i think there are two conversations here. 1. is your opinion on the book valid if you do not belong to the target audience? and 2. how much is your like/dislike of the book based on you being the target audience?

1. is your opinion valid if you are not the target audience? yes and no. you certainly have the right to an opinion. however, that opinion might be uniformed. for example, you think a certain book makes no sense, but it makes no sense to you because you do not get the references. someone form the target audience would get all the 80s trivia references and think it is great, or not but at the very least it would not be nonsense to them.

2. you don't like the book, is it because you are not the target audience? there is a book i read recently that was very violent. i did not enjoy it, because of the violence and other reasons, but the target audience (some) said the book was very cathartic and while it was unnecessarily violent it scratched a certain itch. would i have enjoyed the book more if i was the target audience? maybe, but it is something i will never find out.

people's opinions on stuff are not gospel. yours should not be discounted because you do not belong to the target audience, but neither should you feel that your opinion is the only valid one.

As with a lot of things: it depends. This definitely happens, but sometimes people really do miss the point about what makes something special. Call Me By Your Name is special because it’s a romance between two men where the story still somehow isn’t about that. I had someone dismiss the story (the film, but that doesn’t really matter) because “if it were a man and a woman, no one would bat an eye at this movie.” Sure, maybe, but that’s completely missing why people responded to this particular story. So in this example, the criticism really does come from just not understanding it, which may very well stem from the critic in this case being a straight man.

That doesn’t mean there aren’t valid criticisms that can be directed at CMBYN.

Though Miller’s Circe agreed with you about immortality, which is why she made the choice she did at the end. I liked Circe better than SOA precisely because I loved its exploration of the distinctive weight and meanings that mortality gives to human life.

Fr

Omg SoA was heart wrenching.

soa was my book of the year, even though it's only march. gonna be very hard for any other book to beat that spot tbh. it was just beautifully written and i agree the writing style was just it for me. i literally read soa in a day and then immediately reread it. im sad its over but im gonna read circe this year, and i wanna try to really complete the iliad (even tho ive tried and its HARD)

I completely agree!

Enjoy Circe. It's one of my all-time favorite books.

I am on the waitlist for SoA and waiting as patiently as I can. I picked up Circe after a friend recommended it. I couldn't believe how much i loved that book. It is so out of my normal genre and style. I read it. Then I read it again. Then I listened on audiobook. I hope you enjoy Circe as much as I did. I hope I enjoy SoA as much as you did!

Super crazy curious now. So this guy thought a perceived gender divide prevented to from 'getting' this classic Sci Fi book?

I haven't read Song of Achilles yet, but Circe absolutely wreaked me. Such a gorgeously written book.

I actually went back to my Goodreads to try to find it but I was on a bit of a classic sci-fi bender at the time so the majority fit the bill I'm trying to think of anything more specific about the plot other than how bewildered it left me

Yes, the relatability of something does not depend on the gender or race of characters, but in the ability of the author to make them emulate real human emotions.

Aye, that's the size if it. Good intentions or not, at the end of the day, a shitty book is just a shitty book.

I think sometimes people don't distinguish between subjective and objective criticism. So sometimes people subjectively don't like something and so they assume it has absolutely nothing to offer anyone. And then similarly sometimes something appeals to someone's subjective tastes and then they decide that anyone else looking at it MUST have the same reaction because any other reaction is somehow threatening to your ability to feel positively about it. So like, someone should be able to read a book, and it doesn't relate to them at all on any level, not one of their most exciting or stimulating reading experiences, but still acknowledge that it's well written. And vice versa, someone should be able to read a book and it blows their mind, is a window into their soul, changed their life, but still acknowledge yeah you know, issues here or there that might be more significant to a reader not having the same emotional response I am.
But you know, for a culture so obsessed with how complex identity is, we're not great at engaging with any kind of duality

Oh man, now I'm super curious about what the book in question might be...?

[removed]

Exactly this. I'd hold up Chinua Achebe's Things Fall Apart as an example of a book that's especially impressive in this regard.

The ideas woven into the story are universally accessible, so anyone who reads it can "get" what it's about, and it accomplishes this while still remaining an authentic expression of the author's lived experiences.

No plain text spoilers allowed. Please use the format below and reply to this comment once you've made the edit, to have your comment reinstated.

Place >! !< around the text you wish to hide. You will need to do this for each new paragraph. Like this:

>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<

Click to reveal spoiler.

>!The Wolf ate Grandma!<

I meant more along the feeling like the earth was under your feet. There was more attention to flora and fauna, more of it feeling posited in the real world.

I liked the book. I had never really placed close attention to Circe in mythology, didn't know she was the daughter of a Titan or a nymph.

After watching The Eternals, I now picture Circe as Sersi. :)

Same with acting now, you can’t pretend to be someone your not.

Haha yes! I was not male and as such not clever enough to get the book in question apparently. Needless to say that person is very very single. Fairly sure the author in question wasn't on speaking terms with very many women either...

That's a very good response, thank you. I get what you mean about if a book has resonated with a number of people it must be doing something right. I should have stressed- and might edit- in my original question is the importance of the fundamental writing itself- the structure, composition, language used, research of the subject matter etc rather than the plot itself. I suppose popularity itself if a win, if it gets people fired up about something.

That said, my comment regarding the greater importance of strong writing for books on 'worthy' subjects comes from a couple I've read that tackle tough, emotive, controversial subject matter, but are written so poorly and researched so badly all I can think is "these authors are charlatans who got cut a book deal purely because of the subject matter". To me this seems like the most shameless of scams and does not give the subject the justice it deserves.

I think a good book will be relatable even if the reader has no shared or relevant experience. So maybe it's just a shitty book?

The idea that white men only possess the capacity to understand what it’s like to be a white man and nothing else. Whilst every other person on the planet seems capable of understanding others plight has always been puzzling to me.