Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikepurvis | Hacker News Reader

That surprises me too. When I've heard that remark in the past, it's always been from someone I could dismiss as being a silly snob.

What's the core of the argument? Is it that fiction is not intellectual enough? What about Milton, Shakespeare, and the profound insights they offer into the way people think? Is it not more interesting (and even persuasive) in that form than as a straight essay? What about science fiction, and the thought experiments it offers regarding our social and political systems?

What about films? Does Mr. Fried also ignore films that tell fictitious stories, or are they acceptable due to the reduced time requirement?

Yeah, I don't know. But it's surprising.

View on HN

I'm pretty much the same way: fiction is just not usually interesting to me. That doesn't mean I'm reading tech manuals; it means I'd usually rather read history, essays, or something discursive on science than a story. And Shakespeare? Milton? Seriously?

There's fiction I do read (I took on Infinite Jest this summer, and I'm slowly reading Blood Meridian), but it takes effort to engage with it; nonfiction never does.

Just another perspective.

Yes, Shakespeare, Milton, Austen, Joyce, Kafka, seriously! Why the hell not? They're all incomparably more fascinating, stimulating, fun and mind-blowing than watching House, after all! (and I'm a fan of House).

I'm not trying to invalidate your perspective, but your rhetorical question suggests you really don't understand, beyond the point of your own preference, why people would read Shakespeare. That's incredibly bizarre to me.

My own perspective is that I'd rather lose a limb than swear off fiction for the rest of my life. I can't help feeling deeply sorry for people who can appreciate good literature but won't read it, for whatever reason - even if I understand how gratuitous and unwelcome this feeling may seem to them. It really is such an important part of what makes life worth living.

I'm honestly not aiming for hipster cred here (I haven't read Infinite Jest). Just another perspective.

Austen, Joyce, and Kafka I get. I think most people who read Shakespeare do so because they think they're supposed to, though. Seeing Shakespeare, different story.

There are a million things vying for our attention. We should invest it in things that we appreciate. There are also people who think fine wine is an important part of what makes life worth living, or marijuana, or Bach.

But Milton, you forgot Milton. I'm reading Paradise Lost. Maybe it is one of those things you're supposed to read, but it's genuinely really good. Like,

"to be weak is miserable doing or suffering: but of this be sure, to do aught good never will be our task, but ever to do ill our sole delight"

When I've heard that remark in the past, it's always been from someone I could dismiss as being a silly snob.

Snob? My first reaction is to dismiss them as philistines.

(Of course, I'm often wrong, and philistines are often smart people too...)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com