Is it unreasonable to criticise a book without having read it?

[NumTumDeDum]

I have in mind 50 Shades of Grey as an example here but I suppose it could be any piece of writing - daily mail articles, political books.

I've read reviews of 50 shades, almost all those I read criticise the subject matter, the style of writing and several express a view that they wish they hadn't bothered to read it.

Can't remember why it came up but dp reckons you can't criticise something unless you've read it. Now normally I might be of that view, but in this case, I'm satisfied that particular book is a pile of shite. I refuse to read it. AIBU?

I haven't read any of the Harry Potter books for that same reason. I believe they will be shite and they are kids books anyway. YANBU.

50 Shades? Nah.

I think it's a bit naff to do the whole 'oh, yah, Anna Karenina is sooo trite, my dear' if you've not read it, but that's because there's cultural cachet attached to pretending to be too smart for classic lit. There's not much cultural catchet attached to objecting to a wank book with a bad premise, so knock yourself out.

YANBU. I haven't read it either and am completely prepared to agree with you.

I read the first chapter of 50 shades, decided that the writing was terrible (and it hadn't even got to any dirty bits) and put it aside.

There's plenty of good books out there to read and too little time to read them. So yes, I'm happy to criticise that particular book without having read it in it's entirety.

If you are a reader then 50sog is shit, but I thank that book because before that I didn't even own a book now I have a large shelf with about 30ish book and around 25 on my iBook app.

I find its a good starter book for adults.

Yanbu.

I think it's a bit unreasonable - I've read 50 shades it's shite but I know it's shite because I read it.

Surely that's a bit like saying "I don't like peas" "what is it you don't like about them?" "dont know - never actually tasted them"

That is possibly the clunkiest example ever written but I'm sure you get the gist.

I would judge FSOG as a crap book and I have never picked up a copy,

I think if you have been told in detail why a book is rubbish from several reliable sources it is fair enough to criticise it.

I have read 50 shades and it has no redeeming features. My mum has read all three and claims the first one makes sense within the context of the full story.

So where do you stop? I like the Historian but read no other vampire fiction. My friend who likes vampire fiction says the Historian is poor by comparison. Am I wrong because I don't know the genre?

Depends.

If you're phrasing it along the lines of "Everything I've heard about 50 Shades of Grey suggests that it's a pile of shite that I'd hate reading", then YANBU.

If you're just saying "50 Shades of Grey is a pile of shite", then that's less reasonable.

It is a little reasonable to judge something without reading it. You can choose not to read it because you believe you wouldn't enjoy it but can't really give an opinion to someone else.

50 Shades IS a pile of shite

I know because I've read it

No. My FIL does this all the time. I'm not even sure he can read. He pompously regurgitates book reviews despite never reading the actual text.

Drives me mad and makes him sound like a buffoon.

I think you can decide from a review whether to choose a book to read, but nothing more. It's a totally subjective experience.

You can make a judgement on it based on other peoples opinions, but until you read it you don't really know for yourself. You just assume, based on other peoples opinions. I've read it, and, in my opinion, its shite.

Yabu you cant base your views on what other people think

But isn't there a point at which there's no possible way an author could make a plot ok for you?

Eg., Lolita. I've never read it. I have read enough extracts to know the writing is clever and stylish. I'm still icked out by it and don't want to read it.

No. Life's too short to read anything that you even think might be shite or boring.

Harry Potter however is awesome.

Totally with you!

Mum, course you can. Many do on here every day..... Many students do at uni basing everything they learn on just few texts. Some people read nothing but daily fail or sun, never stopped them either!

Depends on what you are criticising.

If you are criticising the writing then you need to have read some of it.

If you are criticising the subject, you can get a good idea of the subject of the book without having read much.

If you are criticising the story, or the characterisation, you need to have read quite a bit before you know enough to criticise these.

It's not at all unreasonable to decide that you don't want to read a book, without having read it, but your criticisms of it are possibly less valid than someone who has actually looked at the entire contents of the book.

I've read 1.5 chapters of 50 shades and don't need to read anymore to know it is awful. I haven't bothered with the rest although dh and I sometimes play a drunken game where we pick out passages at random and read them out loud.

Does your DP think you should read something all the way through?

Like RhinestoneCowgirl, I make a judgement by the end of the first chapter of something. I don't waste my time if it's poorly written and doesn't make up for the poor writing with a gripping plot.

I feel perfectly able to criticise a book that I abandon after the first chapter - in my mind I've given it the old college try, so I'm allowed to judge freely.

Examples:

Poorly written, good plot: Harry Potter (read them all)

Poorly written, shite plot: Da Vinci Code (read first chapter)

Poorly written, distasteful characters that I hated yet mysteriously compelling plot: Twilight novels (read them all in a sort of sick frenzy and felt really shitty afterwards, like I'd eaten an entire sharing bag of kettle chips dipped in nutella)

I think that when it comes to your example you are failing to make the distinction between "pile of shite" and "not something that I want to read".

no. it's not unreasonable.

I gave to do it professionally a lot. (or i'd end up stocking every book in the world)

you can also criticize the idea of a book, which you can ascertain from the blurb.

that doesn't mean that you shouldn't read it
the way to get readers is allow them (encourage them) to read whatever the hell they fancy, regardless of its shitness.

It is unreasonable to criticise a book you have never read. You are not unreasonable to not read a book because you don't think you would like it.

My husband reads fantasy/sci fi books. I wouldn't read them as I know it's not my type of book. I would never criticise them though.