50 Books Challenge 2025 Part Three

[Southeastdweller]

Welcome to the third thread of the 50 Book Challenge for this year.
The challenge is to read fifty books (or more!) in 2025, though reading fifty isn't mandatory. Any type of book can count, and please try to let us all know your thoughts on what you've read.

If possible, please can you embolden your titles and maybe authors as well of books you've read or going to read? It makes it much easier to keep track, especially when the threads move quickly at this time of the year.

The first thread of the year is here and the second thread here.

I’m a great believer in ‘there is a book out there for everyone’.

Sorry, but why? Why is it a good thing? I know it's a thing people say, but why does it matter to you personally, that Alexandra in Balham, for example, has just started reading in her spare time?

I'm not being confrontational for no reason, but I'm trying to discern why so many people say "well if it gets people reading isn't it great?"

Why? Children, yes, they need to learn to read, but imo for adults it is entirely optional. I love to read but my dh has literally never read a book for pleasure. Ever. He reads for work and has a Masters degree but he read to do well in those things, not for fun. I don't care. Why do you care if someone like my husband has no inclination to read? Does it in your eyes make someone less valuable or does it make them less content? What's your theory.

I am truly interested to hear it.

But also feel free to say it isn't my business.

I think it’s the reading that is the point, rather than reading for pleasure. There are too many people in this world who read nothing more than the Daily Heil or whatever the Fox News equivalent is in the states. And we all know where that has got us.

@Pickandmixusername I'll have to be honest and say you are coming across as a little confrontational, but perhaps that is just me, and I will answer your questions in good faith.

It doesn't matter to me personally whether specific people are reading, I do however think that encouraging reading in general is a good thing. Reading let's people expand their knowledge, learn about different points of view, enhance their vocabulary, can reduce stress, and so many other benefits. I must admit I'm struggling to understand why someone on a reading thread would not think this is a benefit, but we all see things differently. It's not enforced reading, so if people don't want to read then fair enough. But I stand by my statement that anything that encourages people (and by people I mean people in general) to read more is a good thing, regardless of the type of book.

Thank you for answering in good faith. I was asking in good faith as several people on here have said similar to you. You were just the most recent one I saw.

I disagree with you (and others) who think reading is of benefit to everyone. I used my husband as an example of a lifelong non reader, and he is genuinely one of the most intelligent people I have ever met.

I love to read and discuss books, which is why I'm on this thread, and have been under several usernames for years. It does not naturally follow that, because I love to read (and to discuss books, even with - especially with - people whose taste differs a lot to my own), that I think everyone benefits from reading. I don't think that.

I've enjoyed reading your views on it. I don't feel I've been confrontational at all, just curious and I am glad I asked and that you answered, despite us not agreeing.

,

@Pickandmixusername Thanks for not taking offence I struggle with anxiety and find it hard to read people's tone at the best of times so appreciate you were not being confrontational, just genuinely interested. And there's nothing wrong with a good natured debate.

I do think we are coming at this from slightly different angles though. I think you are talking about individuals, whereas I am talking about the population in general. If someone doesn't enjoy reading of course they shouldn't have to do this in their spare time, and I don't think any less of them for this. I guess I'm more saying that anything that encourages people to consider whether reading might be for them can only be a good thing, regardless of where they get the impetus.

We will have to agree to disagree on this one but it was interesting for me to hear your views, and to think a bit more about my own.

Your husband does read though. He reads for work and has read for academic success. Reading has had value for him. When people say that any reading is better than no reading, I’m assuming that they don’t mean it has to be fiction. Your husband will have acquired and honed vocabulary from whatever he’s read; he will have formulated opinions; learned knowledge of whatever it is he studied; been able to think about said knowledge and perhaps impart it to others using vocabulary he has gained from reading. Of course it matters.

I’m just here to defend CCM. (There are at least 3 covers knocking about now)

I enjoyed EO, we know my view in Crawdads and Matt Haig’s one book I’ve read wasn’t for me. However, I did enjoy all three Fifty Shades of Grey, thought the Da Vinci Code was ok and read Bridgerton, Catherine Cookson and Santa Montefiore with joy.

I don’t agree that these are books people who don’t read read, more they are often the books shops display prominently. Being totally honest, in a bookshop it isn’t often I walk along spines and go ‘oh that looks interesting’ - it the books face up on the table that entice me because I can see their covers. It’s the same way that it’s books in the deals that often grab me so dictates what I read to some degree.

I think reading is about whatever you get out of it. Personally, I do love new words, new worlds, ideas, I love (what I feel) beautiful prose, I enjoy emotional writing. One of my work colleagues reads all the time, almost always thrillers, what she gets from reading is different - she loves to be compelled to turn the pages, trying to work it out, that is a satisfying read. I’d say we both win here.

Short version: if you enjoyed it (the process, the content or whatever) = great stuff

Thank you for your views. I like reading people's thoughts on this.

So, when you say, "well as long as it gets people reading, isn't that a great thing?", can i ask, do you believe that these people who are about to "get reading" never read a book, articles, journals whatever, at all, to pass an exam or for work? I don't think that's true. My interpretation of "well as long as..." was that people meant for their own enjoyment. Interesting to see that people may mean something else.

I don't know how to word this to sound unconfrontational, so you will just have to take me at my word really

And to reiterate, I don't care if people read Oliphant and the like. I read it myself! If that's what you like, have at it 🤷‍♀️

Lovely post. I agree with you

No. That’s not what I said at all. You’re assuming I’m talking about fiction. I’m absolutely not. I’m talking about the act of reading, full stop. And I’m talking about a general population where too many people don’t read at all, or only read the Mail which can succeed in indoctrinating them because they don’t know how to read with any discernment. And anything that gets people like that reading anything else at all is pretty much always going to be a good thing imo, even cereal packets.

I agree with you on the Mail. I'd actually campaign to STOP people reading there (joking...kind of...)

Well, thanks for clarifying.

Since I was the one to use the phrase 'books for people who don't read' I think I should probably explain myself. A typical literary novel would be sold 250 times annually, 3000 over its lifetime. In comparison Captain Corelli's Mandolin had sold 1.5M copies in the UK in first 5 years after it was initially published. When it came out in 1994 it was everywhere. The only way a book can be that popular is if lots of people who don't normally read much buy that book. That's just a fact and isn't a value judgement of the book or the people who read it.

Secondly, after the initial good publicity there's a bit of a backlash to bestsellers. In CCM's case, there's the non-favourable comparison with García Márquez, and the unhappiness in Cephalonia about how the war in Greece was portrayed. In EO and Crawdads it's the simplistic way they overcomes their childhood trauma. These issues in the characterisation are more likely to be noticed by people who read a lot or those who have experience of the topic the book is about. So the book becomes a bit controversial because it talks to some people but not others and enough people have read it for it to have an opinion (see also the multimillion selling BBB).

I'm very much of the opinion that fictional stories are good for people, whether they are consumed as books or films or plays or TV. They take you out of yourself and make you experience the world from someone else's viewpoint. So these best sellers are good because they can act to tempt occasional readers into becoming regular readers. People who already read a lot can either avoid them or choose to read them as a lighter read.

My comment was intended to be jokey and throwaway in the same way we joke about the 'female relative of the male job title' books or the 'small retail business in the back of beyond' books.

I'd just like to apologise in case I offended anyone by agreeing with other comments around 'books for people who don't read'.

FWIW I think I was partially projecting as I was annoyed by something that happened a long time ago. My work colleagues were very much 'read what's popular' and knew I read more diversely, so they were dismissive of my EO suggestion because they hadn't heard of it before but then raved about it when everyone began to talk about it. But tbh it was reflective of their overall attitude towards me so I know its more of a 'me' problem than anything else.

What a great post and explanation of why you think reading fiction is A Good Thing.

I do agree with you I think in general, so really appreciate your well thought out post although I know it was not aimed at me directly.

I'm finding this a really interesting discussion. It's good to hear all your opinions, and makes me think about my own. I tend to agree with @JaninaDuszejko that one of the benefits of reading fiction is that it makes you consider a viewpoint that may be very different from your own. But also, like @Pickandmixusername, I have a non reading DH who is intelligent and empathetic so 🤷‍♀️

I had to read the toothpaste tube whilst brushing my teeth. Riveting stuff!

I think, and I hope everyone knows that I'm the last person to be a Book Snob. Like @AgualusasLover I enjoyed 50 Shades Of Grey and in recent times I've read and enjoyed (with caveats) several Jilly Coopers. All books are great.

But I would say that there's a reason why some books become Classics (Jane Eyre) or Modern Classics (Handmaids Tale) whilst others remain mass market and are never elevated as such.

In the last 6 months I've read two books (Good Material and We Solve Murders) that have mentioned the Boots Meal Deal. Are they perfectly acceptable reading material. YES. Are they contributing to Literature As An Art Form - probably not.

Did I find them both easy reads? Yes
Am I finding the Count Of Monte Cristo a challenge? Yes

Is it more worthy as a reading choice? Who can say? It's not really working for me.

I'd just like to say from my own perspective that very long posts being unnecessarily quoted is making the thread harder to read, for me anyway, but I really don't want to be thought of as Thread Police

Peace And Love Folks!

I think that where Captain Corelli differs from Eleanor Oliphant etc is that it has stood the test of time. It may have been a bestseller when it first came out, but it's still remembered and loved now. There's no chance IMO of that being true for EO in 30 years' time.

I always remember a line from a TV show I watched years ago, ‘you should read what you enjoy, not what you think you ought to.’ That stuck with me as I was always worried what other people thought of what I read, particularly as it was around the same time as Harry Potter was first published and adults who read it were ridiculed in certain places. I don’t care as much now (probably due to my age more than anything else) but there is still a side of me that wishes I read more literary books or at least found them easier to read.

Yes. Too much quoting of long posts going on. Happy to join you in the policing of that @EineReiseDurchDieZeit 😂

Thank God!

Great post @JaninaDuszejko ! You've put your finger on one big thing that annoyed me about both EO and Crawdads, namely the characters' implausibly quick recovery from trauma. I also agree totally with what you say about how reading fiction (and sometimes also nonfiction) can immerse you in someone else's world. So reading can make you more emotionally intelligent as well as better informed.

I'm greatly enjoying this whole discussion of what people read. On one level, obviously, it's very much a matter of taste. 'Litfic' is generally what I read and like, but I'm very aware that litfic is only one genre among others. And some types of litfic I find too pretentious and navel-gazing (books that make it to the Booker Prize shortlist, I'm looking at you!). That said, most friends I know in real life prefer less lit-ficcy, more commercialised fiction than I do. My SIL, for example, reads masses of fiction, but there's very little cross-over in her tastes and mine. So I love the 50-Booker threads because there are loads of people here who share my reading tastes. These MN threads are probably more skewed towards readers of litfic. That said, 50-Bookers read and review all kinds of books, and I've definitely been inspired to read books I wouldn't have read otherwise, due to the reviews on here. For instance, I might actually have to go off and read Captain Corelli now, gasp!

I firmly believe that people should read whatever they enjoy, regardless of how popular or unpopular it is the Daily Fail excepted of course.

The literary critic Roland Barthes in his book S/Z argued that there are two types of books, the readerly text versus the writerly text ('texte lisible' and 'texte scriptible'). Readerly texts according to Barthes are more predictable and easier to understand, so you read them passively and they bring you pleasure ('plaisir'). Writerly texts on the other hand are more demanding and don't present their interpretation to you on a platter; you have to actively work to make sense of them. Writerly texts therefore turn the reader into a co-author, and while reading these texts is more challenging, it's also more rewarding, and you experience not just pleasure but bliss ('jouissance').

So make of that theory what you will, ha. Personally I find it quite helpful, because yes, sometimes more demanding books are more rewarding. That said, I don't always want to be an active reader; sometimes I just want to be a passive one, and lose myself in a story without having to think about it too hard.

I would also say that quite a few books that initially look like 'readerly' books turn out to be 'writerly' ones, if you think about them some more. Barthes' theory is also quite elitist I would say. For centuries, books written for a primarily female audience were seen as less worthwhile and less literary, whereas in fact this view involved a lot of implicit sexism (if women are enjoying a book, it must not be very good!).

Another thing is that in my RL book club, some of the books I consider less 'good' from a literary point of view are the ones that we've had the best discussions about.

I feel like posting Daniel Pennac's excellent 'Rights of the Reader' list, even though everyone has probably seen them before!

When it comes to reading we grant ourselves every right in the book, including those we withhold from the young people we claim to be teaching.

1. The right not to read.
2. The right to skip pages.
3. The right not to finish a book.
4. The right to reread.
5. The right to read anything.
6. The right to escapism.
7. The right to read anywhere.
8. The right to browse.
9. The right to read aloud.
10. The right not to defend your tastes.

I’ll stop at ten. A nice round figure, that also happens to be the sacred number of the famous Commandments. Except this is a list of things you can do.
If we want our sons, our daughters, all young people to read, we must grant them the same rights we grant ourselves.

-- Daniel Pennac, Better Than Life

Sorry that was such a massively long post, I get carried away on this topic in case you can't tell 😳