SciFi and Fantasy Book Club discussion
Members' Chat
>
Do you post unpopular opinions on book discussion threads?
re: Opinions vs. Facts, what I hate is when people refuse to believe in the existence of facts. Like, "This book has 523 pages in the paperback edition" and they respond "Well, that's just your opinion." Gag.
Nicki wrote: "Also, while I'm hardly a fan of Jar-Jar, I find him no more annoying than Chewbacca. Possibly less..."
Nicki wrote: "Oh, that face! Haha!Yeah, that was the one for which I am expecting tar and feathers, or torches and pitchforks. ;)"
As soon as you said that about Chewy I got this "AARRNNRR" noise in my head. That would be a Chewbaca noise but I need a visual representation of my trauma. ;)
Noooo, the trauma was the voice itself. It's so irritating.
Mute works for me ;) I'm actually not a Star Wars fan. I don't think I ever saw episode 3.
Well, I have to thank George Lucas for one of the very best cinematic moments I have ever had. I actually managed to get in to the premiere of 'The Empire Strikes Back' in Manchester (UK), and had no idea what was coming -- no internet spoilers in those days -- and by the time I joined the queue it was already around the side of the theatre.
This is the only time I have ever been in an cinema audience where the villain's first appearance was greeted by hisses and boos!
The whole experience was wonderful, and the final revelation just capped it! We all wandered out after the end credits still five feet above the pavement.
So, what ever the depredations committed afterwards, George gets a great big thank you, from me, for that!
I like 1, 2 and 3, for various reasons, but 4, 5 and 6, and especially 5, remain my favourites.
I liked JJ Abrams way back when he did Alias. The first season of Alias was one of my favorite shows, but I haven't liked his Star Trek or Star Wars reboots. The characters and acting are good, but the plots are too derivative and lame.
I'm very late to this thread but after reading the great posts here I find myself having to join in. (I didn't like Star Wars btw. Tried to see it four times and always fall asleep... *revoking my nerd card*)But what I find missing in most threads/reviews/discussions about books is that people can't seem to separate an analysis about a book from someone's reading experience.
Like Fifty Shades of Grey. There was a lot of explaining things wrong in that book. But that doesn't mean that it can't be a very enjoyable read for someone. Because someone just enjoyed reading it, even with all of the flaws in it.
And to say that someone's reading experience is wrong. Seems like the hight of stupidity to me. Because that have absolute nothing to do with facts about/in a book but more with emotions reading it. You can't bash that...
Steve wrote: "re: Opinions vs. Facts, what I hate is when people refuse to believe in the existence of facts. Like, "This book has 523 pages in the paperback edition" and they respond "Well, that's just your opi..."Totally. And it's not just books or media. It's, like, everything in life now. People don't want to ever admit they might be wrong, so they act like everything is just a matter of opinion.
No, man. Sometimes there are facts. I mean, yes, there are interpretations of facts which are opinion oriented - but there are also facts themselves.
Bruce wrote: "I liked JJ Abrams way back when he did Alias. The first season of Alias was one of my favorite shows, but I haven't liked his Star Trek or Star Wars reboots. The characters and acting are good, but..."I loved both of the reboots. Both were way more fun, imo, than the originals! :D
Mary wrote: "It's not just a matter of thinking and issues. It's a matter of liking. I remember a time when I said I disliked a book because of certain things, and someone said that he didn't get it because it was supposed to be that way.Which makes no sense. I don't like spinach, I won't like a spinach based dish, and it makes no difference whether it's one of the standard ingredients. "
Not to dredge up that specter again - but this is sort of how I felt about The Magicians.
Like, I get Nicki's analysis and I'm not even gonna disagree with it. I get that the nihilism and whatever was part of the story.
I still detested reading it, and got no joy or great intellectual thought from reading it. It was just a dire experience, and the fact that it's meant to be dire doesn't change the fact that I have no interest in repeating said experience.
Ada wrote: "Like Fifty Shades of Grey. There was a lot of explaining things wrong in that book. But that doesn't mean that it can't be a very enjoyable read for someone. Because someone just enjoyed reading it, even with all of the flaws in it. "I get people liking bad books. Hell, I have enjoyed the hell out of some craptastic and trashy books in my time. (Shakespeare Undead in which Shakespeare is a zombie hunter and his Dark Lady is a fellow hunter? Yeah, I read that. And I *loved* its tawdry glory!)
But where I tend to get twitchy is when people think that liking something means it's a "good" book, in the well written or literary sense. I mean, just admit that it's trash, right, and you can like it as much as you want.
But try and pretend that it's actually really well written or not problematic and shit, and that's when I die a little inside...
colleen the fabulous fabulaphile wrote: "But where I tend to get twitchy is when people think that liking something means it's a "good" book, in the well written or literary sense. I mean, just admit that it's trash, right, and you can like it as much as you want."I'm not sure people are being taught to assess books, or anything else, in that way. It seems that everything just gets a gold star for trying. But I'm probably just a cranky old critic.
colleen the fabulous fabulaphile wrote: "I get people liking bad books. Hell, I have enjoyed the hell out of some craptastic and trashy books in my time. (Shakespeare Undead in which Shakespeare is a zombie hunter and his Dark Lady is a fellow hunter? Yeah, I read that. And I *loved* its tawdry glory!)"Heartily agree. If you are going to do something rubbish, do it with style! And the rubbish comes in two flavours. There are some things that are so deliciously bad, unintentionally so, that they verge on genius. Then there are the ones that know they are bad, but carry it off anyway. For the former there is English as She Is Spoke by Pedro Carolino. Poor old Pedro wanted to write an English to Portuguese phrase book, but only had English to French and French to Portuguese. The result was utter incoherence. In the words of Mark Twain:
Many persons have believed that this book's miraculous stupidities were studied and disingenuous; but no one can read the volume carefully through and keep that opinion. It was written in serious good faith and deep earnestness, by an honest and upright idiot who believed he knew something of the English language, and could impart his knowledge to others. The amplest proof of this crops out somewhere or other upon each and every page. There are sentences in the book which could have been manufactured by a man in his right mind, and with an intelligent and deliberate purposes to seem innocently ignorant; but there are other sentences, and paragraphs, which no mere pretended ignorance could ever achieve --nor yet even the most genuine and comprehensive ignorance, when unbacked by inspiration.
Some examples:
"Walls have ears" becomes "The walls have hearsay"
"I feel sick" becomes "I have mind to vomit"
"The rolling stone gathers no moss" becomes "The stone as roll not heap up not foam"
The 'Idiotisms and Proverbs' section is a treat.
I am trying to think of an example of the latter, of badness done with style, but can only think of a film, the 1980's remake of 'Flash Gordon'.
colleen the fabulous fabulaphile wrote: "Not to dredge up that specter again - but this is sort of how I felt about The Magicians."Well, besides the "spinach" reaction, there was also the problem that the story stopped dead in its tracks when they graduated. No plot movement forward at all.
colleen the fabulous fabulaphile wrote: "But where I tend to get twitchy is when people think that liking something means it's a "good" book, in the well written or literary sense. I mean, just admit that it's trash, right, and you can like it as much as you want."True that.
Simon wrote: "Then there are the ones that know they are bad, but carry it off anyway. For the former there is English as She Is Spoke by Pedro Carolino. "This is incidental to this thread, but I literally just heard (for the first time in my life) a reference to Carolino in the Netflix series "Cuckoo" which is an absurdist Britcom. Like, not even ten minutes ago. And here is the second.
Why does this sort of synchronicity happen? It's so weird.
Trike wrote: Why does this sort of synchronicity happen? It's so weird.
My woo-woo detector has just bleeped. Please don't go there. Coincidences are not weird, they are just coincidences. (And I think you know this perfectly well, Trike. You are being provocative.)
My woo-woo detector has just bleeped. Please don't go there. Coincidences are not weird, they are just coincidences. (And I think you know this perfectly well, Trike. You are being provocative.)
Umm, ok then. I experience that kind of synchronicity/coincidence all the time, Trike. You're not alone there.
colleen the fabulous fabulaphile wrote: "Totally. And it's not just books or media. It's, like, everything in life now. People don't want to ever admit they might be wrong, so they act like everything is just a matter of opinion...."I have not run across this sub-type. It seems like the people I've run across that don't want to be wrong usually state their opinion as fact and others as opinion. Like my uncle, who claimed that the encyclopedia was wrong when it conflicted with him.
I was doing a review of The Swiss Family Robinson today and trying very hard to avoid passing judgment on the quality. It made me laugh because this thread has that uppermost in my mind. I couldn't do it. I finally threw up my hands and just stated that it was crap even though I know that's just an opinion :)
Sarah Anne wrote: "I was doing a review of The Swiss Family Robinson today and trying very hard to avoid passing judgment on the quality. It made me laugh because this thread has that uppermost in my mind. I couldn't do it. I finally threw up my hands and just stated that it was crap even though I know that's just an opinion :)"But ... but ... surely it is crap?
Most people who hate being wrong don't seem to understand that being wrong is, in fact, not a bad thing at all. It's called the learning process. I love being wrong, and then realising it afterwards. The scales suddenly fall, and a whole new world is revealed. Depends how it happens, mind. Having a whole lot of people pointing at me and laughing doesn't help.
And you should not be surprised by Pedro Carolino. He is omnipresent.
Nicki wrote "When you get things wrong in real life, people are less likely to respond by telling you to die in a fire, if only for fear that you'll smack them in the gob. "Lol! For some reason that really made me laugh:)
I love talking about books period, and many times on the internet my gushings have been taking personally by someone or another, and I will receive a diatribe that leaves me looking at my post thinking WTH did they get that? I have left groups that I thought had too much drama before...
Phrynne wrote: "Nicki wrote "When you get things wrong in real life, people are less likely to respond by telling you to die in a fire "and I was thinking I need to try that in real life, just to see what would happen.
colleen the fabulous fabulaphile wrote: "Valerie wrote: "Sometimes, it is more subtle. If you love a book and feel there is a lot of complexity to a story, and then someone pops up with "the plot was very childish and immature," that can ..."I HATE when someone refutes my opinion with the "you just don't get it defense."
No, I got it perfectly well, and just thought it was crap, thanks. But, I'm glad that you enjoyed it.
Lol, Valerie! That's perfectly expressed :)
3 pages late to the party. :DMy wife holds Jar-Jar in high regard, and when I make fun of his character she tells me to shut it. She doesn't care that she's going against the grain.
I'm okay with having an opposing view from others. I fully expect that no one is the same and others may not feel the same about things as I do, even if I'm in the minority. I don't like Game of Thrones anything. I'm sure some would say I haven't given it a fair chance and I'd smile and nod and let them think that. It won't change my mind.
That being said, I'm not likely to join in a conversation willingly where a topic I'm in the minority of liking/disliking is being discussed. I'll just focus my attention elsewhere on either a more balanced discussion, or I'll find like-minded folks to talk with about something else.
"Do you post unpopular opinions on book discussion threads?" I post my opinions. Whether they are popular or not doesn't really matter to me, ultimately, and I try my best to keep a cool head if I get slammed.
Thomas wrote: "3 pages late to the party. :DMy wife holds Jar-Jar in high regard, and when I make fun of his character she tells me to shut it. She doesn't care that she's going against the grain...."
And so much catching up to do ;)
Opposing comments are not the problem, or shouldn't be, in a forum like this. The problem is hateful or personal comments. That's what I have a problem with.
Should be of interest to note that next month's sci fi book in this group is one of those people either love or hate. I wouldn't think an unpopular opinion should be quieted as long as that opinion is backed up. If you're going into a discussion with "I hated this book because 1...2...3" then you shouldn't be silenced, because there is probably someone else who agrees with you.I haven't gotten into discussions about polarizing books, but I have a reviewed a few that divide opinions. I think if you're recommending or not recommending a book, it's important to recognize that not everyone has the same opinion. If you put forward a recommendation and someone reads the book and feels the opposite, they might not trust your recommendation in the future.
When I finish reading a book I write my opinions about it. Originally I started doing it several years ago because I've got Swiss cheese brain. I can't remember what I've read, or what I thought about it, but consciously writing about what I've read helps. So sometimes I reread a book I liked and I either love it or hate on reread. (I've been known to reread a book, without knowing I was, and I thought it was derivative, because I'd forgotten I'd read it already.) It's one of the things I don't care for about Goodreads, I can't have two (or more) differing opinions on the same book. For me, giving a book 5 stars or three or one is without context: I try to write about what either worked or didn't work for me and why.
Julia, I agree with you on all counts.Except the technical - did you know that you can rate & write different reviews for the same book, so long as you choose different editions?
Cheryl, I did know that, but by now I've gotten used to having the two or more reviews together. Besides, I'm one of these people who wants to try to have same cover on my review as the book I read has. Since I'm rereading likely my own copy, it's the same cover, usually. Unless I can't find my copy.
Yep, generally only when I get sucked into a book because everyone is telling me how great it is and the premise sounds great, then it turns out bad/mediocre that I get frustrated and I post about it a lot. Vicious/Name of the Wind/Quantum Thief were the big examples, then for Ancillary Justice I held the most disliked opinion of all that the book was mearly okay(Instead of amazing or the worst thing ever).
I found this* today and found it very fitting:http://themetapicture.com/pic/images/...
*I found this on a sharing site but couldn't find the original one the artists website.
Sarah Anne wrote: "That is pretty funny :)"No it's not. And you don't think so, either.
Is there something I'm missing? It seems like it's the exact situation that led to the start of this thread.
Sarah Anne wrote: "Is there something I'm missing? It seems like it's the exact situation that led to the start of this thread."/joking
You ass. I thought I had done something truly awful!
Oh, you guys, I have tears in my eyes from laughing. Thanks!
This actually illustrates a good point. A sense of humour can land you in trouble, especially if you are being flip or facetious. Your throwaway comment can be taken the wrong way and suddenly you are posting something construed as unpopular.
That's been the case since writing was invented. Readers are always going to interpret things based on their own experiences, mindset, point of view, etc. I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing. I think it just means that if people are truly interested in the discussion, they will question and clarify meaning. If they are only interested in being "right", or are unable to understand someone else's perspective, then they'll interpret a comment as whatever they think it means and consider the conversation over. Or get condescending.
Either one is fine for me. I'm interested in talking to the former (though if they respond in kind, even better) but the latter, not so much.
Simon wrote: "This actually illustrates a good point. A sense of humour can land you in trouble, especially if you are being flip or facetious. Your throwaway comment can be taken the wrong way and suddenly you ..."Yeah, that's happened to me a couple of times before. 'Trouble is, it's often easy to forget that sarcastic tone doesn't always carry through with typed text.
SciFi and Fantasy Book Club
Books mentioned in this topic
The Swiss Family Robinson (other topics)The Swiss Family Robinson (other topics)
English as She Is Spoke (other topics)
Fifty Shades of Grey (other topics)
Matilda (other topics)
More...
It's not just a matter of thinking and issues. It's a matter of liking. I remember a time when I said I disliked a book because of certain things, and someone said that he didn't get it because it was supposed to be that way.
Which makes no sense. I don't like spinach, I won't like a spinach based dish, and it makes no difference whether it's one of the standard ingredients.