Popular Book Genres Seen As "Easy Reading" || Literary Inbox

It's been a long time since I wrote a discussion post. I'm also not as up-to-date with trends and discussions on social media ever since I stopped being active on social media platforms. (It is one of the reasons I hesitate to write discussion posts, actually. I don't know what others are saying to comment on them.)

I have a lot of thoughts in general, though. Social media is not the only way to consume content and discuss, after all. I talk about literacy and critical thinking with my friends and colleagues. When I saw this prompt on 24hryabookblog's Literary Inbox, I decided to give it a shot.

I don't know how much I'll say or which direction this will go in. I'm just going to wing it. Grab a drink and settle down, let's discuss.

Do you read from genres that others call “easy reads” or “quick to read”? When it comes to primarily women-led genres like Romance, Romantasy, YA or with visual literature like Graphic Novels can those labels be seen as reductive or insulting? Inspired by a recent #booktok, a creator mentioned certain books can be seen as “junk food” reads. Do you find that this “negative” connotation skews the opinion of a genre or category of books?

Firstly, let's talk about what it means. The term can mean different things for different people, which can lead to wildly different ideas about this topic.

To me, an "easy read" is a book that doesn't require much thinking or effort. It's a book with fairly simple vocabulary i.e. even if I don't know the words, I can understand the meaning by the context it's used in and doesn't require me to look it up. An easy read is a book that doesn't make me pause and think about what's going on in the story, why it is happening, and what it subtly references to. An easy read is a book that says everything and doesn't ask you to find out anything by yourself.

The prompt mentions that a creator called certain books as "junk food" reads. I'm assuming they refer to books that are easy and fun to read—not necessarily "healthy" (intellectual) but satisfying. I understand the comparison. Honestly, even I classify some books similarly. I call them no-brain books. Reading them is like giving my brain a break without resorting to watching something on a screen like TV shows or movies.

However, easy reads =/= junk. I will always stand by this. It may be, but it may also not be. Just like "hard" books can be junk too. The generalisation is not right. Books can be easy to read while teaching and being incredibly informative. Just because a book is easy to read doesn't mean that it doesn't have anything of value to say.

Exhibit 1: Fumbled by Alexa Martin. This is a book that I consider an easy read and I'm sure that most people would too. Especially those who love to diss on romance books. I read it for fun and really enjoyed it. I also came away from the book with new information. I learnt about Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE) in football without having to research it while reading. The book taught me about it by showing me an experience. And honestly, that's the best way to learn about a health condition. Reading a Wikipedia page about symptoms and history is one thing. Learning about how it affects people, how it can go undiagnosed for a long time, and how it affects the person and their family is a whole other thing. I believe that the latter is more important than the former.

Romance is actually my favourite genre. It took me a long time to admit it because of the negative connotations attached to it. I am still sometimes ashamed when people call me a romance reader because it's with the assumption that I don't read anything "important" or "serious". When I talk to new people I don't usually say that it's my favourite genre, instead preferring to say that I read everything. I technically do, I just read a lot of romance too.

The funny thing is that the people who lowkey make fun of romance are also the ones who ask me how I read so much. They think it's mutually exclusive. It's not. The reason why I'm able to read so much is because I read romance too.

If you only hard books, you're going to struggle with reading. This is a simple rule that is understood in other aspects of life. The worst way to maintain a habit is to constantly do it the hard way.

If you think about it, you can find so many parallels between reading and running. (I'm using running as an example since I know it best, I'm sure you can come up with other similar activities.) Runners are coached to mix up their runs by doing easy runs in between the hard ones. In fact, in the Nike Running Club 10k plan, it is recommended to do more easy runs in a week than hard runs. The point is to keep running, not keep running hard. You won't continue running if you end every day feeling like you're dying. You also won't continue running if it's the same thing every day. Monotony doesn't help maintain a habit.

Everything is a balance, so why is it expected to be any different with reading? I understand that some of it comes from the way reading is introduced to us in school—as something "smart" and "intellectual". That's a whole different can of worms that I can write a whole post about so I'll just say that we all know academics is flawed.

"Easy reads" can be the thing that keeps you reading. I always read something easy between hard books. Firstly, because I want to still think about the hard book I already read for longer before picking up another one. And secondly, to give myself a break while still maintaining the flow/habit. Easy reads can help you get into and keep up with reading, especially when hard book give you a hard time.

Exhibit 2: Fourth Wing by Rebecca Yarros. This could be classified as an easy read because it's romantasy. It has a whole new world and everything is explained on the page. The reader isn't asked to decode relationships or think about why something happened. The story tells you everything and just asks that you stay along for the ride. When a new reader asked for a recommendation, I suggested Fourth Wing even though it's not the best book. It's easier to read and is easier to complete. Finishing a book, even a "bad" one, is a better motivation to read more than to read 30 pages of Fahrenheit 451 and give up because it requires a lot of thinking. And you know what, that person is still reading.

If reading is always hard, we are not going to be a well-read society. Most discussions say it the other way and I disagree. You can't throw only hard books at people and expect them to be avid readers. Very few become avid readers that way. Most of the readers who read only classics or "intelligent" books are the worst snobs and aren't nice to be around.

Obviously, one shouldn't read only "easy reads" either. That's how we lose critical thinking skills and become the best receptacle for propaganda. It leads to a blissfully ignorant society that believes everything told to them by the few people who know how to wield the avenues of information. We're already seeing this in so many different ways with the rise of misinformation and AI. I won't go deeper into this here because that's another huge topic.

Instead of calling out the amount of easy reads and dismissing the people that read them, we should be asking "why aren't more people reading the hard books"? Romance, romantasy, YA, and graphic novels are easy gates to get into reading. Why are people stopping there instead of going further?

Everything is a balance. The solution should not be to ridicule and cut off one side of things, because that also cuts off the value that this side brings. The solution should be to uplift the other side too.

There is value in these easy books more than them being easy to read. Some of the books are nonsense and don't bring anything to the table just like in any genre, but it's not most or all of them. I have noticed that the easy books are the ones teaching you how to be a good person. They're the ones teaching you to listen, to be empathetic, to understand how to react to bad news, and how to support the people around you.

Middle grade and YA books are doing an amazing job of depicting emotions and flaws and how to move forward. The fantasy and romantasy are the best books, in my opinion, to encourage ambition and grit. The romance books show an infinite number of ways to be a partner through happiness, despair, and challenges.

Exhibit 3: I Hope This Doesn't Find You by Ann Liang. It's a simple and easy-to-read story about a girl in high school. Most people would not classify this as a hard or "smart" book. But it's such an important story that deserves to be out in the world, especially for the girls in high school that are doing too much. It's also for the teenagers to learn that even if something so monumental and embarrassing happens, they will get through it. Teenagers should be reading the classics in school, yes. But they should also be reading books like this.

Exhibit 4: Percy Jackson and The Olympians by Rick Riordan. Will anyone classify this as an intellectual book? No. But you can't deny that it has raised a generation of smart, knowledgeable, empathetic, and friendly people. You can't deny that most people who read Percy Jackson when they were younger are still readers who read "hard" books. This story has value because it shows that flaws like dyslexia do not define you and that you can still go on to be a hero who saves the world. It shows characters going through tough trials and coming out champions by working together.

Let me reiterate the point: if a book is easy to read, that doesn't mean it doesn't have value. This negative perspective definitely skews opinions and actually hinders readers. If you're dismissing all of these amazing books, you're not getting the value they uniquely have and you're discouraging others around you from getting it too.

The prompt asks, "When it comes to primarily women-led genres like Romance, Romantasy, YA or with visual literature like Graphic Novels can those labels be seen as reductive or insulting?" Yes. And it is usually meant to be insulting.

It's not a new conclusion that anything that is primarily driven by women is the subject of ridicule or dismissed entirely. Be it careers, labour, art, ideas, or whatever else. Men in areas that are primarily occupied by women are respected more than women. As soon as more men join the area, it's value goes up. This is not new information. At least, I hope that it's not a new fact for everyone? If it is then people need to read more books—many easy reads can teach this too 🙂

Instead, let's flip the question. Why are these genres women-led? Why are there so few men in them?

Men usually write in the "serious" genres such as non-fiction, literary fiction, and mystery. These genres are expected to be brilliant at the topic they address and don't have to do well at anything else. In fiction, they usually have characters that one should not be inspired by. In non-fiction, people aren't usually a subject of consideration at all. It's only a subject.

In my opinion, this is due to the way people are raised. Just like how raising women to constantly think about serving the people around her led her to be good at writing books centred around people, men are raised to think about specific things like careers and money and hence they occupy those spaces more. Men aren't usually raised to consider emotions (theirs or those of the people around them) and hence they write about factual things and not on emotional things.

Obviously, this is a super high-level perspective. There are exceptions on both sides. There are brilliant women who write in male-dominated areas and brilliant men who write in female-dominated areas. The lines are blurring more because we're more aware and trying to change the status quo.

The best way to win is to strive for more balance. Empower more women in the "serious" genres. Encourage men to pick up "easy reads". It is only by reading widely ACROSS BOTH will we be well-read and good people.

It isn't a good thing to be well-read across things like politics and history if the person isn't a good partner, friend, and neighbour. It isn't a good thing to know how to support others if you don't know how your world works.

We must read books that show us things to learn from and books that make us question the way things are. It is just that the former is usually in a certain format considered easy and the latter is in a format considered hard. The ridicule is simply because of the gender that leads those spaces.

chat with me!

I definitely went on a tangent that deviated from the main prompts. There are so many ways to look at a topic and so many ways to answer a prompt. I'm glad I wrote my version. Discussion, whether it stems from a dissertation or a casual blog post, is important. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

What do you consider "easy reads"? What makes it an easy read? How do you think easy and hard books contribute to literacy and knowledge in the big picture? Do you have any examples or counter points to what I said?