I recently came across this article and it immediately made me uncomfortable.
I don’t have an English Literature degree from Duke or any other degree for that matter, but even I know that reading for pleasure isn’t a guilty pleasure. I’m so sick of the rhetoric that women should feel guilty about reading for joy.
OP*, if you genuinely believe that you are better off reading from your phone because it has the New York Times, then why continue? The irony is that SJM is a #1 New York Times bestselling Author, so do with that what you will… but I don’t get why you feel you need to apologise for reading something that isn’t “intellectually stimulating.”
The need to let us all know that you’ve read “serious literature”, therefore you should know better is elitist which is further strengthened when you detail your working life that involves what you again imply as serious reading, you state that after work, “I need to turn off my brain. I need to have simple thoughts”
I’m not going so far as to say that she thinks everyone who reads these books is simple-minded, but when a whole article that diminishes reading for joy and is titled ” These Sarah J. Maas Books Are Making Me Dumber” it paints a picture of someone who sees reading books like this is intellectually lesser.
I also want to address the claim “ The age gaps bother no one.” I’m going to say this with my whole chest, you are reading about 200-year-old fae beings, in many cases they are not functioning as 200-year-old humans. That’s the entire point of fantasy. Applying the same social construct to fae as you would to humans is a strange criticism of fantasy, and just to be clear, if you do find age gaps problematic in fantasy that is of course your prerogative. In contemporary romance I’m very much not a fan of this trope.
“These books do not expand my worldview. The plotting is chaotic. The pacing is scattershot. They do not move me”
If a book is not provoking an emotional response, why carry on reading them? You say you enjoy these books, but you write about them like you hate them.
And then we get to the last few paragraphs, which are just more of the same intellectual posturing. But this line stood out “I have always loved fantasy. I donāt hate romance.” On its own, “I don’t hate romance ” is fine, but when it is put in an article in which OP continues to bring up their qualifications, reads these books to switch off her brain, and says reading these books are making her dumber, it lands differently. It continues the idea that romance needs to be defended or separated from the more “respectable” books.
You end your article with ” Reading any book is better than reading no book.” which is confusing. The whole article is you explaining in detail why you think that isn’t the case. If you believe what you are writing about then what exactly was the point of this? If reading anything better than nothing, why is it an intellectual competition?
You say you enjoyed these books, that you’re having fun reading for the first time in a very long time, but why does this enjoyment come with an apology?
Maybe the problem isn’t that these books make you dumber, maybe it’s that you feel shame for enjoying books that aren’t considered intellectually challenging, and instead of challenging the ideology that books written for women are lesser, you are reinforcing it.
*OP: Original Poster.
