You know what, I'm not even gonna wait for your reply. I'll come out and say it:
You want a culture of literary snobbishness. You want to look down at people who don't read "complex" literature, where "complex" is in the eye of the beholder, and the beholder is you.
You think books that are recent, easy to comprehend, and entertaining are "slop" - a word used to describe pig food; you can't stop yourself from using it.
A lot of people don't actually want to look down on others in the way you're doing! If being a serious reader means looking down on others and calling their books "slop", you're going to drive people away.
Books should be for everybody. The full-time worker who wants to kick back at the end of the day and read some romance or fantasy (or romantasy :) ) is doing more for their literacy and empathy than any social media use would accomplish. By discouraging this - and you are, every time you call it "slop" - you are contributing to illiteracy.
What I wanted to say was that people should read books which challenge themselves. That the judge of complexity should be they and that it is not up to me to decide what people read. That reading for the sake of reading is actually always worthwhile and that nobody should be judged for what they are reading. That all reading is a joy. That slop was just a way to categorize, but that each person themselves had to categorize themselves. That there is nothing wrong with treasuring what other see as banal or slop.
All this is what I was trying to express to you. I tried to emphasize, because I am a reader of genre fiction and I do love books. Just like you.
But actually you made me rethink this. Reading slop is worthless. The only reason to do is because it is marginally better than watching tiktok. I will look at someone reading Kings slop novels just like I look at someone watching TikTok slop. Reading for the sake of reading is worthless. Someone being illiterate or only reading slop makes no difference at all. Yes I do look down at you. Reading romance novels does make you a worse person. Sci-fi is for people who are semi tech literate losers who do not shower enough. Fantasy is for people running around in plastic armor as if they were 5.
I guess a thank you is in order for making me come to this realization.
"What I wanted to say was that people should read books which challenge themselves. That the judge of complexity should be they and that it is not up to me to decide what people read."
If you wanted to say that, you would have.
You claim to see people browsing genre fiction in a bookstore as consuming "slop", but now that you're called out on it, you claim that everyone gets to decide for themselves what's challenging? You can't know what is challenging or complicated to those readers. You're being elitist and condescending when you judge people and books this way.
There's actually a pretty easy on-ramp from genre fiction to serious literature. You can take the average Sanderson reader and introduce them to more advanced genre authors like Bradbury, Wolfe, Le Guin, or Asimov. Here, they will find books which challenge the reader to understand the characters, and to reflect on their own society. At that point, the reader is primed for advanced reading - they'll have seen how themes, characters, and events all reinforce each other in interesting ways. And from this, you can introduce the "classics" and the "complex" and the "literary" - they'll be ready.
It's funny that you are trying to present your overt snobbery as a "realization" you had after "rethinking", when it was already there in your first post in the thread.
"If you visit a book store you will also find out that most "readers" are a very niche group, who mostly read genre fiction or crime slop."
You are no more judgy or condescending now than you were yesterday.
Good. I actually tried walking back the scare quotes in my posts and actively tried defending slop (which you proceeded to attack me for, for some reason), but you are right. I really am judgemental, condescending and elitist, I just wasn't honest with myself. I despise slop, reading for the sake of reading is worthless and the idea of reading as torture inflicted upon oneself seems very appealing.
"What I wanted to say was that people should read books which challenge themselves. That the judge of complexity should be they and that it is not up to me to decide what people read."
What you actually said:
"If you visit a book store you will also find out that most "readers" are a very niche group, who mostly read genre fiction or crime slop."
Perhaps before refocusing on your snobbery, you should educate yourself on language and sentence construction. Maybe something remedial? For there to be such a huge gulf between what you intended to say and what you actually said, is an indication of deficiencies whose correction is beyond what these forums could provide.
You want a culture of literary snobbishness. You want to look down at people who don't read "complex" literature, where "complex" is in the eye of the beholder, and the beholder is you.
You think books that are recent, easy to comprehend, and entertaining are "slop" - a word used to describe pig food; you can't stop yourself from using it.
A lot of people don't actually want to look down on others in the way you're doing! If being a serious reader means looking down on others and calling their books "slop", you're going to drive people away.
Books should be for everybody. The full-time worker who wants to kick back at the end of the day and read some romance or fantasy (or romantasy :) ) is doing more for their literacy and empathy than any social media use would accomplish. By discouraging this - and you are, every time you call it "slop" - you are contributing to illiteracy.