[Beau_Soir]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRises

I have never read the 50 Shades, it just isn't my type of book, but I don't think it is wrong for others to enjoy the books, people should be able to read whatever books they wish without get judged as "sad" or "disgusting". People seem to judge people all the time now, and a snobbish attitude is developed towards everything and everyone who does something different to them from what they watch on TV, what they eat, what they wear, where they shop, and of course what they read.

I am not a literary scholar or anything, I rarely read the classics, I read books for my entertainment, my enjoyment. So my book collection isn't going to meet the standards of many people on here (I enjoy Jeff Lindsay's Dexter series, Michael Connelly book, Tom Thorne Series, Song of Fire and Ice series etc.) but I read books for my enjoyment not anyone else so I wouldn't judge others for reading book that I wouldn't particularly enjoy.

Interestingly the OP hasn't mentioned what books and authors they read, is this fear of being judged themselves?

It's a shite book, written by someone that has no writing ability. I'm all for some light novels now and again, I liked Bridget jones, belle de jour etc, but this woman has zero talent. There is a reason why this book has no critical acclaim whatsoever. It's badly written and a lot of sentences don't been make sense, that is a matter of fact, not opinion.

[Madonna38]

I think anything that gets people reading is a positive thing. However after reading bits online to see what all this fuss is about. I know it's not for me. It is so poorly written.

What has annoyed me though that people who haven't read a book for years (if ever) have all of a sudden read this and are now acting like they are some kind of superior intellect because they have finally read a book. I've read some stupid comments from people I know. It's quite sad actually.

[ravensborough]

Originally Posted by Viridiana

And why exactly is 50 Shades of Grey better than Katie Price?

At least EL James wrote the books herself as opposed to Katie Price who gets someone else to do the hard work whilst she takes all the credit.

[PhoenixRises]

Originally Posted by Beau_Soir

It's a shite book, written by someone that has no writing ability. I'm all for some light novels now and again, I liked Bridget jones, belle de jour etc, but this woman has zero talent. There is a reason why this book has no critical acclaim whatsoever. It's badly written and a lot of sentences don't been make sense, that is a matter of fact, not opinion.

I never said the book was good did I? I haven't read the book because I have a feeling I wouldn't enjoy it so I can't judge it from it's style and content. All I was saying was that it is not nice to judge people for reading the book, and possibly enjoying it. Criticise the book all you like but don't criticise the people just because they enjoy something you don't is all I am saying.

Also why embolden that sentence and then post something that has nothing to do with that sentence? Just curious

Finally I liked that said "...and a lot of sentences don't been make sense" that was quite amusing

[Moshe]

From all I've heard about it, it sounds like a nasty, poorly written piece of sensationalist S&M hard porn. Trash. Not "literature" at all. A sad comment indeed

[Viridiana]

Originally Posted by ravensborough

At least EL James wrote the books herself as opposed to Katie Price who gets someone else to do the hard work whilst she takes all the credit.

It does not matter if Katie Price wrote them or not. She's not going around saying she did, she just reaps the profits from the Katie Price brand. But someone got payed to do it. The ghostwriter cannot write worse than EL James.

[the_lostprophet]

Originally Posted by Viridiana

And why exactly is 50 Shades of Grey better than Katie Price?

Yes that's what I was going to say; I'd put them in the same category of 'mindless dross' to be honest. From what I've heard about Fifty Shades it sends out some frightening messages about how it's okay to be emotionally abused as long as the guy is older and rich. It's not even the sex scenes which are controversial to me; it's the other stuff. The male character is apparently a weird, traumatised, sadistic control freak and the girl seems to be passive, emotionally immature and in thrall to this oddball. She seems to think that she can 'save' him if she just loves him enough - and I bet he is a reformed character in the end as well.

If people want erotic fiction then I hear that there are far better and more thought-provoking examples out there, which I guess don't have such a power imbalance at the heart of the novel. It just worries me that the majority of women reading this aren't analysing the subtext of these 'novels' at all. Terrifying, not to mention deeply saddening, that women still buy into something which could arguably legitimise abusive relationships in 2012. Some of my Facebook contacts (grown women!) are even going on about how they want to find their own Mr Grey - deary me. They seem to be acting like naive teenage girls. If they want to be abused then they won't have to try very hard; there are tons of freaks out there.

[Viridiana]

Originally Posted by the_lostprophet

Yes that's what I was going to say; I'd put them in the same category of 'mindless dross' to be honest. From what I've heard about Fifty Shades it sends out some frightening messages about how it's okay to be emotionally abused as long as the guy is older and rich. It's not even the sex scenes which are controversial to me; it's the other stuff. The male character is apparently a weird, traumatised, sadistic control freak and the girl seems to be passive, emotionally immature and in thrall to this oddball. She seems to think that she can 'save' him if she just loves him enough - and I bet he is a reformed character in the end as well.

If people want erotic fiction then I hear that there are far better and more thought-provoking examples out there, which I guess don't have such a power imbalance at the heart of the novel. It just worries me that the majority of women reading this aren't analysing the subtext of these 'novels' at all. Terrifying, not to mention deeply saddening, that women still buy into something which could arguably legitimise abusive relationships in 2012. Some of my Facebook contacts (grown women!) are even going on about how they want to find their own Mr Grey - deary me. They seem to be acting like naive teenage girls. If they want to be abused then they won't have to try very hard; there are tons of freaks out there.

Best post I've read about this book. I totally agree. Exactly how i feel.

[Miss C. DeVille]

Let's face it, sex sells and always has done. Look back at the queues when Lady Chatterley's Lover and Lolita came out. This is just the latest fad, there will be another one along again in a minute.

[vintage_girl]

Originally Posted by SHAFT

There is no real difference in quality between Shades, Potter and Twilight IMO I'm afraid. It's all badly written dross for the mass market. Does that make me a snob? Probably.

I have to disagree with you there. I haven't read 50 Shades, so I can't really comment, but judging by the reviews it's pretty dire.

Twilight, I have mixed feelings about. While reading the books I was totally hooked, but lost interest as soon as I finished them and will probably never read them again.

Harry Potter is in a totally different league altogether though. It really is a good book, even if you don't like the genre it's madness to claim it's badly written. Also, remember it's aimed at a young audience, mostly children.

This is coming from someone who reads mostly classics, and very few popular novels. The joy of reading is being able to appreciate different genres for what they are IMO.

I doubt I'll ever read 50 Shades though, doesn't sound like my kind of thing.

[Viridiana]

Originally Posted by Miss C. DeVille

Let's face it, sex sells and always has done. Look back at the queues when Lady Chatterley's Lover and Lolita came out. This is just the latest fad, there will be another one along again in a minute.

Well but Lolita is a masterpiece. And Lady Chatterley's lover is a very well written book. It's not because of the sex they carved a place in literature. It's an insult to refer them in connection with this.

Of course 50 Shades is a fad, but question of this thread, and a valid one is, even for a fad have we gone too far? And to be honest i do not think sex is the pull here.

[Teddybleads]

I don't recall any sex in Lolita, or at least very little and I wouldn't say it was a big part of the book.

[Beau_Soir]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRises

I never said the book was good did I? I haven't read the book because I have a feeling I wouldn't enjoy it so I can't judge it from it's style and content. All I was saying was that it is not nice to judge people for reading the book, and possibly enjoying it. Criticise the book all you like but don't criticise the people just because they enjoy something you don't is all I am saying.

Also why embolden that sentence and then post something that has nothing to do with that sentence? Just curious

Finally I liked that said "...and a lot of sentences don't been make sense" that was quite amusing

It's called making a typo on the iPad.

Unfortunately, as much as you may wish to, you can't stop people having opinions. My opinion is that people who enjoy the book have no taste and no knowledge of what quality writing and moreover, story telling is. But your comment did amuse me, so thanks for that.

[Beau_Soir]

Originally Posted by Teddybleads

I don't recall any sex in Lolita, or at least very little and I wouldn't say it was a big part of the book.

Precisely. It's also such a well written book, you have more sympathy for the middle aged lead, rather than the 15 year old girl he's having a relationship with. Her manipulative nature is construed very well.

[strictlyfloss]

Jeez guys, what does it matter? If that's all that people have to be sad about then I'd say they're very lucky. I'm sick of hearing people going on about it - if you don't like it, don't read it! Simples! I don't much like the Daily Mail but I don't find it "sad" that some people do. I just leave them to get on with it.

[Residents Fan]

Originally Posted by the_lostprophet

Yes that's what I was going to say; I'd put them in the same category of 'mindless dross' to be honest. From what I've heard about Fifty Shades it sends out some frightening messages about how it's okay to be emotionally abused as long as the guy is older and rich. It's not even the sex scenes which are controversial to me; it's the other stuff. The male character is apparently a weird, traumatised, sadistic control freak and the girl seems to be passive, emotionally immature and in thrall to this oddball. She seems to think that she can 'save' him if she just loves him enough - and I bet he is a reformed character in the end as well.

If people want erotic fiction then I hear that there are far better and more thought-provoking examples out there, which I guess don't have such a power imbalance at the heart of the novel.

"Wetlands" by Charlotte Roche and "One Hundred Strokes of the Brush Before Bed" by Melissa Panarello were both
erotic novels by women writers that did well commerically,
although neither did the huge numbers "50 Shades" is
getting. Both of these books divided the reviewers, but
they seemed to be better recieved than the E.L. James
book.

I hardly think "woman writes erotic fiction" is worthy
of headlines in 2012- I mean, women have been
writing erotic novels openly since Erica Jong in
the 70s and at a more downmarket level,
Jackie Collins and Shirley Conran in
the 1980s. And if you go back far
enough, there's Kate Chopin, Aphra Behn
or even Sappho...

[Beau_Soir]

Originally Posted by strictlyfloss

Jeez guys, what does it matter? If that's all that people have to be sad about then I'd say they're very lucky. I'm sick of hearing people going on about it - if you don't like it, don't read it! Simples! I don't much like the Daily Mail but I don't find it "sad" that some people do. I just leave them to get on with it.

To be fair, this whole site would die within minutes if everyone did that

[strictlyfloss]

Originally Posted by Beau_Soir

To be fair, this whole site would die within minutes if everyone did that

Yes that's a fair point well made Beau_Soir, I'll give you that one

[PhoenixRises]

Originally Posted by Beau_Soir

It's called making a typo on the iPad.

Unfortunately, as much as you may wish to, you can't stop people having opinions. My opinion is that people who enjoy the book have no taste and no knowledge of what quality writing and moreover, story telling is. But your comment did amuse me, so thanks for that.

I think it is called making a typo on any device not just the iPad I just always find it amusing when people make the mistake when criticising spelling and grammar, I wasn't having a go at you.

I still think it is wrong to judge people (and I do not wish to stop people having opinions quite happy with opinions of others a lot of people even convince me their opinion makes a lot of sense) on such simplistic things but you obviously are happy being judgemental of others so each to their own I suppose

One good thing about this book though, it should embolden budding authors, such as the OP, into publishing themselves, I mean if such drivel (as popular opinion on this thread says) as this book can make it then surely if you are writing something even a fraction better it should get a few readers at least.

[PhoenixRises]

Originally Posted by strictlyfloss

Jeez guys, what does it matter? If that's all that people have to be sad about then I'd say they're very lucky. I'm sick of hearing people going on about it - if you don't like it, don't read it! Simples! I don't much like the Daily Mail but I don't find it "sad" that some people do. I just leave them to get on with it.

That was my point, but I don't think I articulated it quite as well

[Beau_Soir]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRises

I think it is called making a typo on any device not just the iPad I just always find it amusing when people make the mistake when criticising spelling and grammar, I wasn't having a go at you.

I still think it is wrong to judge people (and I do not wish to stop people having opinions quite happy with opinions of others a lot of people even convince me their opinion makes a lot of sense) on such simplistic things but you obviously are happy being judgemental of others so each to their own I suppose

One good thing about this book though, it should embolden budding authors, such as the OP, into publishing themselves, I mean if such drivel (as popular opinion on this thread says) as this book can make it then surely if you are writing something even a fraction better it should get a few readers at least.

You are easily amused. How delightful.
I disagree, self publishing is criticised for precisely this reason, it produces shite.

[GreyButterfly]

Originally Posted by strictlyfloss

Jeez guys, what does it matter? If that's all that people have to be sad about then I'd say they're very lucky. I'm sick of hearing people going on about it - if you don't like it, don't read it! Simples! I don't much like the Daily Mail but I don't find it "sad" that some people do. I just leave them to get on with it.

I couldn't agree more!

[PhoenixRises]

Originally Posted by Beau_Soir

You are easily amused. How delightful.
I disagree, self publishing is criticised for precisely this reason, it produces shite.

But surely if authors who are good self publish then it won't be shite? The OP for instance seems to feel their works are better than the book being discussed in this thread. I am sure there are some good self published books out there.

Funnily enough I am not easily amused at all, so not so much with the delightful

[Beau_Soir]

Originally Posted by PhoenixRises

But surely if authors who are good self publish then it won't be shite? The OP for instance seems to feel their works are better than the book being discussed in this thread. I am sure there are some good self published books out there.

Funnily enough I am not easily amused at all, so not so much with the delightful

You're not getting it. People don't take self publishing seriously, it's nicknamed vanity publishing, precisely because of books like 50 shades of Grey, if anything it's made it more difficult for talented, new authors to be taken seriously by publishing houses that care about more than just cold hard cash.

[PhoenixRises]

Originally Posted by Beau_Soir

You're not getting it. People don't take self publishing seriously, it's nicknamed vanity publishing, precisely because of books like 50 shades of Grey, if anything it's made it more difficult for talented, new authors to be taken seriously by publishing houses that care about more than just cold hard cash.

I actually understood perfectly what you was saying, I just have a different opinion on the matter, I feel that if more excellent writers were to self publish it would become less of a joke format and be taken more seriously, turning the tide as it were.

And then people wouldn't turn up their noses at the works like they do now, I mean self publishing has not always had this reputation so it could get back to a better standing.