The Quickening: The triumph of garbage literature · 3:00pm May 12th, 2017
From the title, it's obvious that this has prejudice, so I'll try to be as clear as possible.
A book whose information is false, is full of clichés, has an empty speech and content is a garbage book, therefore this is garbage literature. In other words, a book made not to express but to sell.
I'll start with a sensible question: Why does a YouTube videoblogger need to publish a book? Simple: to reach an "intellectual" audience. That's ridiculous, it's like taking an action figure out of Jesus.
Are you serious?!
What happened is that the bookstores started to have a new section called bestsellers. And what happened? Many authors began to worry more about selling than writing something even decent. They no longer cared to write classics, but bestsellers.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Puzo's masterpiece shares many similarities with garbage literature (he wrote it just for making money). However, at least I can say he put effort into his work, unlike today's "writers".
A book is taken to exploit the image of a product. The fact that these books triumph tells us who are the opinion leaders of today's youth. But let not make us fools, there has always been cheap literature, although the situation is critical nowadays. And the worst thing is that people who do not read are more likely to buy them just because the fashion videoblogger is on the cover or, what is the same, a very good marketing campaign.
The problem then is that the authors become overly complacent, for readers who are victimized by anything that happens to their masterpiece (and you have to remember, the books are not the only ones affected).
In the world there will always be someone offended: if you mention the Holocaust you stain the history of Germany, but if you don't mention it you are a stranger to the Jewish tragedy. And if you mention the Holocaust but not the slavery, you are a racist and a long etcetera. So the author has no choice but to pass the reward directly, which makes the characters less developed and interesting than they might have been. And this is reflected in the juvenile literature: usually they take the plots of Aldous Huxley and George Orwell, simplify them, they put a love triangle forced to them and they already have their success.
Korra has more political depth than the Hunger Games. You made me defend The Legend of Korra, damn it!
It's a blatant mistake that in your story the world is going to hell and your characters are so dull and stupid as to worry more about being a couple of their love interest in turn than trying to do something for the world.
But there are also those on the other side, those who think they are smarter and profit from proselytizing just by reading. If you have read something that you are passionate about, share it, do not walk around saying "I have read this and you don't". So remember, be careful for what you read
Interesting. But I always went by the belief that what people say they want and what they really want are two different things. If people want depth tabloids wouldn't be so popular.