Recreational Reading

Today, I purchased a Nicholas Sparks novel. Approximately my eighth Nicholas Sparks novel, in fact.

I understand that this makes me horribly cliche, a label which I attempt to skillfully avoid at all costs. And of course, to make matters worse, I am a library student, and should love all things literary, such as 19th century British Women's Literature or the Romanticists or Classicists and all the other assorted literary genres which I'm convinced I'll never keep straight, no matter how long I may work in libraries. But I have to be honest... when I want to sit down at the end of the day and lose myself in a book, I love me some John Grisham, Jodi Picoult, and yes, Nicholas Sparks. And I'll admit it: I loved The Da Vinci Code. I read it in one day.

However, I get the vibe from many people bookish--librarians, book store entrepreneurs and employees, and various self-righteous readers--that this is not acceptable leisurely reading. Or at least not "important" enough reading. "Important" reading would be Faulkner, Austen, Tolstoy, and the like. The big names in the literary world. These are books that people can comfortably call "classics" because someone else, a very long time ago, made some master list of books we should all regard as ingeniously written and superior to all others. All else is fluff, says list-maker.

Now, let me be clear: my intent here is not to slam these "important" authors or their works. I've enjoyed several of them. Salinger's "Catcher in the Rye" is one of my personal favorites... but that could be largely because I enjoy the excessive profanity. I also love Hugo's "Les Miserables," and appreciate its political significance in its era... but let's face it, that's a BEAST of a book. You've got to sit down with serious intent to read something like that. If you've got that drive to do it, though, you discover a wonderful, intricate, and socially impactful plot, not to mention an historical snapshot of the era. But I would hardly call any sort of reading that requires one to "buckle down" recreational. Although Les Mis makes one damn fine musical theater production.

My intent, then, is to slam people who read said important authors and works, paraphrase someone else's book review in an attempt to fool people into thinking they have original feedback about the work, and walk around yammering about how smart and worldly they are for having read these titles. And of course, tell one of these folks you picked up a Grisham novel, and you're in for a literary chastising.

Another caveat: I don't mean to imply that Grisham, Picoult, or Sparks are "unimportant" authors. They are just popular, in the true sense of the word, which, traditionally, the 'worldly readers' avoid, assuming books produced by popular novelists have no substance. But if I may say so, the books are popular for a reason. They're good. People like to read them. How novel. (No pun intended.)

I'm not saying that my Nicholas Sparks book is going to change me or teach me an important new life lesson. But by God, I'm going to enjoy it. Hence, recreational reading.

Curse you, snobby readers.