I did not call anything vapid nor a waste of time, nor would I, personally, make the same claim as the article author that any sort of literature is without val

I did not call anything vapid nor a waste of time, nor would I, personally, make the same claim as the article author that any sort of literature is without value to society. My point is that the author of the article was a criticizing a specific category of book, so any counter-argument against that criticism should also be specifically about that form. Just saying "fiction as a whole is valuable" seems both obviously true and not relevant to the discussion.