Is it justifiable to read books for the story and to not look into deeper meanings of the book (where there are some)
I.E.
This girl asks me if I have read Fahrenheit 451, and I went on to tell (although this seems drawn out it was quite brief) her how I really enjoyed it and that it speaks a lot on censorship, anti-intellectualism, etc. Most of which is just generally what you can retain from the book if you have basic critical thinking skills.
She responded with, "Yeah it was a cool story, I like sci-fi."
Is it justifiable to read a story with an obvious deeper meaning just for the plot?
Or am I just an elitist prick? Probably.
Zachary Campbell
>genre fiction
Joseph Cooper
>>Other people are only allowed to enjoy a book the same way I do!
Yeah, tone it down there son.
Adam Richardson
the idea of 'looking into deeper meanings' as if literature is some kind of encrypted chinese cookie, is pleb as fuck.
>Is it justifiable to read a story with an obvious deeper meaning just for the plot?
justifiable, sure.
>Or am I just an elitist prick?
you're just a prick, don't get any ideas.
Joshua Flores
...
Landon Johnson
meh well the majority of classic stories have shitty, boring plots. you are literally supposed to read deeply into them to think about it.
>thinking that the main purpose of literature is to tell a story and not to convey a theme/overall lesson how fucking juvenile
Charles Peterson
>assuming i was advocating reading for plot
life must be so simple when you only think in these shitty binaries.
Josiah Gutierrez
>implying that you just didn't imply that reading books for meaning is for plebs
go back to tumblr, faggot
Thomas King
i didn't, but it's real cute you think that. come back when you finish high school.
Bentley Reyes
a-user..
Brody Butler
I think so. For me, I can never do that even if I try. Even if I'm reading the shittiest, shallowest waste of paper, I always look for hidden/deeper meanings. But I know some people either aren't capable of doing that or don't want to use so much brain power. I can respect that though.
Grayson Flores
Ok I admit it was shitty for me to assume my way was the best way to read a book, and of course people can read a book however they want.
Cooper Jackson
>Farenheit 451
Joseph Rivera
I never read a single book for the story. I only read for style and symbols.
Henry Thompson
You're an elitist prick, but for Fahrenheit 451 however, I agree with you.
Angel Mitchell
>symbols thos are called letters, user~
Leo Barnes
If you need a justification for reading something (excluding reading for school/work) then you are already on the wrong path.
Liam Rodriguez
There's nothing wrong with reading a book just for the plot. If you're worried about having to justify the way you enjoy a book (or not), you're insecure.
Also you sound autistic OP.
Henry Price
It's only elitist of you if you're rude to/about her for it.
James Baker
You want us to decrypt your post to find its true meaning? Write what you mean if you're so smart.
Michael Martinez
>reading books composed only of letters
Oliver Parker
>Is it justifiable to read books for the story and to not look into deeper meanings of the book
You're supposed to undesirable this things intuitively or at the very least retrospectively.
Jace Hughes
understand*
Jonathan Kelly
>thinking there are rules to reading Read how you want.
Christian Walker
>the majority of classic stories have shitty, boring plots