CrazyCatLady108

CrazyCatLady108 t1_jclrg34 wrote

Reply to comment by JohnTaylorson in "You don’t like it because you don’t get it, you don’t get it because you’re not ___________" by JohnTaylorson

but your criticism that something is poorly written is not an objective fact.

raw chicken is consumed in some cultures, you can get raw chicken sushi in Japan. so yes if the coq au vin was from a fusion restaurant referencing a style of cooking from a culture you are not familiar with, you are not the target demographic and there is nothing wrong with your dish. similarly, if you find a bug in your food it might be because the restaurant is incorporating novel sources of protein.

back to my original comment. you might think the book sucks because you do not have the background knowledge needing to understand what the author is referencing. or the author could legitimately suck. barring some extreme cases, your opinion that something is terrible is not any more correct than another's opinion that something is awesome. that's how opinions work.

0

CrazyCatLady108 t1_jcl6ej6 wrote

Reply to comment by JohnTaylorson in "You don’t like it because you don’t get it, you don’t get it because you’re not ___________" by JohnTaylorson

you are conflating two things. a book being not well written and how much someone enjoyed the book are separate things.

let me use food to demonstrate. say you really like strawberries. your mother makes you a strawberry cake. it is raw in the middle and burnt on the edges, but your mom made it and you love strawberries, so you eat it and you like it. someone comes by and says "that cake has poor grasp of structure and lacks the nuance to be called cake" and you tell them "shut up, i like it. i am the target audience."

back to books. people can have a reason to like something that is, in your opinion, poorly written because it has something else that makes them enjoy it. and your insistence on something being poorly written is not concrete objective criticism. sure, sometimes the steak is raw but some people prefer it that way. (mixing up my food metaphors here)

1

CrazyCatLady108 t1_jcgsthq wrote

Reply to "You don’t like it because you don’t get it, you don’t get it because you’re not ___________" by JohnTaylorson

i think there are two conversations here. 1. is your opinion on the book valid if you do not belong to the target audience? and 2. how much is your like/dislike of the book based on you being the target audience?

  1. is your opinion valid if you are not the target audience? yes and no. you certainly have the right to an opinion. however, that opinion might be uniformed. for example, you think a certain book makes no sense, but it makes no sense to you because you do not get the references. someone form the target audience would get all the 80s trivia references and think it is great, or not but at the very least it would not be nonsense to them.

  2. you don't like the book, is it because you are not the target audience? there is a book i read recently that was very violent. i did not enjoy it, because of the violence and other reasons, but the target audience (some) said the book was very cathartic and while it was unnecessarily violent it scratched a certain itch. would i have enjoyed the book more if i was the target audience? maybe, but it is something i will never find out.

people's opinions on stuff are not gospel. yours should not be discounted because you do not belong to the target audience, but neither should you feel that your opinion is the only valid one.

6

CrazyCatLady108 t1_jcg8e13 wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Finished Song of Achilles, moving on to Circe! by Ssnnooz

No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment once you've made the edit, to have your comment reinstated.

Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this:

&gt;!The Wolf ate Grandma!&lt;

Click to reveal spoiler.

>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<

1

CrazyCatLady108 t1_jadhamk wrote

Reply to Writers replaced by AI? by Tre_akl

Hi! Please make the effort to answer your own questions with enough detail to get a discussion going and to give something to other users to respond to. Let us know if you have edited your post.

1

CrazyCatLady108 t1_jab9wl8 wrote

Reply to What is your guilty pleasure? by Sea_Concentrate_6543

Jack Reacher - i read all of them, and do not intend to follow the ones by his brother, so technically a past guilty pleasure.

Hard Luck Hank series - the protagonist is dumber than a box of rocks but he is indestructible and immortal so things usually work out for him. i do wish the author would tone it down on sex with virtually every woman Hank meets, because even taking the Kama Sutra into consideration those women would not survive. still it is a fun romp with aliens and gangsters and a very proper butler and quite a few laughs.

i am almost done with the series. i will have to find something else to satisfy the 'popcorn' cravings.

8

CrazyCatLady108 t1_ja92ht5 wrote

Reply to comment by iwanttobelikeyou-oh in What do you guys think about a book's setting being a prison? by [deleted]

We do not allow authors to poll readers about their story/trope ideas.

>Surveys and market research are not allowed in /r/books because they usually do not abide by Rule 1. Market research includes, but is not limited to, asking for feedback on your (potential) project/idea or asking how many people would be interested in your potential website/project/book/etc.

1