What’s Wrong with a Readable Book?

By posted at 1:04 pm on October 22, 2011 2

There is a controversy brewing right now in Britain about readability and excellence in literature. Apparently, being “readable” is no longer a compliment.

The Millions' future depends on your support. Become a member today!

Share this article

More from the Millions

2 Responses to “What’s Wrong with a Readable Book?”

  1. Tim Chambers
    at 8:16 pm on October 22, 2011

    An excellent article and an apropos analogy. I see nothing wrong with a readable book and Julian Barnes was an excellent choice. There are many books that I have tried to read that were just too turgid in style to make the effort worthwhile. Many of them works of great acclaim, Molloy is one that stands out in my mind, and William Gass’s The Tower, and anything by David Foster Wallace. But then again, so is Dan Brown unreadable, in my opinion, because he writes for people with a taste for story but no taste for language. There is a very fine line between pure story telling and pure writing, somewhat akin to a tightrope, upon which literature exists. Getting the balance right is what makes all the difference.

  2. Fiction Writers Review » Blog Archive » Taboo book words: Readable and Plot?
    at 8:01 am on November 14, 2011

    […] The Star, Bert Archer argues that there’s nothing wrong with “readable” books (via): You could make snide comparisons to see-ability in art and hear-ability in music, but I think the […]

Post a Response

Comments with unrelated links will be deleted. If you'd like to reach our readers, consider buying an advertisement instead.

Anonymous and pseudonymous comments that do not add to the conversation will be deleted at our discretion.

NEW COMMENTING RULE: Comments may be held for moderation and/or deleted. Whitelisted commenters will see their comments appear immediately. Don't be a jerk. We reserve the right to delete your comment or revoke commenting privileges for any reason we want.