This is so true how they try to invalidate the bigger picture of the author by categorising like this. It makes me sad how we just can't read books in peace.
This was a great read! I commented something on a Mina Le post recently that I think also applies to this discussion: As someone who has social media but does not have the apps on my phone (I really only use to post a few times a year- basically I use social media but I don’t consume it) I have a really interesting perspective on all of this. Because I don’t consume discourse, I am able to love what I love freely, and pick and choose the content I want to watch or receive about it. It’s actually quite sad to me that people are turning things they love into real life anxieties, or dimming their initial positive feelings about it, just because of what other people are saying.
Basically, I have literally no idea what any of this cool girl or vanilla girl or sad girl thing is. I just read what I want because I don’t derive a sense of worth or identity from what I read. I just absolutely adore reading and always have. I think people should read whatever they want without identifying with it, or on the other end, justifying it. Doing either of those seems to me like an exercise of ego at work.
This also made me think of a Hozier lyric as well: “I wouldn’t fare well…. Critic hoping to be remembered kind of wouldn't fare well”. Anyone who critics is building on someone else’s creation and therefore nothing able to withstand on its own. That to me is enough to dismiss most criticisms which allows me to enjoy freely!
i love this!! men have been writing 'sad boy books' for decades (centuries, even) and no one would lump them all together because of the author's gender. and the recommendations are wonderful!
on social media, everything must have a niche. even books unfortunately. maybe especially books, because genres have existed for a long time and that can be useful for recommending books but people love to write off anything that doesn’t fit into their preferred boxes.
i doubt she even bothered to read any of those books, just looked up a “sad girl book” list on goodreads and picked up her pitchfork lmao
“There is nothing wrong or overdone about writing about pain and suffering in order to put it under a microscope and examine it, in order to validate it. In fact, that is quite literally what authors have been doing for thousands of years.” - EXACTLY! love this so much!!!
Loved this! I've been thinking about how books are categorised a lot lately. How 'Babel' is summarised merely as 'dark academia' (mostly on BookTok), completely disregarding its complex themes. Likewise, how romance or fantasy are often reduced to singular 'tropes', grouping them with other 'enemies to lovers' plots, not considering how much each author has poured into their book. Love your article recs! <3
I’m more of a genre reader, so I wonder if people are taking what does often happen in genre fiction - in particular YA genre fiction - and applying it to litfic too? The paranormal romance boom post-Twilight, how Hunger Games ushered in the dystopian age, etc.
That’s not to say all of the books that followed those trends were bad, or even overly similar. Certainly it would be unfair to say that Hunger Games started a new kind of fiction - teen dystopias existed for a while before then (i.e. one of its inspirations, Battle Royale).
The assumption that any literary trend has to be 1. New and 2. Overwhelmingly bad seems to plague discussions of ‘sad girl books’ as much as it did paranormal romance back in the day.
Thank you for writing this! My essay collection was once negatively reviewed (alongside Jia Tolentino's) as an example of "cool girl" nonfiction. It was so demeaning and frustrating to be dismissed as a "cool girl" - all posture, no substance.
I resonate with this so much. I wish we would just let people read what they want to read, and stop trying to make it more than it is. Lumping all “sad girl” books together just feels like a big generalization trying to minimize the validity of our reading choices, much in the way that romance readers are mocked for reading only “fluffy” books. I read a lot, and I read in a variety of genres, but ultimately what I’m looking for is to enjoy or get something out of what I’m reading. Sometimes that’s a classic, sometimes it’s a romcom, sometimes it’s lit-fic!
This is so true how they try to invalidate the bigger picture of the author by categorising like this. It makes me sad how we just can't read books in peace.
Loved today's postcard as always
Was a perfect ending to my day. 💕
thank you for reading!
This was a great read! I commented something on a Mina Le post recently that I think also applies to this discussion: As someone who has social media but does not have the apps on my phone (I really only use to post a few times a year- basically I use social media but I don’t consume it) I have a really interesting perspective on all of this. Because I don’t consume discourse, I am able to love what I love freely, and pick and choose the content I want to watch or receive about it. It’s actually quite sad to me that people are turning things they love into real life anxieties, or dimming their initial positive feelings about it, just because of what other people are saying.
Basically, I have literally no idea what any of this cool girl or vanilla girl or sad girl thing is. I just read what I want because I don’t derive a sense of worth or identity from what I read. I just absolutely adore reading and always have. I think people should read whatever they want without identifying with it, or on the other end, justifying it. Doing either of those seems to me like an exercise of ego at work.
This also made me think of a Hozier lyric as well: “I wouldn’t fare well…. Critic hoping to be remembered kind of wouldn't fare well”. Anyone who critics is building on someone else’s creation and therefore nothing able to withstand on its own. That to me is enough to dismiss most criticisms which allows me to enjoy freely!
oh i wish to be this offline...thank you for reading!
i love this!! men have been writing 'sad boy books' for decades (centuries, even) and no one would lump them all together because of the author's gender. and the recommendations are wonderful!
yep! thank you for reading!
on social media, everything must have a niche. even books unfortunately. maybe especially books, because genres have existed for a long time and that can be useful for recommending books but people love to write off anything that doesn’t fit into their preferred boxes.
i doubt she even bothered to read any of those books, just looked up a “sad girl book” list on goodreads and picked up her pitchfork lmao
eaxctly!!!
gorgeous and insightful commentary
i love you mei <3
“joy within melancholy feels more meaningful to me” there it is 🥲 this is best thing I’ve read all day 👏👏👏
thank you!
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
you always put words to my subconscious thoughts before I've given them the breathing space they need. i loved this so much!!!!
this is the nicest thing ever. thank you so much!
i love this sm !!! <3
thank you!
“There is nothing wrong or overdone about writing about pain and suffering in order to put it under a microscope and examine it, in order to validate it. In fact, that is quite literally what authors have been doing for thousands of years.” - EXACTLY! love this so much!!!
thank you!
oh you know i love this one
u know i love u
Loved this! I've been thinking about how books are categorised a lot lately. How 'Babel' is summarised merely as 'dark academia' (mostly on BookTok), completely disregarding its complex themes. Likewise, how romance or fantasy are often reduced to singular 'tropes', grouping them with other 'enemies to lovers' plots, not considering how much each author has poured into their book. Love your article recs! <3
thank you for reading! and i 100% agree
I’m more of a genre reader, so I wonder if people are taking what does often happen in genre fiction - in particular YA genre fiction - and applying it to litfic too? The paranormal romance boom post-Twilight, how Hunger Games ushered in the dystopian age, etc.
That’s not to say all of the books that followed those trends were bad, or even overly similar. Certainly it would be unfair to say that Hunger Games started a new kind of fiction - teen dystopias existed for a while before then (i.e. one of its inspirations, Battle Royale).
The assumption that any literary trend has to be 1. New and 2. Overwhelmingly bad seems to plague discussions of ‘sad girl books’ as much as it did paranormal romance back in the day.
Thank you for writing this! My essay collection was once negatively reviewed (alongside Jia Tolentino's) as an example of "cool girl" nonfiction. It was so demeaning and frustrating to be dismissed as a "cool girl" - all posture, no substance.
I resonate with this so much. I wish we would just let people read what they want to read, and stop trying to make it more than it is. Lumping all “sad girl” books together just feels like a big generalization trying to minimize the validity of our reading choices, much in the way that romance readers are mocked for reading only “fluffy” books. I read a lot, and I read in a variety of genres, but ultimately what I’m looking for is to enjoy or get something out of what I’m reading. Sometimes that’s a classic, sometimes it’s a romcom, sometimes it’s lit-fic!
Well written and thought provoking as always 🤍