Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

tommy_the_bat OP t1_jeen3uk wrote

Reply to comment by twenty-six-sixty-six in I love this sub by tommy_the_bat

Eh, I've had pretty civil conversations with people who have book views that are on the other end of the spectrum of mine. Never really got a sense of a reddit hivemind compared to other subs. I think it's all about tone and approaching conversations in good faith. Obviously there are popular opinions but I don't see people getting "down voted to oblivion" as you say.

0

twenty-six-sixty-six t1_jeen9mg wrote

well i prefer a more abrasive tone personally

0

tommy_the_bat OP t1_jeenh9r wrote

Idk man, that gets boring very fast IMO

6

twenty-six-sixty-six t1_jeeo14n wrote

i think it's boring when people state their opinions blandly, without confidence -- but it seems to be the preferred communication style here

i'd rather have good arguments with people who have courage of their convictions

4

tommy_the_bat OP t1_jeeo6bl wrote

That's not what abrasive means lmao

7

twenty-six-sixty-six t1_jeeom7r wrote

the definition i'm using means to showing little regard for the opinions of others

i see no point in showing regard for an opinion i disagree with, and i don't expect other people to show regard for my opinion, but people here seem to want a lame kumbaya prayer circle where we all talk about how every writer is equally good, it's just a matter of opinion. nothing could be more boring

−2

tommy_the_bat OP t1_jeerkog wrote

Why would anyone enter any conversation with someone who, right off the bat, says they have 'little regard for the opinions of others'? That's just deranged. You don't have to be an asshole to have a good conversation.

I never understood people who enjoy arguments rather than a simple disagreements. Just talk to people like you would in real life. So yea I guess that's what I mean by getting bored by those conversations. Like just scream at a wall or cry in a pillow if you want to get emotional.

14

Character_Vapor t1_jegn5gw wrote

>I never understood people who enjoy arguments rather than a simple disagreements

I mean, it all depends on context, but I got in a debate about Thomas Pynchon with a friend of mine last week at a bar that culminated in him raising his voice over the table and telling the rest of the group that I was an "odious motherfucker". Those kinds of heated debates about art are way more enjoyable than worrying about making sure everyone feels validated all the time.

Yelling and arguing about your opinion (if not literally, then in spirit) about a piece of art is a great time, as long as everyone is secure enough to know that saying someone's opinion is "bad" or "tragic" or "the worst thing I've ever heard" does not mean you think those things about them as a person.

Give me some Balzac, Lost Illusions-level shit-slinging about books! Tell someone they should have been sent to the guillotine for not liking Emile Zola. Tell someone they have an unhealthy fixation on 19th Century fuckboys after they tell you they love Heathcliff in Wuthering Heights. Tell someone they should be tried at The Hague for not having read Toni Morrison. It's more fun that way.

Let’s bring this kind of Ebert energy back into arts discourse and maybe we can all start having a good time talking about this stuff again.

0

[deleted] t1_jees0ay wrote

[removed]

−1