5 ms·

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB963270836801555352 https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB963270836801555352 http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped

• mellosouls 7y ago
  It's unwise to base your assessment of him on a single article. (Edit: I wrongly assumed the two links were to the same article, one archived). It's not unreasonable for a literary critic to view the bestowal of literary awards on commercial writers with distaste. Those writers have more fame and wealth than they will ever need; it's fair enough to query why acclaim, publicity and awards - that would benefit less populist authors far more - has been directed in this way.
  • ikeboy 7y ago
    I had two links, from years apart, in which he denigrated two authors. He's making a different argument than you. He's not saying King shouldn't have gotten the prize because others would have deserved it more, he's saying he shouldn't have gotten it because he's trash.
    • mellosouls 7y ago
      Sorry - I saw the archive prefix, and assumed an alternative for the same article. Yes, in the article I read (the second), his tone is provocative at best, and reflects a personality defect at worst, but I think he is saying the same thing - the award was inappropriately awarded, and he has a point. I don't think your original assessment of him is fair.
      • ikeboy 7y ago
        I'm sure he had other interesting qualities other than being a snob, and I'm not putting down his other contributions, not being familiar with them myself. But I don't think classifying him as a snob based on that sample is unfair. It's the difference between "I don't like this work" and "people who like this work are wrong".
        • DataWorker 7y ago
          Criticize the criticism not the critic.
    • zozbot234 7y ago
      Literary-minded folks often don't understand what might make 'genre' literature compelling, intellectually worthwhile etc., that's why they're sometimes inclined to regard it uniformly as trash. The reverse also happens, of course. I'm not saying that pure snobbishness does not play a role, but there's also a real divide in aesthetic outlook behind these attitudes.
      • ikeboy 7y ago
        Even so, Harry Potter is a broader phenomenon than just that. That should have been clear already in the early 2000s, after the first few movies. There is an interesting question about where the line gets drawn. I'm inclined to exclude works such as 50 Shades of Grey, but that was also tremendously popular (although not nearly the scale of Harry Potter) and I could easily see someone call me a snob for drawing that distinction. On the other hand, if 50 Shades won some kind of award I wouldn't be inveighing against it, so there's that.
      • mellosouls 7y ago
        I'm a literary minded person and completely understand the draw of genre fiction; I'm currently burning my way through Jack Reacher 16-book set. But I think it is a very different thing intellectually to literary works, and it shouldn't be dismissed as snobbish (I'm not referring to you or anyone else here) simply to point that out.