/lit/ - Literature

>easily accessible
>who doesn't love a written romance story that's been played out in your head
>simple themes mean you can feel pseud

But really it's just the writer being able to capture a niche market, but that market is a large majority of people.

I wonder myself

>>8964047
you don't know what a niche is, do you

>>8964166
No, I don't.
I'll dictionary.com it later.

>>8964176
>not having the dictionary.com app
>not knowing a word before you use it

Kys

>>8964035
Why you dont ask them?

>>8964035
People search for the absolute and these books present characters and situations outlined with a bold black line. Stereotypical characters are easy to like, because they are easy to understand and to predict. These books tell people the absolute is possible: absolute love, absolute bravery, absolute good.

>>8964035
Because it is simple to understand and dreamy, easy.

>>8964047
>niche market
>that market is a large majority of people
Anon you aren't just a moron, you're an oxymoron.

It's just pandering to certain tastes. There are people who like things that tick certain boxes, regardless of overall quality.

>>8964635

Like large niche audiences

>>8964568
Underrated diss

>>8964035
because they're actually marketed and its niche (teenage girls) is extremely manipulable

>>8964568
I've never heard that before, that is one spicy insult

>>8964035
Because readers can self-insert

>>8964568
lel smart people insult le reddit man le reddit gold for your le quipsult up boat le reddit man

>>8964739
not an argument

>>8964739
cancer

I don't know, ask Rand.

>>8964035
Because they provide accessible meaningfulness, however "pseud" they might appear to the more patrician. Not everyone is going to read Nietzsche, despite the objective greater value of his works over John Green, because his prose is fucking impenetrable to all but the most scrutinizing of readers.

>>8964047
>niche
>large


Dude.

Because he's a drizzle, while we're all hurricanes.

>>8964035
Literary novels are heavy to read for a lot of people. People don't like to give up on a book and feel stupid.

Easy to read novels are popular because they're accessible.

The literary novel is for a increasingly dwindling demographic.

>>8964568

>>8964035
I'll I know is that it means even i have a shot at the New York times bestseller list :^)

>>8968166
based schopey

>>8964185
>having "apps"
>having a phone
>acknowledging denotation

>>8964035
Because they're aimed at teenage girls who are experiencing love for the first time.
>>8964739
You've already been BTFO.

Because it's not about being poorly written or not. It's about appealing to people's emotions, their desires and ideals.

>>8968166
bible btfo

Price

>>8965237
>objective

>>8968166
If you are such a great writer, writing for fools should be an easy task. But you are not even that, /lit/fags. John Green is rich, you know?

>>8968369
Please, don't start this discussion again.

>>8968377
I thought we were all smart(er) here. Oh well. The word you're looking for is "subjectively", though.

>>8968374
Yeah but it's the ages old question of fame and money vs. artistic integrity. Selling out for money or dying poor intentionally with respect.

>>8968386
Money is all that matters, you fucking idiot. Look around you; is anyone without money happy? Christ. I'm sick of it.

>book is famous = book is good
>book is not known = book is shit

How hard is it?

>>8968394
>book is famous = book is good
>book is not known = book is shit
That's not really a good way to measure a book's merit.

>>8968397
I only read Nora Roberts and consider myself well read.

>>8968394
>>8968397

Oh no! The thread is being perverted by intellectual narcissists! Oh no!!!!!!!

>>8968402