I think "difficult" is the wrong word. I think "challenging" is a better one. In many cases, books (and other forms of expression/art) are acclaimed for being

I think "difficult" is the wrong word. I think "challenging" is a better one. In many cases, books (and other forms of expression/art) are acclaimed for being difficult -- but they're difficult for the sake of being difficult. There's difficulty but no reward. After having read some of these books (or attempted to), I think they're pointless. However, we do need challenging books/art. Challenges are how we grow, develop, improve, etc. Something can be challenging without being difficult/impenetrable. Also, challenges come in various forms: they can be stylistic (difficult prose) as well as moral or intellectual or political. (One common complaint I hear about fiction is: "I don't like the characters." Well, yeah, that's sort of the point: you probably wouldn't like a lot of people if you knew them.) Some concrete examples: Novels: Joyce's Ulysses: I actually really like Ulysses. As a whole, it's a slog. But there are wonderful passages throughout. It's also very funny. Wallace's Infinite Jest: same as above, often even funnier as the humor is more contemporary. Films: Malick's The Tree of Life: a wonderful, slow, all-encompassing film that doesn't rely on the conventional approach to narrative