Can we objectively judge literature? Murakami or Dostoevsky?

[@BookishTexan]

This is one of the best discussions of Murakami I've seen. I think you nailed it perfectly. One quibble. As I've gotten older I've realized that people are LESS mysterious, but MORE interesting. Our common motives and needs have become clearer, but I've realized the ways we pursue those motives and needs are endlessly varied.

[@WhatKamilReads]

That’s quite poetic and beautiful what you’ve written about people here. Thank you!

[@alexsilber9776]

Alek Congratulations on the great job you are doing. Thank you. I found one of the best approaches to literary criticism in one of the English manuals on the topic. The author proposed a set evaluation criteria (which I amended somewhat) and which include: · depth and complexity of characters and themes: · dealing with timeless topics such as love, jealousy, lust, desire of power; · similar to the above universal appeal regardless of the culture and location of the story; · literary qualities, i.e. the language, structure, use of metaphors etc; · novelty aspects: inventive structure, language; Applying these criteria to Dostoyevsky, Shakespeare or popular bestsellers quickly shows the differences.

[@suzannebousquet2710]

Thank you for such s refreshing video! I loved Russian Literature when I was in college (70's). I am now near 60 and am trying to read Norwegian Wood for the first time. I put it down after a few pages. I will probably not pick it up again. I just wasn't feeling it! I love your videos....

[@WhatKamilReads]

Thank you, Suzanne, for watching and thank you for so kind words.

[@TheStoryscapeShow]

What a fascinating video! I haven’t read any Dostoyevsky, and I haven’t read Murakami in a couple of years but I recently picked up ‘Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World’ which was, interestingly enough, recommended to me by the friend who introduced me to Murakami in our 20s. I think about this a lot and especially what is the criteria for literature, and who gets to set it. I agree that books can be judged by objective measures, but I do think that reviewers are subjective, in the sense that that’s what makes book critics artists as well, especially the ones who influence our reading habits the most. So there’s another rung in the ladder between readers and books. I assume this is what makes discussions around literary prizes so interesting too, and the panels that decide which books make the cut. Your breakdown of Murakami is such a great point to make because it reminded me of how much data you have to gather before you can even make an objective claim. My 1st Murakami was amazing, by the 4th the wonder had worn off and I could see how flawed his crafting of female characters is. That could be subjective, but I now have more evidence to judge it against and make a more objective critique. You’ve given me lots to think about 🤔

[@WhatKamilReads]

You made a great point about critics being another layer between the artist and the reader... I agree, hearing so many times that something is art or the best example of certain literature movement, you for sure are affected by it... also Murakami did something impressive he managed to capture attention of so many young people that is not something a lot of people did so however we judge him taking objective measures into account he did accomplished something great...

[@justjuanreader]

Kamil, you have won BookTube this month with this video. 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

[@WhatKamilReads]

Just Juan Reader Juan you are very kind, thank you!

[@gs547]

A bit snobbish. I majored in Eng Lit and was engrossed with literature and studiously avoided reading frivolous fiction for most of my life, but having lived as long as I have, I think the value of literature is inflated. Essentially, novels are entertainments, primarily. They may speed up the circulation of certain ideas (who knows if those ideas are salutary or not?) The main benefit of reading fiction, other than entertainment, is that it helps build communication and thinking skills. To say that we can judge literature is true if you posit standards, but the standards you posit are likely to be meaningless in reality.

[@PlotsAndPoints]

This was a great discussion! I've flip-flopped on this issue a few times but ultimately I come down to no, you can't be truly objective in respect to reviewing books or really any other art. The issue with judging a work qualitatively is that you're really asking "how close does this come to fulfilling authorial intent." One author is not trying to do the same thing as another. If you're comparing Dostoyevsky to let's say, John Green, then Green is going to fall on his face with shallow themes, simplistic narratives and melodramatic characters (in comparison) but to say that that means Green is worse than Dostoyevsky would be unfair if you're saying that both should be some sort of political treatise intended to make cutting observations about the current political sphere through satire. It's an uneven playing field. John Green is great at delivering the product he is trying to deliver and Dostoyevsky is great at delivering the product he is trying to deliver. Now that is something you CAN and SHOULD point out in a review, leaving personal preference at the door BUT if you gave a book like Game of Thrones to someone like Will Self he'd turn his nose up at it, say it was ridiculous and swan off to drink the blood of orphans (or whatever it is Will Self does when he isn't penning self-aggrandising think pieces for The Guardian). My point being that an element of personal preference is always going to seep into a review, especially with a frankly absurd measuring stick like a 1-5 star rating system. It is definitely possible to strive to take your biases into account when reviewing a work, and judging them based on their success towards authorial intent is one tool to do that (and really we're just guessing at what the author is trying to do in the first place). However, I believe people gravitate towards book reviewers that share their own tastes, they trust if that person liked a book they will like it too, so to take away all of the personal taste of the reviewer would leave a much more hollow viewing experience in my opinion. It's less about whether we can be objective, and more about if we even want to be.

[@WhatKamilReads]

Brilliant comment. You point is that as long as an author doesn't play in the same league we should not compare them and say one is better than the other? It would be ok to compare Green to let's say Markus Zusak because they both write YA and try to sell the same product, so they play in the same league. I'm fine with that but I believe comparing one adult literature contemporary writer to the other is absolutely fine, therefore as long as Will Self ranks Game of Thrones (genre fiction) with other fantasy books I believe he can criticize it. Also, just because an author chooses to write within the certain genre it doesn't exclude him from being compared on the grounds he uses a written word. So I would not compare Green with Dostoyevski on the grounds of the final product (the books with all the elements I talked about video) but I could compare them on the grounds of their craft - writing. There's always a subjective element in the review, in everyone's and as long as a reviewer clarifies the subjectivity, I believe that everything is fine. It's important to be aware of it, just that. I'm aware for instance that I'm partial to politically or sociologically driven books.

[@Gabrielcezar94]

Great topic! I pretty much agree with you. I believe you can stablish some parameters with which to judge literature, analysing the formal aspects of it and come to an evaluation. Then subjectivity comes in. I just think the latter usually comes as too prominent a way of assessing art. Many a time you see people just saying "I don't like it", using it as an explanation as to why a book is not good. I believe you may not like something but be able to acknowledge the artistic qualities of a given work. Also sometimes it feels like people don't look inwardly and sound how they are feeling when reading something, thus they will be slightly tired or distracted due to too much work, for instance, and not with the best mindset to appreciate say a lyrical prose, but they'll blame the book. This ability comes with time and experience, sometimes coming back to something you disliked initially but came to realise it's you all the time... But I digress 😂 only thing I don't agree much, and I'm not sure I got what you said right, but I don't think a novel dealing strongly with social issues has got to automatically be elevated into a great piece of art, I mean, "good" intentions don't necessarily make great art, you can have a book dealing with the most timely topic, and one you most agree with, but at the same time the said novel may not be that great as a novel, as a work of art... So there's that, you need not agree with the author's point, but you can appreciate and judge as fine his/her artistic power.

[@WhatKamilReads]

Brilliant comment, I believe unless something is a total trash commenting on the book with one sentence, be it " I don't like it" or "it was so boring" is more of a comment on the person saying that rather than the book itself. And you are so right saying that the way you "feel" about the book is trigger by your current state of mind. For instance, reading Overstory by Powers in 10 minutes slot when commuting to work would never work in this novels favor. The part you disagree with, let me explain I meant that the good book should have in my mind those elements jointly, sociopolitical or socio-psychological factors, great writing and good plot but not that one of those make a great novel. I talked recently about From a Low and Quite Sea, a book that I wholeheartedly agree with it's message, but didn't like as I believe it didn't do anything interesting with the very current topic - immigration. Also I agree with your statement that you don't have to share authors values but if those presented give you material for thinking or help you re-analyze your point of view that still great.

[@clumsydad7158]

Very interesting, I just went back last week and tried to read Crime and Punishment again... interesting how my memory of it wasn't accurate, I remembered it as more dense. I still didn't finish it, even though it's my favorite book by him, but overall his style of endless discussions and devolutions kind of bores me after awhile, but I'm not really a strong ready, so take it with a grain of salt. I do find it hard to find relevance in most old literature, but I'm kind of like that with fiction over all, although Blood Meridian blew my mind.

[@WhatKamilReads]

What are your other favorite fiction books you read recently, just want to get a sense, as it sounds fascinating that you say you are not a strong reader, while its pretty obvious to me you are interested in literature. Sorry for getting back so late and thank you very much for all the comments.

[@clumsydad7158]

@@WhatKamilReads Hi Kamil, thanks for your interesting replies... oh know, I can't cut and paste my comments here,,, I'll email you instead. Peace (-:

[@thereadingcompanion9499]

How come I haven’t watched this before? Excellent video essay!

[@WhatKamilReads]

Thank you very much, great to hear that.

[@curioushmm9027]

so that's why people like "norwegian wood"...when i first picked up murakami a few years ago i loved him..with the exception of "norwegian wood" which felt really far too prosaic...the only other book of his i don't care for is "kafka on the shore"...i loved the premise and i felt like he just quit on it about 2/3 of the way through and pasted on the rest...

[@WhatKamilReads]

curious hmm I liked Kafka when I read it so long ago, but as said for me he belongs to the time when I was in my early twenties.

[@1book1review]

I don't think objectivity really exist, I think informed experience is more a thing. Like you said, you need to read to form opinions on books, and I would also say you need to read wide spread to get a better background and not just live in a bubble of same.

[@WhatKamilReads]

1book1review I would agree regarding wide reading to some degree. I think it’s important to try different types of things to understand for instance what crime novel or thriller is but I don’t think one needs to get back to those genres if not for pleasure. I read a few and it’s not my thing and don’t thing it’s detrimental to my understanding or analysis if I never pick it up again. It would maybe if I was to judge crime novels award otherwise I don’t think it is.

[@1book1review]

Good point and I agree, if I don't have to I am not seeking out mystery or crime novels. But that makes me more impressionable to things they do, which may be new to me but old for readers of the genre. Was thinking along those lines for reading wide to get a different background.

[@WhyteLis21]

Objectivity does exist in every form of media. We first logically look it in a structure guide line way such as does it have a compelling story, characters,interactions and consistency. Subjectively opinion, does these characters and stories move us emotionally, how well its executed and experience something different or related to us. They are interlink in some way. In this case you would need a balance of sort in my opinion. 😊

[@sunk7814]

I have began reading. And enjoying .. thanks for your reviews.. read Amish Tripathi .. you will find better piece in his writing

[@WhatKamilReads]

Sun K thank you, will look him up.

[@muthuramanan1862]

Wonderful talk.

[@WhatKamilReads]

Thank you so much, lovely to hear that

[@brittabohlerthesecondshelf]

This was fantastic! You should be a professional book critc :-).

[@WhatKamilReads]

Britta Böhler ha! Thank you Britta:)

[@tonybennett4159]

I suppose the nearest we can ever come to an objective view of literature is posterity. This, of course is also flawed, because after reading an established book, we can be flabbergasted that it is held in such high esteem. Who is to say that the judgement of those in literary circles can be any more compelling than that of the critically avid reader? Now, your mention of plot brings me to a book you recommended : Mysliwski's Stone Upon Stone. This is a somewhat discursive book, but it is truly wonderful, as it explores character, place and time above a mechanical plot, just what I prefer. Szymek is a rascal, no doubt, a womaniser, a drunkard and a man with a short fuse. He is also vividly human, fearless and at times remarkably sensitive and insightful. The book overflows with incidents that leap out of the page : the harvest carts vainly trying to cross a busy road ; Szymek's surprisingly tender and patient wooing of Malgoratza until she does something unforgivable that reveals what he misses most from his life; the German massacre and destruction of a village and environs, leaving only a forlorn gateway remaining; the wonderfully drawn Kaska, yearning for life but having the wit to be a realist; the frustrated flogging of his traumatised brother Michal. It's a book like a river in spate, and deserves a wider readership. It's writing like this that gains Nobel prizes.

[@WhatKamilReads]

Tony, this is probably the best review of Mysliwski’s Stone Upon Stone I’ve read. Do you have a blog or something? It’d be great to read more of your reviews. Regarding your comment I believe that within certain spectrum of established factors we can judge literature quite objectively, but of corse if we disregard those factors everything is relative. As far as posterity is considered well that is a good point but also I believe that it’s quite natural that certain books stay while others go... and it’s as much a comment or reflection of modern times as the reflection on the value of a book itself.

[@tonybennett4159]

@@WhatKamilReadsThanks for your kind words, Kamil. Like many people of my generation, I'm pretty low tech, and I'm either too incapable (or too lazy) to get myself together to do anything other than make comments or the odd review on Goodreads. I'm grateful to those, like you, who bring forward works that I might otherwise not consider, and that has helped to refresh my reading experience, even though I've been a bookworm from my early days which is almost longer than I care to remember. Like you, I always keep a book on the go, even though, also like you, I have periods of intense activity, in my case, in my retirement, designing sets and props for my local community theatre. Macbeth is at present uppermost in my thoughts!

[@WhatKamilReads]

I feel like we should have exchanged emails as every one of your comments feels like a great email and then when I don't reply immediately and stay away from booktube it takes time to respond. That Macbeth preparation sound brilliant, have you already staged it, how it went? Have you always worked producing plays?

[@tonybennett4159]

Teaching was my profession : you know, jack of all trades, master of none, as the saying goes. I've put my urge to create into the theatre work. It's fulfilling but can be VERY time consuming. We are amateur but we have an excellent reputation in London. Macbeth was one of our best Shakespeare productions, incredibly atmospheric and chilling, and updated to a period corresponding to WW1. I was proud to have my contributions playing a central part and they were made to look better by a fantastic lighting designer.@@WhatKamilReads

[@WhatKamilReads]

I always am stunned with people that can put their energy in one thing and develop it into perfection all their life. I have master in law and second in political science, but I since I already worked before I graduated and law was never my calling, I stayed back then with financial products/sales (hated that) then I moved to finance as it seemed the most resonable move and I do like numbers, did a lot of learning to grasp finance and economy, but now I feel I need to brench out to what I was doing when a student - working with NGOs that try, altough I do understand that often the change is very small, somethign better with this world. Where do you usually show your plays? Next time in London I might come and see.

[@veronikabecickova5538]

Very interesting and well said. Great topic. Many perceptions (maybe all) ať reading are subjective and inseparable from each of us..😊 I love Russian, Polish, English and our czech literature ( it's off topič 😀).

[@WhatKamilReads]

Veronika Bečičková perceptions are always subjective but if we are judging a piece of work on literary excellence grounds it can be quite objective if we set frames to do it with. Otherwise we could go as far as to say Rainbow Rowells is equal to Delillo, some people would prefer Rowells but if we talk about the place her art stands in comparison to him well that is pretty obvious.

[@annabaillie-karas1100]

Yes, I think you can say that some books are stronger than others. (Eg in the Booker longlist, I enjoyed Snap & not Washington Black, but the latter had better writing & themes). I adore Murakami for his easy, friendly style & quirky stories but I may have outgrown him; & from a feminist point of view he’s a little dated. One way to judge quality is, are you in the story? With Murakami I’m there, it feels real (despite talking cats). It can enrich your brain (Eg Dostoevsky, Pamuk), but it has to engage you first, you have to believe in the characters & story.

[@WhatKamilReads]

Anna Baillie-Karas well I believe ‘believing’ is actually a very subjective element. It has more to do with your personal view of the world, personal experience, emotional state etc I do not believe Murakami, he is captivating but I’m constantly throw off - things characters say or do or his metaphors, while when I’m reading mentioned by you Pamuk I’m in Istanbul and I forget about the whole world. That is very personal I believe.

[@clumsydad7158]

The lighting is a bit too bright in this video, fyi

[@WhatKamilReads]

One will never satisfy everybody ;-) I don't have a studio so if I record in the evening it is what it is... it's either too bright (no-natural light) or too dark ...

[@sankhadeepghosh9312]

Are you married? or single? I have got a crush on you! ♥

[@brainfragrances]

Funny how this made me think of the exact opposite as the comment on your previous video about political novels. I recently read Vonnegut's 'Sirens Of Titans', which had nice commentary and satire, but it was, in my opinion, mediocre as far as 'the enjoyable' part goes. For me a great book, a 5-star read needs to have both balanced, but I personally will easily pick a book heavy on the appreciation/intelligence side over a book that's just there for enjoyment any day of the week. I guess it's a personal preference on what reading means to you. Since I started reading more, I almost stopped watching serious tv shows and started seeing tv shows or movies more as 'pure enjoyment', while I expect more out of books. Also, Murakami is one of my favorite writers (and one of the writers that got me into reading in the first place), but after having read more and more, a lot of his work loses some significance, especially the ones about relationships (this might also be because I'm nearing my 30's). 'Hard-Boiled Wonderland And The End Of The World' being the exception for me.

[@WhatKamilReads]

I agree that the best books have both, the enjoyment part and the artsy part. Interesting comment on TV, I find myself hardly watching anything too but when I finally do I go for enjoyment, I guess Tv equals entertainment in my head. I haven't read Hard-Boiled Wonderland And The End Of The World' maybe I'll pick it up one day if you say its exceptional amoung his works.