Mediocre books being popular

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BookTok (the original site that got younger readers reading Colleen Hoover, as an example) type videos are now all over Instagram and even Facebook. A lot of regular readers are driving reading right now.

I've also noticed that a lot of reader promoted books are diversity and/or progressive pushes, more than simply a great reads.

+1M clearly there is an agenda with the books being published these days.

And no obama doesn't read these he endorses whom ever pays him the most to.

I hadn't heard anything about Obama being paid. But he, like many, have an agenda on what he (his team) thinks people should read that furthers their beliefs. And many of the young editors who are buying these days are progressive. As a result, they are buying progressive and/or diverse manuscripts.

Right. Because the world of literature has been dominated by white men for eons. Some balance it way overdue. Sharing voices of women or people who are not white, is hardly progressive. It's just including more people in the story telling.

It's been decades since literature was all white men. Even the oldest readers grew up with James Baldwin and Alice Walker in middle school. A women of color with a book is hardly a new thing in 2026. But a crappy book is still a crappy book regardless of the race and gender of the author. Mediocre books shouldn't get a lift because the author fits a box. Bad books are bad books.

DP. 51 y/o here. Most absolutely did not grow up with Alice Walker or James Baldwin in school.

I had Toni Morrison's Bluest Eye in 11th grade in 1985. I loved all the dreamlike Freudian undertones to it. She didn't write about race Ii a preachy blatant way. It was nnot about the black experience as front and center. The black experience was a background to a magical, maybe dark experience. Maybe like Faulkner's Sound and Fury, it is southern gothic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BookTok (the original site that got younger readers reading Colleen Hoover, as an example) type videos are now all over Instagram and even Facebook. A lot of regular readers are driving reading right now.

I've also noticed that a lot of reader promoted books are diversity and/or progressive pushes, more than simply a great reads.

+1M clearly there is an agenda with the books being published these days.

And no obama doesn't read these he endorses whom ever pays him the most to.

I hadn't heard anything about Obama being paid. But he, like many, have an agenda on what he (his team) thinks people should read that furthers their beliefs. And many of the young editors who are buying these days are progressive. As a result, they are buying progressive and/or diverse manuscripts.

Right. Because the world of literature has been dominated by white men for eons. Some balance it way overdue. Sharing voices of women or people who are not white, is hardly progressive. It's just including more people in the story telling.

It's been decades since literature was all white men. Even the oldest readers grew up with James Baldwin and Alice Walker in middle school. A women of color with a book is hardly a new thing in 2026. But a crappy book is still a crappy book regardless of the race and gender of the author. Mediocre books shouldn't get a lift because the author fits a box. Bad books are bad books.

DP. 51 y/o here. Most absolutely did not grow up with Alice Walker or James Baldwin in school.

My husband and I are in our 40s and we had to read Amy Tan and a lot of other immigration trauma that I can’t even recall in school. It was monotonous. I can’t recall a single book I read in school that gave me a happy or positive feeling upon finishing it. All depressing sadness and guilt. Great for teens mental health.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think 3.76 is actually a pretty good rating from good reads. It’s pretty hard to have a universally loved book. And when a book is particularly popular, it gets a lot of ratings which tends to drive the overall score down.

No, it'a not good at all. I never read books with ratings that low, and still have a to-read list of 1,000 books.

Where are all these weird, negative posts coming from? This used to be the one part of the forum my Upper Caucasia neighbors hadn’t found and pooped all over.

Seriously. There are so many books out there. Read what you like. There are lots of white men writing new books every year. Some people are interested in the immigrant experience or reading about experiences different from theirs. Nice to have lots of options. No need to insult entire genres or authors because it’s not to your taste.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I've read a truly great novel by a creative writing MFA grad. That may just be because the MFA fiction writer is a recent phenomenon though.

George Saunders?
Junot Diaz?
Tony Marra?
Karen Russel?
Lauren Groff?
Curtis Sittenfeld?
Etc.?
Etc.?
Etc.?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BookTok (the original site that got younger readers reading Colleen Hoover, as an example) type videos are now all over Instagram and even Facebook. A lot of regular readers are driving reading right now.

I've also noticed that a lot of reader promoted books are diversity and/or progressive pushes, more than simply a great reads.

+1M clearly there is an agenda with the books being published these days.

And no obama doesn't read these he endorses whom ever pays him the most to.

I hadn't heard anything about Obama being paid. But he, like many, have an agenda on what he (his team) thinks people should read that furthers their beliefs. And many of the young editors who are buying these days are progressive. As a result, they are buying progressive and/or diverse manuscripts.

Right. Because the world of literature has been dominated by white men for eons. Some balance it way overdue. Sharing voices of women or people who are not white, is hardly progressive. It's just including more people in the story telling.

It's been decades since literature was all white men. Even the oldest readers grew up with James Baldwin and Alice Walker in middle school. A women of color with a book is hardly a new thing in 2026. But a crappy book is still a crappy book regardless of the race and gender of the author. Mediocre books shouldn't get a lift because the author fits a box. Bad books are bad books.

DP. 51 y/o here. Most absolutely did not grow up with Alice Walker or James Baldwin in school.

I'm 56 and I totally grew up with Toni Morrison, James Baldwin, Amy Tan, Alice Walker, Gabriel Garcia Marquez. All fine writers. That was school reading. It's been decades since white men dominated literature. Maybe boomers can remember. But there's also nothing wrong with reading Shakespeare, Joyce, Hemingway, Faulkner etc. A writer can't control their race or gender. A good book is a good book. And elevating something solely because the author is a woman and POC is lame. Which is why we have so many mediocre books. Bring back the 90s when quality mattered. Now excuse me while I tell some kids to get off my lawn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think I've read a truly great novel by a creative writing MFA grad. That may just be because the MFA fiction writer is a recent phenomenon though.

George Saunders?
Junot Diaz?
Tony Marra?
Karen Russel?
Lauren Groff?
Curtis Sittenfeld?
Etc.?
Etc.?
Etc.?

Ellin Hilderbrand too.
Most every popular novelist has an MFA. They may not note it in their bio. The exceptions are actually the Freida McFadden types.

There have always been mediocre to bad novels that are popular. I think some in the past were even worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BookTok (the original site that got younger readers reading Colleen Hoover, as an example) type videos are now all over Instagram and even Facebook. A lot of regular readers are driving reading right now.

I've also noticed that a lot of reader promoted books are diversity and/or progressive pushes, more than simply a great reads.

+1M clearly there is an agenda with the books being published these days.

And no obama doesn't read these he endorses whom ever pays him the most to.

I hadn't heard anything about Obama being paid. But he, like many, have an agenda on what he (his team) thinks people should read that furthers their beliefs. And many of the young editors who are buying these days are progressive. As a result, they are buying progressive and/or diverse manuscripts.

Right. Because the world of literature has been dominated by white men for eons. Some balance it way overdue. Sharing voices of women or people who are not white, is hardly progressive. It's just including more people in the story telling.

It's been decades since literature was all white men. Even the oldest readers grew up with James Baldwin and Alice Walker in middle school. A women of color with a book is hardly a new thing in 2026. But a crappy book is still a crappy book regardless of the race and gender of the author. Mediocre books shouldn't get a lift because the author fits a box. Bad books are bad books.

DP. 51 y/o here. Most absolutely did not grow up with Alice Walker or James Baldwin in school.

I'm 56 and I totally grew up with Toni Morrison, James Baldwin, Amy Tan, Alice Walker, Gabriel Garcia Marquez. All fine writers. That was school reading. It's been decades since white men dominated literature. Maybe boomers can remember. But there's also nothing wrong with reading Shakespeare, Joyce, Hemingway, Faulkner etc. A writer can't control their race or gender. A good book is a good book. And elevating something solely because the author is a woman and POC is lame. Which is why we have so many mediocre books. Bring back the 90s when quality mattered. Now excuse me while I tell some kids to get off my lawn.

Publishing is a competitive, cut throat industry. It seems highly unlikely to me that they’re publishing books because they’re authored by women or POC. I’m going to offer an alternative explanation that not everyone agrees with you about what is a “good book”. “Quality”, as defined by you, has never been the metric for deciding to publish books now or in the 90s. Expected sales are vastly more important, as evidenced by the oceans of books published that are authored by James Patterson and Frieda McFadden.

[Anonymous]

I haven’t read all of the comments. I read to escape and relax. Some of the books I enjoy are “mediocre”, but books with substance aren’t always relaxing. Sometimes I want it to be a little mindless.

[Anonymous]

I read Yesteryear and it was a disaster.

Also, DNF TLOSAS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny is far from "mediocre." I read it, and would not only put it as #1 of the books I read last year, but maybe #1 of all of the books I've read the last several years.

And I have an MFA in creative writing with a fiction concentration that I got in a 3-yr program with a lit-heavy component. And my mentor was a relatively famous lit critic. So I feel like I know when a novel could fairly be described as "mediocre."

But to put Sonia and Sunny aside ...

In case you aren't trolling ... why are mediocre books often popular? Because people like an easy read. And brilliant literature is often not an easy read (although sometimes it is).

This is false, and you sound like an MFA snob. The classics were all easy reads, heavy on plot. Because that's how life is -- plot heavy. There is so much nonsense in literary fiction today. Also, as someone "schooled," you should know that books are a subjective art.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am starting The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny and see it's a 3.76 on Goodreads but the waitlist at MCPL is nearly 300 people long.

I've seen cases where a book was mentioned in Sunday's Post, and the waitlist on MCPL skyrockets that same day. It's just luck with publicity.

Not anymore because the Post killed the book section and fired everyone who worked there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny is far from "mediocre." I read it, and would not only put it as #1 of the books I read last year, but maybe #1 of all of the books I've read the last several years.

And I have an MFA in creative writing with a fiction concentration that I got in a 3-yr program with a lit-heavy component. And my mentor was a relatively famous lit critic. So I feel like I know when a novel could fairly be described as "mediocre."

But to put Sonia and Sunny aside ...

In case you aren't trolling ... why are mediocre books often popular? Because people like an easy read. And brilliant literature is often not an easy read (although sometimes it is).

This is false, and you sound like an MFA snob. The classics were all easy reads, heavy on plot. Because that's how life is -- plot heavy. There is so much nonsense in literary fiction today. Also, as someone "schooled," you should know that books are a subjective art.

What? What is “false”? lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read Yesteryear and it was a disaster.

Also, DNF TLOSAS.

Just finished Yesteryear and really liked it. Enjoyed it is too happy of a word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny is far from "mediocre." I read it, and would not only put it as #1 of the books I read last year, but maybe #1 of all of the books I've read the last several years.

And I have an MFA in creative writing with a fiction concentration that I got in a 3-yr program with a lit-heavy component. And my mentor was a relatively famous lit critic. So I feel like I know when a novel could fairly be described as "mediocre."

But to put Sonia and Sunny aside ...

In case you aren't trolling ... why are mediocre books often popular? Because people like an easy read. And brilliant literature is often not an easy read (although sometimes it is).

This is false, and you sound like an MFA snob. The classics were all easy reads, heavy on plot. Because that's how life is -- plot heavy. There is so much nonsense in literary fiction today. Also, as someone "schooled," you should know that books are a subjective art.

What? What is “false”? lol.

Uh, "The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny is far from "mediocre."

That's not a fact. It's an opinion, presented as fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am starting The Loneliness of Sonia and Sunny and see it's a 3.76 on Goodreads but the waitlist at MCPL is nearly 300 people long.

I've seen cases where a book was mentioned in Sunday's Post, and the waitlist on MCPL skyrockets that same day. It's just luck with publicity.

Not anymore because the Post killed the book section and fired everyone who worked there.

They still have book recommendations and reviews!! Don’t quote me but I believe it’s in the Sunday Arts section. I was relieved!!!