Can a Book Ever Change a Reader’s Life for the Worse?

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, Bad Girls Deadlift]

I just finished an article in the NY Times:

Can a Book Ever Change a Reader’s Life for the Worse?

Snippets from the article:

...novels can become embodiments of our own worst impulses, can christen or distill or liberate these impulses — and also because reading about these men makes me remember reading “The Collector” when I was young. I moved through it compulsively. I couldn’t turn away from it. I didn’t want to.

...Did this woman try to slit her wrists because of my book? I don’t believe that — or I try to quiet the part of myself that might have believed that for a moment. But maybe she’d hoped my book could persuade her not to try. And then it hadn’t. It had failed to save her from herself — and in that failure, it had become the emblem and instrument of something in her that she was struggling against. She was showing me the toxic aftermath of that disappointment.

What do you think about the article and/or the impression that books can harm you?

Have you read a book that you felt was harmful?

[Becky]

MrsJoseph wrote: "Have you read a book that you felt was harmful?"

Nope. And I think it's bullshit that a book should be blamed for someone's actions or mental state or sense of self. It's a book. It's something that one person (or sometimes two people- whatever) has created and put out into the world. It's not going to touch every person the same way. It's not going to mean the same thing to two different people. But in a way, it's also for everyone. Because it's the same words, the same ideas, the same story no matter who reads it. It's the reader who either identifies with it or not... who interprets it and fits it into their worldview or not. If you see something in it that profoundly affects you, great... but it is still not really FOR you, specifically.

I particularly like this paragraph: "I realize I’d come to believe that novels full of pain would always offer consolation, would always make people feel less alone in whatever pain their own lives already held — because it had always worked like that for me. But I began to see that it could also work another way: There could be a yearning for hope, for an alternative, for something more positive — for consolation as difference, not echo — and the failure to provide that alternative could feel like betrayal, like permission to destroy, like a promise of what might never change."

I could have written that paragraph... had I thought of it that way. LOL It makes such perfect sense. I fall into the first mindset, the one where reading horrible or sad or bleak books is in itself a kind of "hey, other people have shit lives too" commiseration. I know that there are people who need the hope and uplifting quality of books... but to expect the author to have created with a specific set of needs in mind, rather than telling the story that they've created, is a little... ridiculous, I think.

Readers should know themselves and know their preferences, and know that if a book starts to invade their happy space with too much that doesn't work for them... it's not the book's fault. It just wasn't a book they should have read. Take responsibility. It's your responsibility as the sentient half of the book/reader partnership to know when a book isn't right for you.

That person, I think, as a recovering alcoholic, shouldn't have picked up a book called "The Gin Closet" in the first place, but to expect a fiction book to "save" her from her own self-destructive habits is... unrealistic. To then blame the author for writing a story that wasn't to her liking because it didn't cater to her needs is just so ridiculous I can't even comprehend it.

It's art. It's something that someone created because it meant something to them or was the story that they felt they needed to tell. For any reader to then try to fit that octahedron peg into their own little square hole and rely on it to be the missing part that will fix something they need fixed just... boggles my mind.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, Bad Girls Deadlift]

Yeah. I agree.

I've read things that triggered me but I've always thought of that as my reaction to the text.

[Becky]

I've been thinking about this a bit more... and I think that even really horribly depressing books can change one's life for the better... if the reader is willing. That's the key... to be willing to use a book as a mirror and want to do better.

I haven't read The Gin Closet... but taking from context, it seems to me that the book is bleak and hopeless, which let that reader down. It happens. But, if she had been more willing to look at herself and say "I don't want MY life to be like that" - then that's a positive influence on her life. She chose to take it the other way though, and blame the book for her own failings - or at least blame it for reinforcing them.

I'm not saying that books can't, or shouldn't, ever make us depressed or sad or feel any kind of way... but I'm talking about larger scale changes. It's on the reader to interpret the book and take it to heart... if they choose to make it negative, I don't see how that can be the book's fault.

[Becky]

No, Nicki, I think you expressed what I was trying to say better than I did! :D

[Lee]

We hear all the time that 'books can change a reader for the better' so if that's true, it would make sense for the opposite to be true as well. I guess I can see where the article is going, but I completely agree that the reader must hold the ultimate responsibility of what they take away from what they read.

If there is danger in popular fiction, in my opinion it's the way 'romance' is depicted in young adult books. But that's a whole other topic...

[Becky]

Nienna wrote: "If there is danger in popular fiction, in my opinion it's the way 'romance' is depicted in young adult books. But that's a whole other topic... "

No, actually... I think it's valid to discuss that here. It's a piece that I hadn't really thought about, and a scenario that I think could legitimately change someone's life for the worse.

There are so many books out there for teens and young adults that glorify abusive, controlling, obsessive relationships, which are telling young girls who don't have the experience and maturity to know better, that this is "normal" and "ok" and "desirable". And that is dangerous. But it's not just ONE book that is doing it... it's the trend that shows book after book after book depicting unhealthy relationships.

I do wish that there was a better trend of books out there, and that authors would write stories that didn't romanticize abuse (even if it's emotional/mental, not the physical form)... but this is a trickier area. I'd hope that the parents are doing their job... but I do actually think that this is a situation where books could negatively influence someone.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, Bad Girls Deadlift]

These are great points.

Especially about romance towards young girls. But I think it has an effect on boys as well: I know that a lot of boys don't admit to reading "girl" books BUT women and men are sooo different...it's impossible to believe that a guy wouldn't pick up a book like Twilight to see what the fuss is about.

As I've gotten older I now notice these things (problematic relationships/activities) and I try to note them when writing reviews, too.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, Bad Girls Deadlift]

Randolph wrote: "Most self-published e-books can."

Can what?

[Becky]

Nicki wrote: " Our art is a reflection of our society, of our hopes and fears and prejudices. If we as a society are creating artists whose vision includes romanticising fucked up relationships, if we as a society are creating consumers who would rather buy products in which women are controlled than products in which women are celebrated, then there's something sorely amiss with our society."

I agree with this, and I think that it's a kind of self-sustaining trend... One book sells millions of copies... and then everyone with a keyboard and fingers tries to cash in on the success of that, which floods the market with similar stories, and then it's so common and prevalent that it's hard to move away from it. They market them as edgy and dangerous and sexy... and since those are what sell... there are just more and more and more of them produced. And that's one of the top reasons I've stopped reading a vast majority of YA, sadly.

[Adam]

MrsJoseph wrote: "What do you think about the article and/or the impression that books can harm you?

Have you read a book that you felt was harmful? ..."

John C. Wright recently said that every book is someone's favorite book of all time. Even if it doesn't sell well, someone will love it and it will "open his eyes and fill his heart and make him see things in life even [the author] never suspected" and "it will live in his heart like the Book of Gold."

So what if your Book of Gold is something like Mein Kampf?

The Catcher in the Rye helped Hinkley and Chapman see things that J.D. Salinger never suspected.

If books can help, then books can hurt.

[Nan]

Becky wrote: " ...And that's one of the top reasons I've stopped reading a vast majority of YA, sadly."

Me too. So many of the titles are just "product".

[Becky]

Nicki wrote: "I do not believe that society would be improved by laying blame at the artists' feet until they bow to the pressure to create blandly inoffensive work that can't possibly deliver any inconveniently astute insight into the human condition. "

Ugh... I'm offended at the very thought!

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, Bad Girls Deadlift]

What Becks said. Ugh

[Adam]

Nicki wrote: "It's more about where the responsibility lies when they do hurt -- with the author and the book itself, or with the reader..."

In some cases, the author clearly intended to cause harm. Mein Kampf is an obvious example, as is The Anarchist Cookbook.

In a different vein, take Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know about. Author Kevin Trudeau's bogus medical advice landed him in jail for fraud.

Catcher in the Rye is a trickier matter. On the one hand, Salinger didn't write a murder manual. He had no intent to cause harm. On the other hand, his boring novel has inspired several notorious acts of violence. One must wonder: why this book? I never hear tales of assassins apprehended clutching tattered copies of Franny and Zooey.

It's true that those bent upon doing evil will find an excuse. The Aum Supreme Truth group was inspired by Foundation. It's clear that their gas attack on the Tokyo subways had nothing to do with Asimov's beliefs.

Sometimes the author is responsible, sometimes the reader, sometimes both-- and sometimes it's impossible to know. There is power in the written word, and we must respect that it can be used for good or ill.

[Lee]

That reminds me, in the 90's I was reading a lot of Dungeons and Dragons type fantasy, Dragonlance mostly, and with the whole D&D controversy my grandmother thought I was reading evil books. You would've thought I was reading the Bible of Santanical Rites or something. It was a big scare at the time, even though it seems rather silly now. Same thing happened with video games after all the school shootings years later. When someone does something terrible there is always a need for society to blame something. Music is another biggie.

I've heard it said that no two readers read the same book, and I believe this is true. Reading is a personal experience. And what you take from it has a lot to do work what you bring into it.

I've never read Catcher in the Rye, though I probably should. But I think it speaks to the outcast of society. Those who don't feel like they belong, and don't want to.

[Becky]

Nienna wrote: "I've never read Catcher in the Rye, though I probably should. But I think it speaks to the outcast of society. Those who don't feel like they belong, and don't want to. "

Meh. I just thought it was a story about an asshole kid who DGAF about anything or anyone but himself and made me want to slap him every time he said 'and all' which I think was like 300 times or something . If you're not a disaffected youth with a poor vocabulary, I wouldn't bother, Nienna.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*, Bad Girls Deadlift]

I've tried to read it several times. But each time I would fall asleep because I was bored shitless.