I've been thinking about this.
I agree that most people just like to throw around their opinions.
I stopped writing customer reviews a long time ago, and I wish all sites would drop those. The last thing I want is the opinion of some high school kid on Wuthering Heights. I don't care for the opinion of anybody who hasn't impressed me with what seems like more than average insight.
As for the content of a book, I am a partisan of Oscar Wilde. "There is no such thing as a moral or immoral book. Books are well written or badly written." One should seldom read books without an established reputation.
I try not to use much profanity myself, but I see no reason a good book couldn't contain quite a lot. Several good books do. The narrator could be a very coarse, vulgar fellow. He might still have something interesting and entertaining to narrate. One problem I do see is that profanity tends to become increasingly meaningless in everyday usage, but then, a novel would not be everyday usage, and an author could use the terms with more precision.
I don't mean to say that nobody should ever be disturbed by or find unpalatable the things they read in books. I think the most disturbing thing I ever read was the rape of stupid Ludmilla in Kosinsky's Painted Bird. And I have no problem with people choosing not to read certain books because they heard something about them. I have more or less chosen to avoid the Marquis de Sade. I have the impression they are filled with cruel torture, and I'm well enough aware of the presence of that in the world. That's not the only reason I've avoided de Sade. Most of his books are quite long, and I haven't heard that much good of them. The same thing goes for Robert Bolano, excepting the length.
« Back to index