How do you put aside your own feelings when reading?

[Retros_x]

No. I think it unfounded, unwise, and kind of generally rude. But I'm not personally pissed off.

Ok but can you clarify why? Especially the rude part - again I am not trying to judge or belittle people for not being able to handle their emotions - I think its normal. I fail to do so myself, rarely in reading but more so in personal matters. If there are better choice of words/terms than "handling/processing/dealing with emotions" or "emotional regulation" (maybe they are loaded with cultural/political values I am not aware of), I am happy to learn them - I am from a non english speaking country.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Agreed. Sometimes there's value in seeing how things were perceived in the past, how they've changed, and being able to draw a line between then and now.

Oddly enough, I'm less bothered by things that made me cock my head at them in my teens and twenties than things that just flowed by then. I can reread Lovecraft for the most part because even when I read it back in the day the racism was pretty obvious (there's one particular exception, but then it was a bridge too far even then).

 

[Umbran]

Once you overextrapolate (and to be clear, I'm talking Heinlein, not you) its not like you're probably going to stop, barring outside stimulus

The point here is not to discuss Heinlein, or apologize for his work. It is to point out that, given the work, there's good reason for some readers to not bother with it that aren't, "I can't handle differing opinions".

 

[Thomas Shey]

The point here is not to discuss Heinlein, or apologize for his work. It is to point out that, given the work, there's good reason for some readers to not bother with it that aren't, "I can't handle differing opinions".

Then I agree with that point completely. I absolutely won't bother with Johnny Ringo for example.

 

[Mallus]

Why would I do that? It defeats the purpose of reading. Or engaging with any art, for that matter.

 

[Belen]

Why would I do that? It defeats the purpose of reading. Or engaging with any art, for that matter.

It is a badly worded question because art should make you feel or evoke an emotional response.

I do not set aside my feelings but I also do not let my opinions or biases affect whether I will consume content.

If the story or writing is good, then I will let it transport me to that world and I do not mind being challenged by ideas or opinions.

Mercedes Lackey has started saying that there is no one way and I agree with it in principle. I can disagree with someone yet still respect and tolerate their views with certain caveats for bad actors.

The loss of respect, tolerance, and compromise are things that sadden me.

 

[Gradine]

Found this old meme this morning and it reminded me of this thread

 

[MGibster]

The point here is not to discuss Heinlein, or apologize for his work. It is to point out that, given the work, there's good reason for some readers to not bother with it that aren't, "I can't handle differing opinions".

And when it comes to reading or consuming any media for fun, "I just don't want to" is a good enough reason not to engage.

 

[Autumnal]

Yeah. There is some reading I do out of a sense of obligation as a responsible American human being. It does not include vintage genre fiction. It only very rarely includes any fiction at all, and what little it does is usually by Nobel Prize winners or other figures on the world stage. Mostly it’s non-fiction: history, analysis of recent events, biological and geological sciences, stuff like thst. That’s how I look beyond my current knowledge and perspective, with most fiction being simply what I want to read, for any of a bunch of reasons.

 

[MGibster]

When I took Anthropology 101, the professor was talking to us about the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism.

1. Suffering is a part of life.
2. Attachments and negative actions cause suffering.
3. Ending desire and attachment will end suffering.
4. You can achieve enlightenment by following the Eightfold Path.

He went on to tell us, "I'm not asking you to believe this is true, but if you understand this is what someone believes, it might help you understand why they do things the way they do. Why their society is structured in a certain way."

So when I read something like Starship Troopers, I can kind of see where the author is coming from. Why should anyone have a say in how society is run if they're not willing to serve that society in some way? For what's really a book for teens, that's kind of a profound question and I find it interesting. It doesn't mean I want mandatory service, military or otherwise, before people are enfranchised, but it made for interesting brain fodder. I took a nifty class called Gender & Science Fiction, where I was expected to read a lot of science fiction and analyze them through various theories. It was kind of fun to analyze books/stories through lenses I didn't even agree with. Most people, me included, aren't doing that when reading for entertainment though.