What makes a good book, well, good?
Recently, I wondered whether knowing a book is good is better than feeling a book is good. What is better in the grand scheme of "good books"? Is one better than the other? Or are both elements necessary when judging the value of a book?
Which is more important to a book's being "good": intellectually recognizing its merits (but remaining emotionally unaffected by it) or being emotionally moved by it (despite its lacking intellectual, "literary" merit)? Or are both elements necessary to making a book "good"?
What do you think?
Recently, I wondered whether knowing a book is good is better than feeling a book is good. What is better in the grand scheme of "good books"? Is one better than the other? Or are both elements necessary when judging the value of a book?
Which is more important to a book's being "good": intellectually recognizing its merits (but remaining emotionally unaffected by it) or being emotionally moved by it (despite its lacking intellectual, "literary" merit)? Or are both elements necessary to making a book "good"?
What do you think?
4 comments:
For me: both. Definitely.
A book will never be a favourite of mine if I admire it but don't, somehow, love it. On the other hand, a loveable book that is clumsily written won't do it for me either.
For me to consider a book really wonderful it needs both expert writing and that (rather subjective) emotional connection.
Doesn't this apply to all art?
Of course the best books are the ones that are both.
As an English professor (part-time, as Henry Jones Jr. would say), I think (no, I feel) that it's too easy to discount the emotional appeal of a book in public forums. Some people talk about books they admire, while quietly loving the books they love. One of my goals as a blogger is to talk about why I love the books that have emotional appeal for me.
I'm happiest when I'm reading something and loving the read of it.
I know 1984 is a good book with a smart message and all, but I enjoyed Brave New World much more, and it also contained the smart message.
Post a Comment