Fair point. For the most part I can sort of get the gist of things, especially now that I know what cazador and lobo means. Thanks! :)

I am not American, and I'm not sure why you assumed so.

Wow, The Martian was a web novel?! That is interesting! Also yeah, reading books in general helps with vocabulary, for sure! I tried reading Lord of The Rings, but it was too hard to read for me. The grammar and sentence structure, the vocabulary, all of it. Every other line, there was a word that I didn't know lol. But that's my problem i guessssss...

yeah that comment is so strange to me, because i did feel like it was very clear that he was a poet, but exclusively that came across to me as a good thing.

i'm not sure why poetic language in an autobiographical novel is a bad thing, especially given how emotionally fraught the narrative was

yeah it was very clear to me that he was a poet based on how, well... poetic his prose was

I gave up maybe 2/3rds of the way through.

I liked the premise and the initial worldbuilding, but the exploration of race and imperialism was blunt and simplistic--like it was pretending to be saying something interesting, but was really just using those injustices as a source of plot-necesssry hardship for the protagonist.

This alone didn't bother me too much. I was enjoying the book and probably would have finished it, but then the plot shifted towards action about halfway through. This was jarring, and never quite felt real. Similar to my criticism above, because it never felt as emotionally impactful as it seemed to think it was being, everything felt a little melodramatic and "PG-13 pretending too hard to be R" like I was reading a edgy YA novel (to be fair, I felt that way about her previous books).

And maybe I just stopped too early, but the themes around "translation" didn't seem to be going anywhere.

Overall, I like that she's changing things up and think she has a lot of promise as a writer, but this felt a bit amateurish, or maybe just rushed.

The idea that fiction doesn't have as much value as non-fiction is so stupid and exhausting.

Science fiction, for example, is often invaluable for commentary on present and future issues. Climate change, politics, gender, artificial intelligence, etc. There is no limit to what science fiction can imagine, and that imagination can be used incredibly well for thought-provoking literature that helps people grow. A Clockwork Orange or a Canticle for Leibowitz are excellent examples.

Fantasy is similar in how it can use wildly imaginative situations to expand on interesting ideas. Terry Pratchett's Discworld does this CONSTANTLY. His book Small Gods is a hilarious critique/satire on religion and the various hypocrisies of religion. His work is even profound enough to be referenced as an economic theory of socioeconomic unfairness (Vimes Boot Theory).

That isn't to say that every work of fiction needs to be profound. There is value in a beautiful story. In a creative story. In a funny story. Art done well is worthwhile.

Reading teaches empathy. You see things from the lens of another person and while you might not always agree with their thoughts and actions, you start learning how people think.

IMO the absolutely fantastic thing about fantasy and sci fi is that they can illustrate something, usually about human nature, but sometimes abstract concepts like justice, honor, etc - and you don’t have to carry the baggage of real life references: religions, countries, history, etc. Instead the author can craft precisely the components they need to make their point, emphasizing and deemphasizing as needed, without muddying it up with everything else that comes with it. You can also push concepts and situations to extremes without worrying about cross checking against existing social norms.

A sci fi world can put all readers on equal footing to begin with - again readers from different countries and backgrounds will usually have very different starting views, base assumptions, etc. about current and historical events, what was the TRUE cause of xyz, etc. Now, real people of different backgrounds will take it elsewhere, and quickly, but at least they start in a common spot.

I also believe a persons emotional core can be worked like a muscle - I DEFINITELY see the difference between someone who has wandered far afield, lived many lives, experienced many emotional highs and lows and has learned to look through eyes other than their own….. and someone who hasn’t (tends to gravitate towards meritocracy and extreme stoicism and Spartanism, worshipping logic and failing to value emotions properly, cleaving to principles even to the detriment of the well being of people around them). The great paradox to me is why so many young men (I among them, back in the day) can read so much of this, and yet not learn it well and DO act in that rigid way I described.

I made the same mistake with Pale Fire on my first read-through!

For me, when I read the note he left to his daughter, I thought to myself that’s something I would carry close to my heart forever. I wish had parents that loved me like that and expressed it. That would mean more to me than the cumulative relationship I had with my parents. I still struggle with feeling loved.

Both my parents were pretty much absent in my life. My Dad had full custody, but was abusive and neglectful. I maybe saw my Mom 6 months between when my parents divorced when I was 6 and when she passed when I was 20.

Both parents being alive and present is ideal, but knowing you’re loved matters a lot. Maybe I’m biased, but I don’t think he made the wrong choice. She’ll know forever she made her fathers life worth it.

Particularly during developmental stages of life, I hear a lot of argument for reading in general building vocabulary and reading comprehension, which definitely transfers beyond reading fiction.

But more broadly, beyond developmental stages, three things come to mind based on personal experience: critical thinking, imagination/creativity, and empathy.

As some have mentioned, many sci-fi and fantasy authors, despite the setting being in a fictional world, deal with very real issues (social, political, you name it) that can prompt you to think about the real world more deeply.

I know studies exist that communicate the benefit of creative outlets. I would argue that reading and placing yourself in the story of a fictional world is an exercise in creativity and imagination.

I believe in the power of a well-written character to help a reader build empathy. Often we find ways to relate to characters in the stories we love, but those characters are often very different from us in other ways. Connecting to a character who experiences something that we could only imagine might prompt us to think about the people in the world around us that relate to other aspects of that character.

Annnnnd now I really want to go find and read some research about the benefits of reading. 😃 The above is how it’s had a positive effect on me, though!

I found them here:

https://www.alittlebithuman.com/books-from-ocean-vuongs-syllabus-nyu/

That's fair. I do welcome a preface in a novel that requires cultural translation, though ideally it shares the background without spoiling the entire plot!

> Personally, I find most books more enjoyable on subsequent readings when I know the plot and I can be impressed with how it unravels and the author has layers the groundwork.

This is the premise behind the pro-spoiler movement, backed up by an actual study. Apparently, science has concluded that, on average, it very much is a thing. However. It is not true for every single person. I personally find it differently enjoyable. There's a joy in the discovery, and a joy in the re-treading, and they're not the same thing. I can get the latter any time I want by doing a re-read or re-watch, but being robbed of the former means I can never experience it.

It's all about giving people agency. Tag the spoilers so people can decide for themselves what they want their experience to be, you know? Don't make choices on behalf of other people based on what "science says" is best for them.

Lol yeah I still don't love love Amy. As a kid I hated her with passion when she burned Jo's stories. I think deep inside I still haven't forgiven her for that.

I read and loved them all. Agreed that Nan is what Jo was supposed to be.

Consider the case where the motivations or plot would have been obvious to a reader at the time of publication, but are lost on modern readers. Or the situation where the novel is in translation, relying on cultural knowledge/references that simply don't exist to the average reader in the translated language. A well-done preface or introduction can assist with that, though more extreme cases will need footnotes/endnotes.

You might be right. I think everyone is in a position to have opinions about other people's decisions. I respect his decision for sure and I understand why he did decide to have a child. My dialogue isn't with him but with others who are reading his story and experiences and who have a different perspective on it, so thanks for giving me yours.

It depends on the fantasy or sci fi. Good fiction is good fiction in any setting. And good fiction can provide insights into the hear and now now matter the setting. Sometimes a removed or artificial setting can allow an author more freedom to explore the big questions of this world or to explore what it means to be human.

I can't go into a book with no agenda if I think the author is so pretentious I already hate them, it would have no chance. it's not fair to them but it is what it is.

[deleted]

I thought it was a wonderful book. Some of his sentences are just breathtaking. I felt like English being his second language was a help to him in exploring how to express himself in English. Also, I’m really interested in the experiences of refugees and immigrants to the U.S. and I found his story fascinating, the mentally ill grandmother, the violent father, the socially isolated child.

I never read the two sequels, but I read Little Women(both books, generally they're in the same volume these days) both as a child and as an adult. As a child, I believe I had an adapted version, but a few years ago I re-read the original text on project gutenberg. There was a lot that I'd overlooked as a kid, and some lessons that maybe aren't so great to emulate in the 21st century. But I loved the feminine empowerment, how it showed several different ways to be a woman and demonstrated that they were all good.

Jo's ending is a little questionable these days, I will admit. It really has to be read in the context of the time it was written, as well as considering how it was essentially the 19th century version of a fic author going "haha fuck you your OTP will never be a thing!" I didn't know this as a kid, but as an adult it makes me laugh. You go, Louisa May! Tell them how it is!

I'm actually a huge Amy fan. Anyone who hates on Amy stopped paying attention at the point where she burned Jo's manuscript, but she has so much development after that. She was the one who stayed with Aunt March, and her development abroad was incredible. Yes she's a bit of a prude, but remember the historic context at the time of original publication. She was a prude in the same way that women who supported prohibition were prudes, which is to say, she had a reason to be wary. She was also the perfect match for Laurie. Jo would have been a disaster. Hot take, I know.

ooh could u possibly link it or PM it too me? im really interested as well!