The only thing anyone should feel ashamed of reading and enjoying is content that is racist or otherwise discriminatory and debasing to fellow human beings.
Mr. McGrath, when my son switched from Montessori school to a public elementary school, he was horrified to learn that his new school had a reading program where students received "points" for reading books. An avid reader, he said, "I will not read for points." I told him to read the minimum to get an A, and then opt out and go back to reading as usual. He discovered that Little Women was worth a whopping 64 points! He immediately checked it out of the school library. When his buddies heard why, they all got copies! All the boys were reading Little Women! The librarian loved telling this story.
1
No. The shame is not reading.
I loathed The Goldfinch. Should I be ashamed of that? I wouldn't be caught dead reading most of the books on the best seller lists but I don't think that many of them are embarrassing, simply not to my taste. In my salad days I would try to finish every book I started. Now I am more abrupt.
I more ashamed of the junky web reading habits I've developed. Celebrity tittle-tattle, movie industry fanboy stuff, over-the-top reactionary political blogs and, well, other esoterica I'm just too ashamed to admit. Amusing and inexcusable diversions good for procrastinating and wasting time. Pure digital slumming. Never mind junky books: the next frontier is web habits we don't want to cop to.
2
These essays presuppose that people read for pleasure and, sadly, most I meet do not. They "don't have time" for books and either sometimes read magazines or want to relax with Facebook at the end of the day.
It's unfair to believe someone should feel "shame," but I wish more people enjoyed books and learning. And I'll go further to say that reading *only* trash (poorly-written genre fiction, e.g.), another category I hear, does nothing for a person's brain.
It's unfair to believe someone should feel "shame," but I wish more people enjoyed books and learning. And I'll go further to say that reading *only* trash (poorly-written genre fiction, e.g.), another category I hear, does nothing for a person's brain.
2
It's more a question, I think, of "Is there anything you like to read that you are ashamed of?" I think we're ashamed of liking things that others don't; it means something about us. I don't like judgmental people, so I tend not to converse with them, and wouldn't value their opinions.
I have a friend who, when I ask what she's reading, always says, "trash". Finally I said, "What's the best trash you've read recently?" And she was happy to tell me. I've had lots of recommendations from her; books that I've really enjoyed. It makes me sad that she feels the need to denigrate her tastes in advance.
I usually read according to the mood that I'm in, so I often have a few books going. Sometimes I'm in the mood for genre fiction, sometimes something more serious. I wouldn't finish a book I didn't like. I'm an equal opportunity reader.
I have a friend who, when I ask what she's reading, always says, "trash". Finally I said, "What's the best trash you've read recently?" And she was happy to tell me. I've had lots of recommendations from her; books that I've really enjoyed. It makes me sad that she feels the need to denigrate her tastes in advance.
I usually read according to the mood that I'm in, so I often have a few books going. Sometimes I'm in the mood for genre fiction, sometimes something more serious. I wouldn't finish a book I didn't like. I'm an equal opportunity reader.
4
I used to finish every book I started, just because I was stubborn and didn't want to admit I'd made a poor choice. Ha! Now I vote with my own opinion....if I lose interest, I close the book and look for another....I read for enjoyment, and I read everything, and I still love how an author, fiction or nonfiction, touches my soul with their words!
1
One book which fits this category is The Bible. It is touted as undisputed fact, while in truth it is old word-of-mouth accounts, put into folk-tale status and finally into writing hundreds of years after the so-called events took place. Yet every word, every phrase is taken as fact. How gullible we are..........
What a stupid argument. Well, maybe you don't want to be caught reading Mein Kampf, but give me a 4th rate Star Trek novelization over anything Updike or Cheever wrote any day. I want to be depressed, I will look at my retirement savings, thank you very much.
3
Girl With the Dragon Tattoo. Dreck. Never was able to finish it and embarrassed for trying.
O.K. I'll admit it. I read Love Story when I was in my 20's. I vowed never to read anything as sappy again and I never have. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
3
I must say that I find Charles McGrath's understanding of shame as mere species of being "other-directed" profoundly shallow - and how does one measure that?! True shame can involve our deepest regions, which is why we can have these profound phisiological reactions when we feel ashamed.
"Peyton Place" by Grace Metalious was a truly shame-inducing book. Its most immortal line was: "who needs bathing suits?"
1
I suppose I could dig up a little shame when I think back on all the Sidney Sheldon novels I raced through as a teenager, not to mention the way we passed around a single dog-eared copy of "Valley of the Dolls" in the sixth grade. How else could teens learn about sex back then except through embarrassingly salacious books? There's a time and place for most books. Well, that is, with the exception of ghostwritten celebrity bios.........
1
I'm more concerned that people are not reading at all and are depending on just rumored media and edited video content only in their world. Who cares what it is - read a book. The more you read the more you know.
6
I'm not ashamed of the books I've read. I'm ashamed of the books I have NOT read yet.
15
There will always be books worth reading that you haven't read yet (and will die not having read). Of the making of many books there is no end, and much learning increaseth only sorrow.
1
The two books that all adolescent, American males have read are Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. The one has an fantastically absurd plot, filled with ridiculously cartoonish characters and will stunt the readers' intellectual development for the rest of their lives. And the other one has hobbits.
11
Perfect!
I can't imagine being ashamed of reading any published work. Unless, of course, it's a book so bad that the only shame is in finishing it.
2
Anyone on here old enough to remember Mickey Spillane?
4
"[Bottom-up shame] is the shame from within, the shame that comes stealing with a slow, cindery sensation from the back of your brain."
Sorry, I don't get it. What do you mean by "bottom-up shame"? I have no idea.
Sorry, I don't get it. What do you mean by "bottom-up shame"? I have no idea.
1
The Turner Diaries. Anything by Bill O'Reilly or Dr. Phil. And Highlights for Children unless you're under 10 or in a dentist's office.
6
I'm 54 years old and I like Highlights for Children. And I'm not ashamed.
8
Neither of these answers spoke to me in any way.
My own answer is that I do feel shame at having read certain kinds of works. Some of these works are 'classics' but express ideas and opinions which are morally offensive.
I feel this especially in regard to antisemitic works. Is it right to take a certain aesthetic pleasure in reading a vicious anti- Semite like Celine or Pound? I have been ashamed of reading certain works even when they were on a syllabus and required for a course.
There are other kinds of reading I have found shameful. These might be works in the canon which I felt I should understand but which also outraged my moral sense.
So I believe Shame is not simply a permitted response but a necessary one in some cases.
Does this mean it is no shame to be ashamed?
I don't think so.
There are times when it is simply right to be ashamed because this reflects a true understanding that we are doing something not quite alright.
My own answer is that I do feel shame at having read certain kinds of works. Some of these works are 'classics' but express ideas and opinions which are morally offensive.
I feel this especially in regard to antisemitic works. Is it right to take a certain aesthetic pleasure in reading a vicious anti- Semite like Celine or Pound? I have been ashamed of reading certain works even when they were on a syllabus and required for a course.
There are other kinds of reading I have found shameful. These might be works in the canon which I felt I should understand but which also outraged my moral sense.
So I believe Shame is not simply a permitted response but a necessary one in some cases.
Does this mean it is no shame to be ashamed?
I don't think so.
There are times when it is simply right to be ashamed because this reflects a true understanding that we are doing something not quite alright.
2
Yawn. More proof of the dumbing down of America. Instead of being moved by grand epics, we're celebrating the mythology of comic books and the eroticism of 99-cent porn.
The fact that this populist tripe is being lauded by the Times signals to me that the Grey Lady is suffering from dementia.
The fact that this populist tripe is being lauded by the Times signals to me that the Grey Lady is suffering from dementia.
7
Excuse me but comic books are one of the ways I learnt English when I came to this country from France at the age of 9. The combination of word and image works well to this end, as do movies with subtitles. In France I read "Mickey Mousse"(sic) and Tintin. Many comics are excellently drawn and have imaginative often humorous, sardonic content. It is a legitimate art form. Even the old classics like "Dondi" and "Little Orphan Annie" had something of value to import. Of course some of them are better than others but just because something is popular doesn't automatically categorize it as "low brow" or dumb. As far as porn--whether 99 cent or 99 and plus dollars no one reads or consumes it for intellectual edification. It addresses other needs which all of us have.
I've felt anger at myself for wasting time reading popular best sellers but I've never experienced shame for reading anything. I think anger is how you rebuke yourself & shame is how you react to what others might think. Ain't in my genome.
4
I am not ashamed of reading anything, One day Tolstoi another I am watching Game of Thrones or even Wheel of Fortune. I could not stand Goldfinch and could not wait to give it away. I tried to read 50 Shades but couldn't. I walked out on the movie. Yet I liked Gone Girl. I liked reading it. Often I go to a bookstore and look at the best sellers to see why they are best sellers. I cannot read them. I still eat up Russian writers. Not because I think they are literary but because they are good. Roth is the same.
4
You can't sing at the highest note all the time, so there's really nothing to be ashamed of if you take a break and read something trashy. I can't imagine being ashamed of a particular book, except something self-helpy and with a revealing title like "how to stop being a loser", but I would be ashamed of a poorly stocked library/bookshelf. That'd be like something finding your cheesy-pop albums in your living room; let them shelter in the veiled rooms of your iPod.
1
Yes - Hide the DaVinci Code. I read it all the way through and had to bathe afterward. Whenever I saw someone reading it, I would yell, "She's buried in the Louvre - now throw that away and go get a real book."
5
Fifty Shades of Grey: publicly or privately. just the concept is offensive.
8
Really enjoyed these! I had a regular babysitting gig in my Manhattan apt. building when I was in middle school -- found "Coffee Tea or Me" hidden behind the other books on the shelf. Back when stewardesses were a thing. Still remember both the shame and the thrill of sneaking it out to read after the parents had gone and the baby was asleep...reading with one ear out of the sighing sound of the elevator stopping on that floor...funny.
7
In my mid-sixties baby@-sitting years, it was "marriage manuals" we looked for when the kids were asleep. Occasionally there were sexy novels, but every set of parents seemed to have one of those manuals on the bokshelf.
I read The National Enquirer and so do you.
4
I'm never embarrassed about anything I read. I READ. How many people do that anymore? I've read everything from Proust to Star Trek novels. Hey, I've read Torchwood novels. I'll read anything, pretty much and I'm not ashamed for anyone to know it.
I do use my kindle for anything disposable so it might appear that way. It's not because I care if anyone sees me reading it, it's because I don't want to kill a tree for something that I'll never read again.
Ah, I lied. I don't read pop fiction. Those things you pick up at the airport that EVERYONE is reading. Not because I'm embarrassed but because I've learned over the years I rarely finish them and if I do I often don't like them.
I do use my kindle for anything disposable so it might appear that way. It's not because I care if anyone sees me reading it, it's because I don't want to kill a tree for something that I'll never read again.
Ah, I lied. I don't read pop fiction. Those things you pick up at the airport that EVERYONE is reading. Not because I'm embarrassed but because I've learned over the years I rarely finish them and if I do I often don't like them.
5
I read a lot too. Good thing I am old (50s) and ergo, raised in the era long before internet and 24/7 TV and audiobooks. Reading is what I do. And because I was a very voracious reader as a child, and reading far above my grade level, I pretty much read anything. I had no discrimination whatsoever as a child -- I read comic books and Greek mythology. I read the Encyclopedia and I read supermarket tabloids. I adored Mad magazine, but I also sought out and read Shakespeare on my own, years before it was required in school. I've read porn (BO-ring) and I've read political manifestos and sci fi fan fiction -- all with equal interest.
I must be pretty low-brow because I do not give a rat's patoot what anybody else thinks about what I read.
I must be pretty low-brow because I do not give a rat's patoot what anybody else thinks about what I read.
1
Well, shame is perhaps the wrong term but disgust at the poor writing and, consequently, poor tastes of folks reading such. And not wanting to be grouped with them. I was once loaned a book by Robert James Waller and effectively had to read it because the friend would ask. Mercifully, it was short. Likewise, I think what is trash (I know, judgmental) appears interesting to many as a read in a second or third language. I was always astounded by the tastes of my European friends when I say Danielle Steele or Ira Levin or, fill in the blank. So, if there is to be shame, it is indulging in low lit. One does not have to read for any uplifting or educational reason but one should not spend time with poor quality writing.
3
Badly written books. Books whose grammar I want to correct because the errors reveal only the author's ignorance. Predictable books that need only a confirming glance to slot sequences of sentences into place.
4
As far as feeling negative reactions to what I read, I'm much more sensitive to being sneered at as pretentious for reading high brow material. No one would give me a second glance reading a graphic novel on the subway, and when people ask me what I've been reading lately, they mean genre fiction. The mention of something like a philosophy work like Anthony Steinbock's excellent _Home and Beyond: Generative Phenomenology after Husserl_ is going to alienate people rather fast and be more likely to generate hostility than any trash novel in my experience. If I'm shamed into anything, it's to reply with fantasy or scifi novels when asked what I'm reading, or hold my peace.
1
Well, ain't that America.
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'.”
Isaac Asimov
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'.”
Isaac Asimov
6
While I am not ashamed of reading Ayn Rand...as a dumb teenager...and finding it all dramatic and inspiring and romantic and so forth, I do think that if I STILL liked it, I should be desperately ashamed. Beyond that - all reading is wonderful. As a teacher, I can attest that I can tell the difference between readers and non-readers by the quality of their writing - and if Confessions of a Shopaholic (odious) is what gets them there, I have no judgment. (Well, only a little.)
9
I love "high" literature as well as odds and ends like books based on video games, film novelizations, science fiction, mystery, extreme horror fiction, and even books based on board games. I've yet to try romance, but I'm tempted just to see what so many people read.
That said, a lot of the odds and ends I've read are crap. Usually it's like watching television in between reading works by Willa Cather and John Cheever.
That said, a lot of the odds and ends I've read are crap. Usually it's like watching television in between reading works by Willa Cather and John Cheever.
2
I really enjoyed these essays! Lots of fun and smarts. I've only been ashamed to have read one book and that was due to my age. At 14 I was renowned for reading -- mostly intelligent books in philosophy, science and history. One summer I was sent to stay with my older married sister for two weeks. She and her husband both worked so I was bored and had a lot of time on my hands. Naturally I looked around their apartment and found under an old pile of cheap movie magazines in a dusty corner -- ta da! -- "Studs Lonigan!" Talk about a first! I was so ashamed of myself for reading it that I hid it under the mattress of my bed and only read it when they were gone. The sex, the violence, the dark emotions, the raw lowlife events and characters almost undid me. Yeah, I finished the book, and now count it as part of what helped me untie my Ohio farm girl naiveté and better prepare me for adult living. It didn't corrupt me. People have that idea wrong. I don't think you can be corrupted by a book unless the rotten seed is already growing inside you. But it did allow me to display some sophistication when -- ha ha --"Peyton Place" made the rounds of our girl's dorm.
8
What a strange idea! Embarassed about reading a book. I suppose reading hard core porn in public might fit, but even that can be informative. For example, I don't think anything new has been invented for more that 2000 years. Now, I have been embarased about NOT reading a book. What books should we have read but did not.
1
"Society" says that half the books I read are "shameful".
1
I don't think "high-brow" or "low-brow" is the only discussion. Personal shame from reading something that is morally bankrupt is real and shouldn't be doused or brushed away. Our conscience needs to function; I doubt we would encourage someone whose idea of "reading" is delving into descriptions of incest or juvenile pornography not to feel shame. But perhaps that's no longer an enlightened view....
3
I dunno. I'd be less ashamed of reading Harry Potter than Lolita. But that's just me.
I'm not ashamed of anything I read. But that doesn't mean I read just anything in public. I don't read anything that I'm not interested in discussing with some curious stranger who happens to be sitting next to me.
1
Atlas Shrugged, if you read it twice.
19
Jinx! I submitted nearly the same comment (with less "pith"). Ha!
The only books I've really hidden from sight in public were a couple of Charlie Chan and Fu-Manchu novels that I was reading on the subway. And it probably wasn't at all necessary. While I often notice what other people are reading in public, I'm really never judgmental about that person's choice. I was bemused by the number of adults I used to see reading Harry Potter books. I read them all aloud to my son and thought they were poorly written and actually rather unimaginative. But I never had a problem with any individual's choice to read them. Reading a "low-brow" book is a higher endeavor than watching any movie or TV show, in my opinion.
3
As a Star Trek fan from 1966 (present at the creation if you will), I will say that except for the original paperback adaptations of the episodes published by James Blish, there is no case to be made for Star Trek novelisations. Period, paragraph, new thought. Yes, you should be ashamed of reading them. Go watch the original episodes instead.
Beyond that, however ...
I read Stephen King and EC comics. Golden Age Wonder Woman, Omaha the Cat Dancer, and similar not-quite-porn comics. Books on serial killers and psychopaths interest me. Sometime this year I may read The Fountainhead simply because I've never read it.
Perhaps the question relates to last week's question about pleasure in reading. Trashy tastes may be embarrassing, but if you're going to read it, read without apology.
Non, je ne regrette rien! I apologise for nothing; and like Andrew Undershaft's immediate predecessor in Major Barbara, I chalk upon the wall as my motto: Unashamed.
(A taste for Hemingway or Kerouac, now ... that, one might apologise for. Not all junk is lowbrow; it's the 'literary' rubbish that bugs me. Give me good, honest, unpretentious, unashamed junk any day. Unless it's a Star Trek paperback novelisation. No excuse for those.)
Beyond that, however ...
I read Stephen King and EC comics. Golden Age Wonder Woman, Omaha the Cat Dancer, and similar not-quite-porn comics. Books on serial killers and psychopaths interest me. Sometime this year I may read The Fountainhead simply because I've never read it.
Perhaps the question relates to last week's question about pleasure in reading. Trashy tastes may be embarrassing, but if you're going to read it, read without apology.
Non, je ne regrette rien! I apologise for nothing; and like Andrew Undershaft's immediate predecessor in Major Barbara, I chalk upon the wall as my motto: Unashamed.
(A taste for Hemingway or Kerouac, now ... that, one might apologise for. Not all junk is lowbrow; it's the 'literary' rubbish that bugs me. Give me good, honest, unpretentious, unashamed junk any day. Unless it's a Star Trek paperback novelisation. No excuse for those.)
1
"Spock Must Die!" (Blish, 1970) should receive a pardon.
OK, you got me. I do pretty much despise Star Trek novelizations. I have read some -- read some fan fic (in the era before decent publishers would have EVER put it into print -- they were mimeographed back then!) -- and yes, read the James Blish novelizations. (They are pretty bad too.) However, I can't say I am ashamed of having read them. Just disliking something doesn't make me feel ashamed. I read "50 Shades of Grey" and thought it was tripe, but I was not remotely embarrassed to be seeing carrying it around.
You absolutely should read "The Fountainhead" -- it is very entertaining -- but first you must utterly forget how you feel about politics or Randian economic discussions or that Ms. Rand herself went on SS in late life. Just cross that out of your mind, and read it as if you had no idea who wrote it. That's truly the best way. I read it in my early teens, when there was nothing very controversial about Ayn Rand, because my mother loved the film version with Gary Cooper.
You absolutely should read "The Fountainhead" -- it is very entertaining -- but first you must utterly forget how you feel about politics or Randian economic discussions or that Ms. Rand herself went on SS in late life. Just cross that out of your mind, and read it as if you had no idea who wrote it. That's truly the best way. I read it in my early teens, when there was nothing very controversial about Ayn Rand, because my mother loved the film version with Gary Cooper.
Of course, it being the New York Times, I can't help but laugh that both essays are basically about the shame of enjoying "low-brow" books.
For myself, I used to read true-crime paperbacks and once read one about a famous LA serial killer. The passages relating the murders were so graphic, I set the book aside, ashamed to be reading them.
More prosaically, I remember being embarrassed on the train reading Hijuelos's Mambo Kings, which included many graphic (and thoroughly enjoyable) memories of the narrator's sexual exploits! I used to hide the cover and hunch over the pages, so silly was I in my younger years.
For myself, I used to read true-crime paperbacks and once read one about a famous LA serial killer. The passages relating the murders were so graphic, I set the book aside, ashamed to be reading them.
More prosaically, I remember being embarrassed on the train reading Hijuelos's Mambo Kings, which included many graphic (and thoroughly enjoyable) memories of the narrator's sexual exploits! I used to hide the cover and hunch over the pages, so silly was I in my younger years.
3
I was ashamed to read *In The Cut* because it tried too hard. I was once on a train with my favorite 'on the train' book, *Philosopher's Holiday*. A man perched next to me, looked over at what I was holding, and sneered. I sat next to a fellow with a thick typescript on his lap and a blue pencil in his hand, striking out para after para and labeling each one "TRITE." (Not for the faint-of-heart!) It could be argued that no reading is worthless: a Classicist recently published an article about an erotic image, of which one aspect was (to me, conspicuously) not in evidence. I cited to him an example from the hot novel of my youth, *The Amboy Dukes*. He assures me he will mention it in his next article. Nothing new under the sun; it's all a matter of manner.
1
I have definitely recoiled from some books as too violent and graphic (not sexually, I mean horrific mayhem). Books about serial killers, and I think the novel you refer to is the one about the Black Dahlia. But usually I can get by with skimming or skipping pages. One exception is violence against animals: I cannot tolerate it in a book or movie. If it looks like some dog or cat is going to be tortured, that's it -- I slam the book shut and don't care how it turns out (or turn off the DVD player).
But we are talking about shame here, not a queasy stomach or emotional distraught. And I think the point here is about books that are "too low brow" and which we are embarrassed to be judged as low class or non-intellectual for reading them. And on that count, I clearly am shameless. I quite honestly do not care what people think of my reading material.
But we are talking about shame here, not a queasy stomach or emotional distraught. And I think the point here is about books that are "too low brow" and which we are embarrassed to be judged as low class or non-intellectual for reading them. And on that count, I clearly am shameless. I quite honestly do not care what people think of my reading material.