/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4209278]

your bookerfu

[Anonymous No.4209292]

>>4209278

[Anonymous No.4209295]

A lot of people are saying the book is shit though.

[Anonymous No.4209328]

>>4209278
>Becomes 5th woman in 10 years to win Booker
>Responds by bitching about misogyny

She actually thought it was legit to crit people for asking her how she 'felt' instead of what she 'thought'. Somebody that dumb couldn't write a decent book - I mean it's normal to ask people what they feel after an emotional event.

But in her mind:
>"Sir, what do you think about winning the Oscar for best actor in the history of film'

[Anonymous No.4209349]

>>4209295
Fairly standard for any major book prize winner. No book will be beloved by everyone, and winning such a major prize leads to many more people reading it than would normally happen. Statistically a number of them just won't like it.

[Anonymous No.4209362]

>>4209349
Nonsense. The majority of people believe what they are told by opinion makers, and people who're into lit can be worse than most in this regard. Go look at any half baked piece of literature and you'll see the plebs falling over themselves to hand it 5 or 4 star ratings.

There are some who try establish themselves as iconoclasts by reflexively dissing anything that receives critical acclaim, but they are not in the majority.

[Anonymous No.4209383]

>>4209362
>>4209362
>he majority of people believe what they are told by opinion makers
>but not me
>debate me
>I am euphoric

[Anonymous No.4209392]

>>4209383
No I don't believe what opinion makers tell me, a trait I share in common with anyone with some capacity for independent thought. I was pointing out that winning prizes does not load people against the book in question but the opposite - take a look at any Amazon or Goodreads review page for a critically acclaimed book.

>you must like what I have been told to like or you are pretentious