Love this. Someone else in the thread said they are known as “books for people who don’t read books” and to me, that’s such a snotty, condescending concept. It’s baffling that people spend their time - their valuable, non-renewable time - thinking such shitty thoughts about things and people that don’t even actually affect them.

It's hard to do without giving away spoilers! It's about a family with children and a cat moving into a home on a busy road traveled by speeding tractor trailer trucks. The property is near a pet sematary (misspelled by the children who made the sign) filled with pets killed by the road. I grew up right off of the road that inspired the book. ❤🐾

Well, The Green Mile is more fantasy than horror. It's a wonderful book though. Ienvy you being able to read it for the first time. For straight out horror go to King's earlier works like Carrie, Salems' Lot, The Shining and Christine. All relatively short works for King but he packs in the punches.

TikTok/YA baby... Pretty sure you have aphantasia on top honey 🥰

The green mile is one of my favorite king books, and I have read most

Yeah I kind of got that. I read in 2003 IIRC.

But I felt it was a bit preachy, more a manifesto than a story. Perhaps if I had known it I would have not been bothered.

ah, do i need to go there?

I do remember that she feared him immensely and that he tied her at the end but extensive physical abuse I don't recall. Maybe I'm mistaken, it was quite a while since I read the book the last time.

[deleted]

I remember hearing something about 50 Shades being a Twilight fan fiction (or based on one)

Hello. Per rule 3.3, please post book recommendation requests in /r/SuggestMeABook or in our Weekly Recommendation Thread. Thank you.

Say it louder for the people in the back! 👏🏻People think they’re being “trendy” and honestly, it’s not, it’s annoying. Let people like what they like without making them feel less than. Reading is good for your mind no matter what it is.

Too many people in modern society forget that fantasy isn't real life. I don't really know anything about her, but I understand certain things about the "romance" genre.

Many people get really angry about elements of fictional romances that are for a certain market.

Let's take the "enemies to lovers" trope, since I'm getting that vibe from some comments. I'm not a fan, myself, but there's another related niche I like and I've gone out of my way to try to understand (why people like this sort of thing).

Some people like to read these kinds of fantasies because reading is a safe place to explore things you'd never do IRL.

A person who has had to end a relationship due to red flags, but they really loved that person and wish they had changed, can explore that safely through reading. Imagination is a safe space.

Even very dark fantasies can be safely indulged in (50 Shades ring any bells?) without getting any actual pain or risking running afoul of a true sadist instead of merely a redeemable scoundrel.

These books allow people to have a fantasy in a safe way.

But unfortunately, there are a lot of controlling, thought-policing people who can't separate fact from fiction. They believe that by creating a safe place to enjoy fantasies you'd never risk IRL, you are condoning the behaviors in the story.

That's simply not true.

Everyone but these thought police know...it's fantasy. Their excuse is that no fantasy should exist because what if someone follows through!?!?

In reality, people are more likely to follow through in risky ways if they can't indulge their imagination. They are more likely to follow through in extremely risky ways if they feel ashamed and demonized. The shame itself will drive them towards subconscious self harm.

It's better to give people space to explore it safely and to feel okay about themselves. It's just thoughts, not acted on. It's harmless to self and others when it's just a book.

Most people would enjoy being pursued by someone who loves and dotes on them, for example... But we know IRL such aggressive pursuit is typically abusive. So in person it turns us off. Not to mention it's usually someone we aren't at all attracted to, either.

Books, especially romances, allow us to let go of our reasonable concerns about stalking (for example) and indulge in a sense of being intensely pursued by a person we actually would love being pursued by.

Enemies to lovers allows a person to give in to a "forbidden" but overwhelming desire. Many of us have been deeply, intensely attracted to someone only to find out they're a jerk. In imagination, they are redeemable and come around in the end. IRL, you dare not take that chance.

Fiction is freedom. You can do in fiction what you never would IRL.

Some people want to take that away under "but it's normalizing abusive behavior!"

No, it isn't. It's giving people space to imagine before going back to the harsh reality that being pursued aggressively is only fun in fantasy, but is mostly dangerous and terrifying in reality.

>A few years ago, it was Sarah J. Maas.

I thought she was a good writer. What is the problem with her? Also please do not immediately downvote me. I have no ill intentions.

You're forgetting a fairly major issue here - Stapleton stands to directly benefit from Henry's death in a very public way, because in order to get his hands on the family money he has to out himself as a Baskerville. So that immediately gives him an obvious motive. What's more likely - a wealthy young extraverted aristocrat suddenly commits suicide and his money happens to go to a local relative, or his death was staged? The dog provides a far more plausible smokescreen than a staged suicide (when you consider that in those days, basically everyone accepted the existence of ghosts as a fact - indeed even in modern Britain it's not uncommon).

If you live where a number of counties come together, get multiple Library cards. I have 3, that way if one library doesnt have a particular book to rent maybe I can get it at one of the others. I usually Listen to audios, so I'm not actually driving around.

Wasn't she described as being physically abused?

I usually do the library thing. But I do have some authors that I like to collect. aka Clive Cussler, Elmore Leonard, Michael Connelly (Bosch)

I read a couple of her books and they're on the trashy side (for my standards) but also highly addictive. The woman knows how to write a page turner. If you just want something fast paced for escapism and don't mind morally questionable characters, give it a try. I don't think I'm reading more from her but for my needs at the time, it was fine. I understand why she appeals the masses. Nothing wrong with that.

In the country (as opposed to the city) everybody knows what everybody's doing, there are always a ton of witnesses, who went to whom, who sleeps with whom and so on. If Sir Henry died anywhere near the Stapleton house let alone in it, the latter would be the primary suspect and even the lack of evidence due to rudimentary forensic expertise in Victorian England mightn't be able to save him. And sure the truth that Stapleton is Baskerville would be uncovered and after that any body of jurors would send his ass straight to the gallows.

As for the trouble of using the dog, see it that way: it worked once, it may well work twice, makes perfect sense.

you don't have bad taste, don't let people shame you for enjoying something

He came to Devonshire already planning to acquire the estate one way or the other, that is why he introduced his wife as his sister. He wasn't sure of the actual method yet but then he had heard about Sir Charles frail heart and his belief in the hound.

When Henry appeared he decided to try the same method since it worked for the first time, that makes perfect sense.

Also, I'm not sure about constant beatings, where did you take it from?

I did. It’s my favorite book. I also understand it’s sort of fallen out of favor the last 10 years or so. It’s important to remember it’s a work of fiction and a critique of a government that doesn’t exist anymore. It’s not meant to be a modern political platform.

Question: I haven't read Colleen Hoover but when I was a teenager I read Sarah Dessen's books, which honestly sound very similar in structure, plot elements, etc. Has anyone read books by both of these authors? Are their books similar?

That’s good to hear.