What are examples of lowbrow literature and is it bad if you read them?
>>7390109
>What are examples of lowbrow literature
Most books.
>is it bad if you read them
Yes.
>What are examples of lowbrow literature
Fiction you can buy at the airport
>and is it bad if you read them?
They can be a handy cultural document but that's about it
>>7390109
melodramatic and totaly unrealistic dialogue
cardboard cut out characters without any subtlety (hallmark is the lack virtually any defects, sexual desires along with many super positive and borderline unrealistic character traits, aka katniss from the hunger games)
plot basically is the novel, the novel is basically a screenplay with babby's first imagery peppered in there (dan brown books)
self-insert characters which are always at the center of attention and never did nuffin wrong (harry potter)
plots in which the whole world is at stake in some form due to the actions of the protagonist. 1984 barely edges along this line before it's revealed nothing was at stake all along and winston was no more than an insect. one of the greatest sucker punches in all of literature imo, especially when you read it as an immature teen and are expecting some sort of great rebellion with winston and julia at the center.
in my opinion it is not bad if you read them. it may be bad if you indulge in them because it means you have not acquired more sophisticated tastes and are still immature. you can learn something from every piece of writing though.
Faulkner said one should read everything they can, whether it be quality or into the trash tier.
reading cannot be bad
trying to imitate what you read in those books can
It's not bad as long as you are aware.
It seems the consensus is that most lowbrow literature are popular works. But since Dicken's work was very popular for this time, considering that he wrote his books in serials so he could cater to her readers, would his books have been considered lowbrow back then?
>>7390243
>would his books have been considered lowbrow back then?
yes.
>>7390251
so who's to say that the lowbrow literature of today won't be heralded as classics in the future?
>>7390258
Dickens was considered lowbrow but was only one talented "lowbrow" author among hundreds publishing.
Now we have millions publishing, sure, there will definitely be some quality in among the shlock, but good luck finding it.
>>7390184
Faulkner didn't have throwaway airport fiction to the extent we do today.
>>7390156
>1984 barely edges along this line before it's revealed nothing was at stake all along and winston was no more than an insect. one of the greatest sucker punches in all of literature imo, especially when you read it as an immature teen and are expecting some sort of great rebellion with winston and julia at the center.
I hated Animal Farm so much I have been avoiding 1984 for years but know I kinda want to read it
Just fucking read what you want to read and stop worrying about what other people think
I enjoy reading genre fiction to take a break from the classics and philosophy I've been going through I dont wander too far out of SciFi though because even though a lot of the writing is a along the ideas are cool and the images you can see in your head are better than CGI fest movies IMO.
There's nothing wrong with it if you enjoy it and it doesn't detract from the more important stuff but everyone on /lit/ will tell you otherwise cuz "muh patrician"
>>7392379
>everyone on /lit/ will tell you otherwise
Drain that o, boy.
>>7390243
I still think Dickens is lowbrow. So fucking heavy-handed on the morality.
>>7390109
>is it bad if you read them
The same principle applies for every book: read books you enjoy.
Don't read highbrow if you don't enjoy it or you'll end up being a snob like the rest of /lit/.
>>7390118
I once saw a copy of Bolano in an airport book shop.
