reminder in the charter that this is not a forum for the self-appointed literary elite, and all works of fiction (and indeed, non) are open for discussion.

But the very name of the forum goes against that assertion. Whatever about popular fiction being classified as literature, non fiction certainly can't be. So if I want to post something about non-fiction and I see a forum called Literature I will just move on. But if I see a forum called Books then bingo I'm hitting the post new thread button.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

i-digress

I think books and literature works well. That way everyone feels they can post and the forum might get more traffic.

Anyway, judging people on the basis of what they read, whether it be literary or popular fiction, is just plain ridiculous.

Kinski

I think 'Literature' is an appropriate name for the forum; it would be a shame to unnecessarily change it to something more cumbersome.

i-digress wrote: »

Anyway, judging people on the basis of what they read, whether it be literary or popular fiction, is just plain ridiculous.

Indeed, a person's literary tastes shouldn't reflect negatively on them. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein apparently enjoyed reading some seriously pulpy detective fiction, and I'm sure there are plenty of scientists in the world who were inspired by reading 'low-brow' science fiction in their youths. Equally, fans of writers like TS Eliot or Malcolm Lowry shouldn't automatically be labelled pretentious twats.

The Sparrow

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No I think those books could be discussed in a forum called Books. You have hit the nail on the head. Those books don't belong in a forum called Literature but they could belong in a forum called Books. So what if someone wants to discuss the merits of Mechanical Engineering Principles or whatever? If other people want to discuss it then it will make a valuable contribution to the forum. If not then the thread will die and it won't hurt anyone. And if some people want to discuss it but you do not, simply do not click on that thread.

At the moment the name of the forum influences what is posted here as it definitely insinuates that it is not open for non-fiction and for some people that it is not welcoming for popular fiction. My point is that it should be open to everybody and then what is discussed is based on the interest in that subject alone.

And tbh, it is also very easy to pick out techinical manuals that are unlikely to be of most interest to many people too.

donegalfella wrote: »

I don't think anyone seriously has an issue with popular genre-fiction authors such as John Grisham or Terry Pratchett being discussed here, and the charter can easily be amended to reflect that fact (as sceptre has already indicated that he's open to doing).

But for many people they won't even get to the charter if they don't bother coming into the forum if the name puts them off. I'm not saying that the vast majority of the posters here are not welcoming, I'm just looking at ways of making it more inclusive and increasing the amount of posts and posters.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

For sure, and that is not on either imo.

Eliot Rosewater

The Sparrow wrote: »

No I think those books could be discussed in a forum called Books.

Then that would be far too broad I think. A forum has to strike a balance between being too specific (you'll get no posters) and too broad (there's nothing defining the forum).

More importantly, there's nothing that intrinsically links a book on mathematics and, say, The Turn of the Screw except that they both go through roughly the same production process. (And the process itself is, of course, irrelevant,) You could equally argue that there should be a forum that encompasses lemonade and calpol simply because both are liquids that are ingested through one's mouth.

(Okay, that's being half silly, but I think it communicates the idea. )

The Sparrow wrote: »

At the moment the name of the forum influences what is posted here as it definitely insinuates that it is not open for non-fiction and for some people that it is not welcoming for popular fiction.

I would argue that the contrary is the case. There are multiple definitions of literature, and often times people go by the broad one ("books and writings on a particular subject" (as opposed to the usual one "written works, especially those regarded as having artistic merit")) and post threads on historical and other such topics (that subsequently get moved). We've had quite a few threads on The Secret, for example.

Number of parenthesis in the preceding paragraph: six.

:pac:

donegalfella wrote: »

...the charter can easily be amended to reflect that fact (as sceptre has already indicated that he's open to doing).

The Lit forum doesn't actually have a charter, and I don't think it really needs one, to be honest. "Respect one another's tastes" is about the only Lit-specific rule needed, I my opinion.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

The Sparrow

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Then that would be far too broad I think. A forum has to strike a balance between being too specific (you'll get no posters) and too broad (there's nothing defining the forum).

Film and Television are pretty broad forums and they do pretty well.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

More importantly, there's nothing that intrinsically links a book on mathematics and, say, The Turn of the Screw except that they both go through roughly the same production process. (And the process itself is, of course, irrelevant,) You could equally argue that there should be a forum that encompasses lemonade and calpol simply because both are liquids that are ingested through one's mouth.

Ok a couple of things. First off does anyone really think that there are going to be a raft of posts on obscure mathematics textbooks if the name of this forum is changed? Are there really hundreds of mathematicians just waiting for a change in emphasis away from literature so they they can engulf the forum with their textbooks?

Also, to use your analogy in the Film forum, there is nothing that intrinsically links Terminator Salvation, French New Wave director Claude Chabrol, a documentary on Irish Pyjama Girls and Classic WW2 Movies except that they went through or were part of roughly the same production process. Yet there are threads about all of those subjects on the first page of the Film forum thoday.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I would argue that the contrary is the case. There are multiple definitions of literature, and often times people go by the broad one ("books and writings on a particular subject" (as opposed to the usual one "written works, especially those regarded as having artistic merit")) and post threads on historical and other such topics (that subsequently get moved). We've had quite a few threads on The Secret, for example.

Exactly. As you say, the usual definition of literature is those of having artistic merit. My point is simply that such a definition could put fans of non-fiction and much popular fiction off even entering the forum.

Eliot Rosewater

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I was aware of that alright, it's just that my mathematical brain refused to consider anything that didn't say "charter" in the title to be a charter.

/pedantry

The Sparrow wrote: »

Film and Television are pretty broad forums and they do pretty well.

Rather than dragging this out, to the boredom of everyone else, can we just agree to disagree? I think we've both laid out or positions, so we can let sceptre decide given our reasonings.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Damn! I wasn't expecting my off-hand remark to be dissected. And you exposed my accidental use of the singular instead of the plural, too!

The Sparrow

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Rather than dragging this out, to the boredom of everyone else, can we just agree to disagree? I think we've both laid out or positions, so we can let sceptre decide given our reasonings. !

Sure. I was just replying to the points you raised. If posters didn't do that, it would be a pretty boring thread!:)

Paddy Samurai

The Sparrow wrote: »

I noticed these quotes in the John Grisham thread and it reinforced the problem I have with this forum and why I think it gets less traffic than it should. There is no other forum about general fiction or non fiction etc so if anyone wants to post about those genres they have to do so in Literature. I know technically literature covers a lot but to most people it denotes a certain type of more 'artistic' writing that is also called literary fiction. And that is fine but there should be also a place to discuss thrillers, chick-lit, non-fiction and every other genre of books.

I didn't want to go OT in the Grisham thread so decided to start a new discussion to see if anyone agrees. I would much prefer if this forum was simply called books in the same way that films have the film forum and TV has the television forum and then all types of books can be discussed without anyone saying it is not literature and doesn't belong.

And then if there is a demand perhaps sub fora for thrillers or biographies or literary fiction or whatever. I'd love a really vibrant books forum and this is just not it and I think that the name puts a lot of people off. Does anyone agree?

PS this is not a go at the posters above. The quotes just reinforced my opinion and inspired me to say something.

When I first came accross this forum,i did think twice about posting.But after looking up the definition of Literature ,and deciding to take the definition that best suited me ......... away I went.
I read about 90%fiction and little of it would be considered so called classic literature(or boring crap as I refer to most of it) . I don't worry in the slightest about posting in Literature because the books I read and the threads I post in are not posted for the attention of the "Literature elite". They are posted for myself and like minded people , and from the feedback i get there are lots of boardsies with similar tastes.


If your interested in reading and have something to say..............post and be damned to the so called literature snobs.
Lol from the posts i read they seem to be in the minority,or maybe its just the threads i follow?.

indough

uh yeah i dont really get why people are distinguishing between one type of writing and another, its all literature...sure the word is most often used by elitists to describe more artful writing but it also includes everything else

:writings in prose or verse; especially* : writings having excellence of form or expression and expressing ideas of permanent or universal interest

*note that it does not say exclusively

The Mad Hatter

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I wonder if there are any equivalent studies from Europe or elsewhere. Many Americans seem satisfied once they've read the bible and Atlas Shrugged.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Paddy Samurai

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Most of what is referred to as Literature with so called recognised artistic value is boring crap ................for me. But i do respect other people enough to have no problems with their opinions or what they read.If you check my posts you will see I have never made a negative comment about anyones reading habits or book choice.
If they like it ....fair play to them.I did say so called snobs as they were referred to in other posts.The context in which i used it,was to advise that you ignore such people and read and post about what you like.

If you want your reading choices to be respected, then you also have to respect the choices that other people make

Obviously you did'nt get what I was saying in my post.............I don't require anyone to respect my reading choices ,as I read for my own pleasure not for others apreciation.

rebeve

Maybe a sub forum called general fiction might work .

metrovelvet

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It would make sense for it to be in this forum if the discussion were around the book itself.

For example, Darwin's "Origin of Species" might be very interesting to discuss here. Its publication date, how many copies it sold [sold out on its first day of release btw], how it popularised science to the common reader, etc and how it interconnects with contemporaneous literature of the time. The discussion would be more about the book and less about evolution if you get me.

Dades

Regarding technical books, or books of a specific genre, I think there's no point in getting too caught up in which forum they belong. The OP will make the judgement call as to whether the book in question might have a more general audience and post here, or will only be known to (or be of interest to) a sub-forum on Boards. In short, the idea that the forum will be inundated with posts about "books" that are better placed elsewhere is imagined.

Using the On the Origin of Species example, the OP has a choice of several forums to create a thread in. Here would be best to get the opinions of general "book readers" who may have picked it up at some point. It could equally be posted in the Biology, Anthropology or Atheism & Agnosticism forum if more focussed responses were sought.

rebeve wrote: »

Maybe a sub forum called general fiction might work .

You'd need one too for non-fiction then, and with 3 forums would be spreading the current volume of posts a bit thin, imo.

Ectoplasm

I've only just caught this thread, which probably illustrates the point I'm about to make. I'm a book fiend. A fanatic. If you asked my friends and family what my addiction is, they wouldn't have to think for long before saying 'books'.

When I first joined boards (as opposed to lurking as a guest) I was delighted to find a literature forum. I love literature, be it popular or classic, but the majority of my reading (around 70%) is probably popular fiction. I checked this board pretty regularly when I started - daily to begin with. After a while that dwindled and now I probably only check in once a week or so. So what's the reason for an avid reader not really checking a literature forum?

Well, basically, I agree with the OP. The focus does appear to be on more literary fiction. Which is absolutely fine, if that is what the majority of the posters enjoy. Classical literature is great, because usually you will have many people who have read them, but I find more contemporary literature books more difficult. They are, by the very nature of them NOT being popular fiction, much less likely to have attracted as many readers. Just my opinion, but I've found it to be true among people I know who read. It can be hard to get a real discussion started if only two people have read a particular book :pac:

The only problem, and I do think it is one, is that I think the lack of threads on more popular fiction might prevent 'new blood' from joining these discussions. I know when I join a forum, the first thing I do is lurk a bit and get a general idea of what is on and what's not. I also read charters, but this forum doesn't have a really obvious one (I am aware that there is the 'A few simple reminders thread' but it's not blatantly 'here's the charter').

I suppose it is a bit of a difficult scenario. Having arrived on here as a relative newbie, I wouldn't post a thread about the latest thriller I've just lashed through because I assume it's not the done thing. That said, if I don't, how would anyone else arriving after me know that it is ok. Maybe some of the responsibility lies with the current posters in the forum (and I include myself in this despite my pathetic post count) in that if you want more popular fiction threads, start them.

tl;dr
I think it'd be a good idea to have an official charter which explicitly states that popular fiction threads are welcome

i-digress

EMF2010 wrote: »

I think it'd be a good idea to have an official charter which explicitly states that popular fiction threads are welcome

I second this idea, but I also think changing the title to books would help.

spanx

I'm sure it's been suggested (the thread is way too long to read completely) but why isn't the forum just called Books?


Edit: Obviously I could have just read the post above mine

Eliot Rosewater

EMF2010 wrote: »

Maybe some of the responsibility lies with the current posters in the forum (and I include myself in this despite my pathetic post count) in that if you want more popular fiction threads, start them.

I think it does, really. I know it may be intimidating, so the kind of charter clarification you proposed, whereby it would be specifically stated that popular fiction threads are as good as any other threads, would be welcome. This could be tied in with the respecting one another's views position.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Denerick

If anyone wants to start a thread on Archer of Harris I'd love to get involved. Thrillers are good in their own right (I'd see it as the difference between a competant action movie/whodunnit and a 'serious' or 'arthouse' film. Inevitably you're going to spend a bit longer discussing Pan's Labyrinth than you are 'The Bourne Identity' ) Both have their merits though.

The Sparrow

That's ridiculous on a number of levels. First off, how can you compare the buzz around a book that was released less than a month ago (Freedom) and one that was released just under a year ago (The Scarpetta Factor)?

Plus you are comparing a stand alone novel with the 17th book in a series of novels. I don't buy that literary fiction is more interesting to discuss. You have picked one very recent book to back up your assertion but I last year I could have said that popular fiction is more interesting to discuss because loads of people are talking about The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo books. But it would be wrong because any book is interesting to discuss if you are a fan of it.

Perhaps it is time to move this to feedback to see what other members of boards think?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

The Sparrow

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

How about The Girl with the Dragon Tatoo then? I can't think of many books that have recieved as much attention and discussion. over tha past two years and it is definitely popular fiction

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Of course. Your point is perfectly valid in the same way that I may like to discuss football and not cricket. That doesn't make discussing cricket any less valid... it just means I am more of a football fan.

Dades

Isn't the point that some books will prompt a lot more discussion given the complexity of their meaning/plot/conclusion?

Some books you'll just love reading, and some books might be harder work, but it's the latter you find yourself thinking about for days after. Of course it's a generalisation to call them popular and literary fiction respectively, but it's only label to highlight a point here.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.