By Kristi Spuhler for LitLoversWe've all been there—slogging our way through a lofty tome, every turning page feeling like it's 50 pounds. (Moby-Dick, anyone?) So you've got to wonder: why are we doing this to ourselves?
Sure, we love that high we get when we slide past the finish line at the end of a task, but is reading a task? Isn't it something we should derive pleasure from?
So here's the question: Is it okay to abandon a book if you don't connect with it? Two writers recently took up the question in the The Guardian (of the UK)—and in a nutshell, here's the gist of their debate:
Alex Cross: The best books ...deserve more than being treated like a passing bit of entertainment.... I've nothing against reads that are quick and dirty fun, but seriously good books are immersive experiences, demanding of time and patience. Respect them.
Tom Lamont: But there is a masochistic sense out there—isn't there?—that it's somehow bad form or disrespectful or helpful to Hitler not to finish books. Very austere, very British. Very clear your plate.
If you're in the mood for delightful snark and a sprinkling of wit, do take a look at the full article.
Here's what we think: Some books take a while to get off the ground; others hit slow points along the way. Give those books time. But if chapter after chapter you feel no real emotional pull, we say put 'er down. Find something new.
Some LitLovers readers have told us on Facebook and on their Featured Club page about books they couldn't make their way through—here are several:
Anna Karenina (Leo Tolstoy)
A Confederacy of Dunces (John Kennedy Toole)
Cutting for Stone (Abraham Verghese)
Last Night in Twisted River (John Irving)
Moby-Dick (Herman Melville)
One Hundred years of Solitude (Gabriel Garcia Marquez)
Open City (Teju Cole)
A Thousand Splendid Suns (Khaled Hosseini)
War and Peace (Leo Tolstoy)
What about you? Are you determined to finish a book once you start it? Or are there some you've given up on? Let us know?
*Photo image courtesy of umjanedoan.