i am not on booktok and i don’t exactly know what the current discourse is, however anti-intellectualism is not being against intellectualism the philosophy. it refers to being against intellectual pursuits, academic or personal, and some anti-intellectuals even disregard higher education as pointless completely. in the literary world, i assume people use it to describe being disinterested in and/or dismissive of complex or “deep” texts. i believe your annoyance is due to this misunderstanding of the concept.
@@yue_river Thank you for your response! Anti-intellectualism is all of the things that you mentioned. However, it is also a direct response to the rise of intellectualism. I’m not quite sure how you think there is a disconnect between these philosophies? My annoyance is due to the fact that there is no evidence to support the jargon that they are using to defend their “lack of criticism” claim. Plus, it’s dumb. It’s one thing to discuss something with others who are approaching a work of literature from the same angle as you. However, I take issue with people telling others that they should read/discuss books in a way that they deem “valid”. Plus, people read & discuss books for a variety of reasons. Making it more serious than it is and belittling others who don’t read for the same reasons that you do? That’s also dumb. (Not you specifically, just a general statement)
I agree to this. My only problem with booktok is the horrible "romance" books being decorated with cutesy covers and young children reading those because the booktok books are sometimes right next to teens/ya shelves. But thats just me. Read what you want and if you enjoy it, thats good. Reading decreases stress and depression and helps build empathy towards others no matter the genre.
@@c.lstrife Oh I absolutely agree with you! It’s great that more young people are reading but the cartoon covers/flower covers are so misleading. I also think that some books are being marketed in a way that appeals to a younger audience yet has some pretty mature themes. “Reading decreases stress & depression”?! Would you mind telling my brain that? She hasn’t quite got the memo🤣🤣
Teens have been reading smutty books since I was in school (late 80s) and "Clan of the Cave Bear" (and its much, much more detailed, sequels) were decidedly well thumbed and bent in the corresponding places. It's not a modern trend. It's the dark romances that worry me a more - the ones that romanticize abusive relationships, but they rarely have cutesy covers.
@@lemurkat That's why I said "romance" books. I don't object to teens reading smut, that's not the argument I made, it's the "romance" books that are being published with cutesy covers and it being right next to the YA as a guise that it's a "cutesy romance" books when it's anything but, it's misleading and targeting younger teen audiences when the demographic is meant for rolder teens/adults. When I say "romance" books that includes dark romance as well as ones with cute covers too.
I'm currently writing a thesis on anti-intellectualism, and this video is a great part of my research! Even though I disagree overall with your opinions, its always great to have these discussions. :D I think what you refer to at the beginning with the terminology discourse is 'ethical intellectualism', which is linked to Stoicism. Basically, the belief that objective morality is found via reason alone. Anti-intellectualism in a sociological case refers to disregard or even distrust of intellectual pursuits and proponents of them . For example, we see this in unschooling in the US - a distrust of teachers and the public school system at large. This form of anti-intellectualism has nothing to do with the Socratic kind. I agree with your points about the damaging effects of short-form content on how people perceive books. Yet, it's vital to note that by even having books on these platforms, they will inevitably follow a trend cycle and overconsumption. Short-form platforms encourage spending to keep users interacting, and that includes books. How else can Booktok users fit in with their fellows without purchasing a book itself? (Not bearing in mind Ebooks, though their accessibility is another question!). Then, the algorithm continues recommending books for users to buy, and the cycle continues. Consequently, the success of certain books pushes publishers to follow. This dilutes the industry dramatically, with the same sorts of books being churned out at higher rates than others. In a sense, this is akin to fast fashion, not because of the conditions faced by workers, but in the speed at which the industry is forced to keep up with the trend cycle, diluting and diluting the product to keep consumers just enough in their comfort zone to continue purchasing. Anyway - enough of my rambling! I just really care about books. Would love to have more of a discussion!! Love from UK
👏👏 absolutely books and authors shouldn't be above criticism or analysis and readers shouldn't feel personally attacked on differences of opinion. But first and foremost, I read stories for fun! Of course emotion is going to be involved because a great story touches your emotions. Doesn't matter if the stories are classic or erotic or in-between. And yes non fiction has a different set of parameters than fiction. Great perspective Jo!
I've never been on Booktok. As far as I have ever heard, anything to do with it is toxic. So, I think when people are asking for more objective criticism, I think what they might be getting at is the difference between a professional book review and an amateur book reaction. A professional reviewer can have some emotional detachment and say, "Regardless of whether i personally liked this book, here's whether it's worth your time." A book reaction, especially to fiction, probably talks about the reader's emotional response to the book. Maybe some people don't know that they want to watch Steve Donoughue's how to videos on writing reviews so they can try it.
@@TimeTravelReads I appreciate the distinction between reaction & review. I think that BookTok tends to lean more on the reaction side of the spectrum due to the nature of the app. Like I said in the video, short form content tends to be more punchy & expressive in comparison to long form content. I do think that both reaction & review should have valid space when it comes to talking about books.
I work retail in the book industry and I'd have to say: Thank goodness for BookTok. Young folks are reading again! They're discovering books! And sure, some are crap, but who gives a damn? If they're enjoying the experience, let them. Let's not gatekeep reading. Some of us just want to sink into a simple, uncomplicated world when we don't have to think too much, or worry too deeply. The world is anxious and frightening enough... let us have our escapism. Also... there are some gems in there too. Although, I will add that I get my kicks watching/listening to "book burns" on RUclips. The most fun way to experience a book I probably won't have time (or inclination) to read, is to listen to someone be snarky about it. Thanks to that, I'm now familiar with a goodly proportion of Colleen Hoover books.
Let’s 👏🏼 not👏🏼 gatekeep👏🏼 reading👏🏼 Also, I commend you for your dedication to the Colleen craziness lol. I saw that one quote online where the couple was talking about their sons big balls and I tapped out on CoHo😂
I think also what's getting lost in these anti-intellectualism discussions is the fact that a lot of book content creators are trying to review books without providing spoilers. So without that...what does that leave? Our "vibes". Our personal feelings and reactions to the books that we read. It's very difficult to make spoiler-free reviews that talk about the book based on literary critique.
What I've found to be a good strategy is to start with a very long list of great books and then read them one or two a year or whenever you're tired of what's current. Also, it may help to develop a shared space where you can talk to others about what you've already read and what you like. That way there's an incentive toward civility. Anyway, keep reading and most of all, Enjoy!
equating fast fashion with buying a ton of books is also so dumb because it completely misses the point of why fast fashion is harmful and bad. Buying a bunch of clothes is not bad or good, its morally neutral. The bad thing is buying tons of clothes produced by slave labor, buying clothes made of synthetic materials that wont decompose and then throwing them away to get a bunch more clothes. Books are made of paper and are therefore decomposable and also people dont really get rid of books in general, let alone throw them away so the environmental impact is straight up not there.
I feel like the term “fast fashion” has been equated to “overconsumption” to the point where people don’t see the difference between the two. Of course, buying a lot of books for the “book haul aesthetic” can be considered overconsumption. But I agree that equating that to fast fashion is just bonkers to me.
I'm not even familiar with this. I have seen some young women saying there were "too many words" in a book and that they "only read dialogue". I would say that's just strange as opposed to "anti intellectual". Also, I dont think our opinion matters less when we are talking about nonfiction. Academia matters, too, or we would never innovate. Emotions actually need to be a part of intellectualism as well. My time in academia, in college, in graduate school, have been chock full of emotional reactions. Intellectualism is a hoax basically lol it's impossible for people not to be emotional about things. [Unless they're a very unfeeling person but even then...everyone feels something sometimes].
@@thehorrorwasforlove I love your view of this! I also JUST saw the video of the girl complaining about “too many words” so your comment was perfectly timed🤣 I agree, very strange.
Ehhh while I get where you’re coming from, and as much as I am a part of the “let people enjoy things” crowd to a certain extent, I don’t really agree. In terms of booktok and just general pop literature circles, I find that there is a certain level of dismissal of foundational work in literature and holding up newer things as “doing x better than y” (such as recently seeing someone say that Percy Jackson criticizes class better than Jane Austen?) even when completely nonsensical, or just deciding something isn’t worth engaging with if it’s metaphorical or allegorical in any way? There’s just this complete refusal to engage with anything more complex than YA or Colleen Hoover (which no hate to YA, they make good palette cleansers; can’t speak on Colleen Hoover because I have never read her but people around me have said she isn’t a particularly complex writer and that’s fine) because not everything is spelled right out on the surface that I would say is anti-intellectual.
@@sc6658 I definitely see where you’re coming from! Multiple comments have given me some things to think about on this subject. Thank you so much for watching & joining in the conversation!🥰😄
This reminds me of people saying, since I was a child that "You can absolutely find great fan fiction if you look hard enough" what they don't tell you, because they have terrible taste, there's actually like *two* for any fandom with more than 10,000 works. That you can find anyway, unless your brain is wired to a computer, and your subconscious is running the search in the background. And if you want a completed story that's not a oneshot, you'd probably be lucky to find one, in at least 100,000. Funny how when people want culture and society to change for the better they're heroes, fighting the good fight, speaking truth to power, and educating the masses, when those masses are other fans in pop-culture hangout zones the people who want to change the _quality_ of discourse are suddenly vain troublemakers, who need to get with the program and not upset the applecart... Makes me think of all the people who oppose capital punishment, but somehow believe unironically that the stupidest scene in any movie is when the hero refuses to kill the villain. One villain wreaks havoc, and suddenly everybody's Dirty Harry. Cognitive dissonance, it's a sad thing.
You delve enough into the intellectual side of things for long enough and you find that most intellectuals and academics and even the great writers are nothing except full of hot gas; not to mention their utter lack of a moral fiber, which just makes their intellect seem disingenuous, if we could call someone's intellect disingenuous. Most intellectuals are not very afforded to innovation and the desire to possibly be wrong - most of them just spout what they heard their equally unimpressive professors say, more often than not with tangents thrown in for "relatability", and more often than not with this side of an agenda (so much for our "liberal" humanities). It's all a forumla for a safe and secure intellectualism that results in nothing more than a constant back and forth that really goes nowhere; because we all respect a good debate, right? That is what we call the dialectic, or as a cynic might say "the sniffing of farts." Of course, this isn't to say I like booktok or most of booktube for that matter. But, if someone really wants an intellectual discussion, and if they are so smart - then they should know that online conversations are not the best way to do it. And if they are so wise, then they shouldn't expect young people on booktok, who haven't experienced more than a bad hair day, to give them an enlightening conversation. Fun? Yes. Engaging? Maybe. Enlightening? No. These young men and women are not cut out for that, at least not yet. But I do expect life will give them theirs in due time - and then maybe the wisdom of Seneca will not seem so distant. Eh, a bit of a rant. Haha. But enjoyed the vid.
@@scoutdarpy4465 This comment made me laugh multiple times! You also perfectly represented some of the thoughts I had while getting my English degree😅 “Hot gas” indeed, haha! Thanks for watching!!🥰
@@NotSoAverageJo It's kinda in line with the whole "reading makes you empathetic" garbage you hear the so called "sophisticated" people go on about. It doesn't take long in the humanities or university in general to see that most of these people aren't very empathetic. Anyways where does empathy lead us again? Right into the hands of a terrible, self-glamorizing character. Hell, I've seen some stuff where science has to tell us how empathetic we are. Lol.
@@scoutdarpy4465 Oh wow, I have NEVER heard someone argue against the “books make you more empathetic” thing! I definitely see your point here though. I’ve always interpreted that statement somewhere along the lines of “books give insight into experiences other than your own”. It doesn’t MAKE you empathetic but I think it opens the door. I also think that “empathy” is such a big, and often overinflated, word. I vastly prefer “understand”
@@NotSoAverageJo I may just be a bit too critical for my own good; but I have found that people often read all these stories and still ultimately fail to understand anything. Even the academics understand only insofar as they can acquire a formula. I've met people who don't really read but who get life and its people more than people who do. This was kinda the transcendentlist shtick from Emerson or Thoreau: to experience life first and occasionally read books. Of course I don't really follow this; but I do agree with what they said.
What an odd video. More than half the video is a self confessed straw argument. A good portion of the video is devoted to a watered down definition of "intellectualism" ironically devoid of nuance. You didn't define anti-intellectualism, which is definitionally distinct anyway. A not insignificant portion of the video concedes that the point you believe these people actually are making is valid, or at least has _some_ validity. "Not taking criticism well does not mean that they are anti-intellectualism!" Pretty much sums up this whole video, temperamentally, logically... and grammatically...
I’ve been watching a lot of these videos lately so I’m glad you made one, too. I truly think the people that are stans of this “booktok is anti intellectualism” argument are just haters of people that just like to read for fun, & haters of maybe “smut” or fantasy romance or whatever genres they think are silly and less valuable than whatever books they consider worth reading. It’s an elitist take. It’s judgmental against the people who read those types of books. Not all easy fun books are devoid of important themes and messages because it contains 🍆&🐱lmao. But even the ones that are really just book porn have value if they are bringing readers enjoyment and making them read in their free time. As a reader of everything from classics down to plotless smut and everything in between, I find sometimes I am reading to feel and learn something valuable and sometimes I’m just reading something fun and easy because I had a bad day and need a heathly escape. Readers find value in all types of writing, and it’s all valid. The world is such a sad and scary place irl so it baffles me that people are at eachothers necks over what is a good book or bad book, and what is or is not worthy of attention/hype. I don’t watch booktok but lately I’ve been tempted to start just to spite all the haters 😂
I also feel like people forget that just because we’re all “readers”, it doesn’t mean that we’re all the same! Idk why people can’t just let others read what they want in peace without having to add in their two cents. Some people read for fun, others read to learn, others read to analyze, and so on and so forth. Telling one group that they should conform to “your” way of reading is just dumb.
As someone who probably fits more into the "intellectual" camp than the "romantasy" camp, I'm baffled by the fighting. It feels like some young people decided that some people have to be the "smart" sisters, and others have to be the "fun" sisters, or something like that. Of course we need fun books. I also think we're in a dire time when it's really important for people to relearn the democratic value of lifelong learning. I guess that makes me a grumpy, judgemental person heading into middle age.
@@NotSoAverageJo But also, some of us are all of those type of readers, just at different times haha Like I said, I identify with both, just when I feel like it 😂
i am not on booktok and i don’t exactly know what the current discourse is, however anti-intellectualism is not being against intellectualism the philosophy. it refers to being against intellectual pursuits, academic or personal, and some anti-intellectuals even disregard higher education as pointless completely. in the literary world, i assume people use it to describe being disinterested in and/or dismissive of complex or “deep” texts. i believe your annoyance is due to this misunderstanding of the concept.
@@yue_river Thank you for your response! Anti-intellectualism is all of the things that you mentioned. However, it is also a direct response to the rise of intellectualism. I’m not quite sure how you think there is a disconnect between these philosophies?
My annoyance is due to the fact that there is no evidence to support the jargon that they are using to defend their “lack of criticism” claim. Plus, it’s dumb. It’s one thing to discuss something with others who are approaching a work of literature from the same angle as you. However, I take issue with people telling others that they should read/discuss books in a way that they deem “valid”. Plus, people read & discuss books for a variety of reasons. Making it more serious than it is and belittling others who don’t read for the same reasons that you do? That’s also dumb.
(Not you specifically, just a general statement)
I agree to this. My only problem with booktok is the horrible "romance" books being decorated with cutesy covers and young children reading those because the booktok books are sometimes right next to teens/ya shelves.
But thats just me. Read what you want and if you enjoy it, thats good. Reading decreases stress and depression and helps build empathy towards others no matter the genre.
@@c.lstrife Oh I absolutely agree with you! It’s great that more young people are reading but the cartoon covers/flower covers are so misleading. I also think that some books are being marketed in a way that appeals to a younger audience yet has some pretty mature themes.
“Reading decreases stress & depression”?! Would you mind telling my brain that? She hasn’t quite got the memo🤣🤣
Teens have been reading smutty books since I was in school (late 80s) and "Clan of the Cave Bear" (and its much, much more detailed, sequels) were decidedly well thumbed and bent in the corresponding places. It's not a modern trend. It's the dark romances that worry me a more - the ones that romanticize abusive relationships, but they rarely have cutesy covers.
@@lemurkat That's why I said "romance" books. I don't object to teens reading smut, that's not the argument I made, it's the "romance" books that are being published with cutesy covers and it being right next to the YA as a guise that it's a "cutesy romance" books when it's anything but, it's misleading and targeting younger teen audiences when the demographic is meant for rolder teens/adults.
When I say "romance" books that includes dark romance as well as ones with cute covers too.
Ah i thought the "romance" was indicating smut.
I'm currently writing a thesis on anti-intellectualism, and this video is a great part of my research! Even though I disagree overall with your opinions, its always great to have these discussions. :D
I think what you refer to at the beginning with the terminology discourse is 'ethical intellectualism', which is linked to Stoicism. Basically, the belief that objective morality is found via reason alone. Anti-intellectualism in a sociological case refers to disregard or even distrust of intellectual pursuits and proponents of them . For example, we see this in unschooling in the US - a distrust of teachers and the public school system at large. This form of anti-intellectualism has nothing to do with the Socratic kind.
I agree with your points about the damaging effects of short-form content on how people perceive books. Yet, it's vital to note that by even having books on these platforms, they will inevitably follow a trend cycle and overconsumption. Short-form platforms encourage spending to keep users interacting, and that includes books. How else can Booktok users fit in with their fellows without purchasing a book itself? (Not bearing in mind Ebooks, though their accessibility is another question!). Then, the algorithm continues recommending books for users to buy, and the cycle continues.
Consequently, the success of certain books pushes publishers to follow. This dilutes the industry dramatically, with the same sorts of books being churned out at higher rates than others. In a sense, this is akin to fast fashion, not because of the conditions faced by workers, but in the speed at which the industry is forced to keep up with the trend cycle, diluting and diluting the product to keep consumers just enough in their comfort zone to continue purchasing.
Anyway - enough of my rambling! I just really care about books. Would love to have more of a discussion!! Love from UK
👏👏 absolutely books and authors shouldn't be above criticism or analysis and readers shouldn't feel personally attacked on differences of opinion. But first and foremost, I read stories for fun! Of course emotion is going to be involved because a great story touches your emotions. Doesn't matter if the stories are classic or erotic or in-between.
And yes non fiction has a different set of parameters than fiction.
Great perspective Jo!
“A great story touches your emotions” I love this!!
I've never been on Booktok. As far as I have ever heard, anything to do with it is toxic. So, I think when people are asking for more objective criticism, I think what they might be getting at is the difference between a professional book review and an amateur book reaction. A professional reviewer can have some emotional detachment and say, "Regardless of whether i personally liked this book, here's whether it's worth your time." A book reaction, especially to fiction, probably talks about the reader's emotional response to the book. Maybe some people don't know that they want to watch Steve Donoughue's how to videos on writing reviews so they can try it.
@@TimeTravelReads I appreciate the distinction between reaction & review. I think that BookTok tends to lean more on the reaction side of the spectrum due to the nature of the app. Like I said in the video, short form content tends to be more punchy & expressive in comparison to long form content. I do think that both reaction & review should have valid space when it comes to talking about books.
the "fast fashion" crap annoys me for so many reasons.
Me too! I think that people will just say anything at this point.
I work retail in the book industry and I'd have to say: Thank goodness for BookTok. Young folks are reading again! They're discovering books! And sure, some are crap, but who gives a damn? If they're enjoying the experience, let them. Let's not gatekeep reading. Some of us just want to sink into a simple, uncomplicated world when we don't have to think too much, or worry too deeply. The world is anxious and frightening enough... let us have our escapism. Also... there are some gems in there too.
Although, I will add that I get my kicks watching/listening to "book burns" on RUclips. The most fun way to experience a book I probably won't have time (or inclination) to read, is to listen to someone be snarky about it. Thanks to that, I'm now familiar with a goodly proportion of Colleen Hoover books.
Let’s 👏🏼 not👏🏼 gatekeep👏🏼 reading👏🏼
Also, I commend you for your dedication to the Colleen craziness lol. I saw that one quote online where the couple was talking about their sons big balls and I tapped out on CoHo😂
I think also what's getting lost in these anti-intellectualism discussions is the fact that a lot of book content creators are trying to review books without providing spoilers. So without that...what does that leave? Our "vibes". Our personal feelings and reactions to the books that we read. It's very difficult to make spoiler-free reviews that talk about the book based on literary critique.
@@literatimedium Great point! This is something that I hadn’t thought about when I was prepping for this video!
Yes, 💯% agree. Thank you for speaking up for those of us who don't want to make book content! 💗💗💗💗💗
@@meganlong8087 Thank you so much for watching!!🥰
What I've found to be a good strategy is to start with a very long list of great books and then read them one or two a year or whenever you're tired of what's current. Also, it may help to develop a shared space where you can talk to others about what you've already read and what you like. That way there's an incentive toward civility. Anyway, keep reading and most of all, Enjoy!
@@jamesduggan7200 Great method to follow!
equating fast fashion with buying a ton of books is also so dumb because it completely misses the point of why fast fashion is harmful and bad. Buying a bunch of clothes is not bad or good, its morally neutral. The bad thing is buying tons of clothes produced by slave labor, buying clothes made of synthetic materials that wont decompose and then throwing them away to get a bunch more clothes. Books are made of paper and are therefore decomposable and also people dont really get rid of books in general, let alone throw them away so the environmental impact is straight up not there.
I feel like the term “fast fashion” has been equated to “overconsumption” to the point where people don’t see the difference between the two. Of course, buying a lot of books for the “book haul aesthetic” can be considered overconsumption. But I agree that equating that to fast fashion is just bonkers to me.
I'm not even familiar with this. I have seen some young women saying there were "too many words" in a book and that they "only read dialogue". I would say that's just strange as opposed to "anti intellectual". Also, I dont think our opinion matters less when we are talking about nonfiction. Academia matters, too, or we would never innovate. Emotions actually need to be a part of intellectualism as well. My time in academia, in college, in graduate school, have been chock full of emotional reactions. Intellectualism is a hoax basically lol it's impossible for people not to be emotional about things. [Unless they're a very unfeeling person but even then...everyone feels something sometimes].
@@thehorrorwasforlove I love your view of this! I also JUST saw the video of the girl complaining about “too many words” so your comment was perfectly timed🤣 I agree, very strange.
Ehhh while I get where you’re coming from, and as much as I am a part of the “let people enjoy things” crowd to a certain extent, I don’t really agree.
In terms of booktok and just general pop literature circles, I find that there is a certain level of dismissal of foundational work in literature and holding up newer things as “doing x better than y” (such as recently seeing someone say that Percy Jackson criticizes class better than Jane Austen?) even when completely nonsensical, or just deciding something isn’t worth engaging with if it’s metaphorical or allegorical in any way? There’s just this complete refusal to engage with anything more complex than YA or Colleen Hoover (which no hate to YA, they make good palette cleansers; can’t speak on Colleen Hoover because I have never read her but people around me have said she isn’t a particularly complex writer and that’s fine) because not everything is spelled right out on the surface that I would say is anti-intellectual.
@@sc6658 I definitely see where you’re coming from! Multiple comments have given me some things to think about on this subject. Thank you so much for watching & joining in the conversation!🥰😄
“No, get over yourself” 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 I love this and completely agree with you! Great video and thoughts!
@@marcyreads Thank you so much!🥰
Well said! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
💙💙💙
Find a new fucking place to look - Jo 2024
My new mantra lol
This reminds me of people saying, since I was a child that "You can absolutely find great fan fiction if you look hard enough" what they don't tell you, because they have terrible taste, there's actually like *two* for any fandom with more than 10,000 works. That you can find anyway, unless your brain is wired to a computer, and your subconscious is running the search in the background. And if you want a completed story that's not a oneshot, you'd probably be lucky to find one, in at least 100,000.
Funny how when people want culture and society to change for the better they're heroes, fighting the good fight, speaking truth to power, and educating the masses, when those masses are other fans in pop-culture hangout zones the people who want to change the _quality_ of discourse are suddenly vain troublemakers, who need to get with the program and not upset the applecart...
Makes me think of all the people who oppose capital punishment, but somehow believe unironically that the stupidest scene in any movie is when the hero refuses to kill the villain. One villain wreaks havoc, and suddenly everybody's Dirty Harry. Cognitive dissonance, it's a sad thing.
Love this ❤
@@tifftalkspages Thank you so much!!
You delve enough into the intellectual side of things for long enough and you find that most intellectuals and academics and even the great writers are nothing except full of hot gas; not to mention their utter lack of a moral fiber, which just makes their intellect seem disingenuous, if we could call someone's intellect disingenuous. Most intellectuals are not very afforded to innovation and the desire to possibly be wrong - most of them just spout what they heard their equally unimpressive professors say, more often than not with tangents thrown in for "relatability", and more often than not with this side of an agenda (so much for our "liberal" humanities). It's all a forumla for a safe and secure intellectualism that results in nothing more than a constant back and forth that really goes nowhere; because we all respect a good debate, right? That is what we call the dialectic, or as a cynic might say "the sniffing of farts."
Of course, this isn't to say I like booktok or most of booktube for that matter. But, if someone really wants an intellectual discussion, and if they are so smart - then they should know that online conversations are not the best way to do it. And if they are so wise, then they shouldn't expect young people on booktok, who haven't experienced more than a bad hair day, to give them an enlightening conversation. Fun? Yes. Engaging? Maybe. Enlightening? No. These young men and women are not cut out for that, at least not yet. But I do expect life will give them theirs in due time - and then maybe the wisdom of Seneca will not seem so distant.
Eh, a bit of a rant. Haha. But enjoyed the vid.
@@scoutdarpy4465 This comment made me laugh multiple times! You also perfectly represented some of the thoughts I had while getting my English degree😅 “Hot gas” indeed, haha! Thanks for watching!!🥰
@@NotSoAverageJo It's kinda in line with the whole "reading makes you empathetic" garbage you hear the so called "sophisticated" people go on about. It doesn't take long in the humanities or university in general to see that most of these people aren't very empathetic. Anyways where does empathy lead us again? Right into the hands of a terrible, self-glamorizing character. Hell, I've seen some stuff where science has to tell us how empathetic we are. Lol.
@@scoutdarpy4465 Oh wow, I have NEVER heard someone argue against the “books make you more empathetic” thing! I definitely see your point here though. I’ve always interpreted that statement somewhere along the lines of “books give insight into experiences other than your own”. It doesn’t MAKE you empathetic but I think it opens the door. I also think that “empathy” is such a big, and often overinflated, word. I vastly prefer “understand”
@@NotSoAverageJo I may just be a bit too critical for my own good; but I have found that people often read all these stories and still ultimately fail to understand anything. Even the academics understand only insofar as they can acquire a formula. I've met people who don't really read but who get life and its people more than people who do. This was kinda the transcendentlist shtick from Emerson or Thoreau: to experience life first and occasionally read books. Of course I don't really follow this; but I do agree with what they said.
What an odd video.
More than half the video is a self confessed straw argument.
A good portion of the video is devoted to a watered down definition of "intellectualism" ironically devoid of nuance.
You didn't define anti-intellectualism, which is definitionally distinct anyway.
A not insignificant portion of the video concedes that the point you believe these people actually are making is valid, or at least has _some_ validity.
"Not taking criticism well does not mean that they are anti-intellectualism!" Pretty much sums up this whole video, temperamentally, logically... and grammatically...
I’ve been watching a lot of these videos lately so I’m glad you made one, too.
I truly think the people that are stans of this “booktok is anti intellectualism” argument are just haters of people that just like to read for fun, & haters of maybe “smut” or fantasy romance or whatever genres they think are silly and less valuable than whatever books they consider worth reading. It’s an elitist take. It’s judgmental against the people who read those types of books.
Not all easy fun books are devoid of important themes and messages because it contains 🍆&🐱lmao. But even the ones that are really just book porn have value if they are bringing readers enjoyment and making them read in their free time.
As a reader of everything from classics down to plotless smut and everything in between, I find sometimes I am reading to feel and learn something valuable and sometimes I’m just reading something fun and easy because I had a bad day and need a heathly escape. Readers find value in all types of writing, and it’s all valid.
The world is such a sad and scary place irl so it baffles me that people are at eachothers necks over what is a good book or bad book, and what is or is not worthy of attention/hype.
I don’t watch booktok but lately I’ve been tempted to start just to spite all the haters 😂
I also feel like people forget that just because we’re all “readers”, it doesn’t mean that we’re all the same! Idk why people can’t just let others read what they want in peace without having to add in their two cents. Some people read for fun, others read to learn, others read to analyze, and so on and so forth. Telling one group that they should conform to “your” way of reading is just dumb.
As someone who probably fits more into the "intellectual" camp than the "romantasy" camp, I'm baffled by the fighting. It feels like some young people decided that some people have to be the "smart" sisters, and others have to be the "fun" sisters, or something like that. Of course we need fun books. I also think we're in a dire time when it's really important for people to relearn the democratic value of lifelong learning. I guess that makes me a grumpy, judgemental person heading into middle age.
@@NotSoAverageJo But also, some of us are all of those type of readers, just at different times haha Like I said, I identify with both, just when I feel like it 😂
😻😻😻😻😻😻😻
💙💙💙💙💙💙💙