Hater: On the Virtues of Utter Disagreeability

by John Semley

A timely manifesto urging us to think critically, form opinions, and then argue them with gusto.

Hater begins from a simple that it's good to hate things. Not people or groups or benign belief systems, but things. More to the point, it's good to hate the things everyone seems to like.
Scan the click-baiting headlines of your favorite news or pop-culture website and you're likely to find that just about everything is, supposedly, "what we need right now." We are the victims of an unbridled, unearned optimism. And our world demands pessimism. It's vital to be contrarian--now, as they say, more than ever. Because ours is an age of calcified consensus. And we should all hate that.
In this scathing and funny rebuke of the status quo, journalist John Semley illustrates that looking for and identifying nonsense isn't just a useful exercise for society, it's also a lot of fun. But Hater doesn't just skewer terrible TV shows and hit songs--at its core it shows us how to meaningfully talk about and engage with culture, and the world. Ultimately, Hater is what we actually need right now.

Genres: Nonfiction, Philosophy

176 pages, Hardcover

Published October 23, 2018

Reviews

[Sinéad O'Brien · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Hater” is one of the best books I've read this year. It is thoughtful, well-written, smart and very funny. It cuts to the core of what is wrong or alarming about how we engage with art and culture around us. Namely, that we are not nearly skeptical enough and that thoughtful criticism itself has been ostracized - or worse - out-moded.

Every essay is so thought-provoking and called into question many of the ways I engage with art and culture. It was both validating (as somewhat of a crusty skeptic myself) and a necessary call-out for the ways in which I’ve uncritically engaged with mass media. It is at times very philosophical, which can be heavy reading, but he manages to create accessible analogies where they are necessary. I definitely read some parts of this book twice - sometimes in order to understand, sometimes because the writing was so pleasurable that I wanted to read it over.

In particular, Semley is so adept at handling issues of race and gender in pop culture with nuance and is never dismissive. For example, his handling of Beyonce as the complex and important cultural icon she is - while lamenting the lack of critical engagement with her role as a musician specifically - is artful. Similarly, his brief dismissal of Sex and The City was couched in the understanding that the show - while deeply flawed - offered space for female characters largely unseen before in popular media. I also appreciated his awareness when discussing curmudgeons about the limitations women have in assuming that role in our society and why.

The best (unexpected) thing about this book is that the core message is quite lovely. To quote:

“It’s not like Hate and Love are two sides of the same coin. The relationship between the two is not dichotomous but dialectic: They are entwined, challenging and refining and reforming one another.

Hating becomes a thing to be admired, as loving so often is. And if love (as Shakespeare so often put it) is blind i.e., animated by a pure passion that somehow precedes reason, then hate must be reasonable, purposeful, deeply informed. To hate in such a way is to practice the art and craft of thought itself.”

So, with sincerity and from a place of kindness, I will continue to hate things and nurture the impulse. But not this book. You should read it.

[Jess · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a brave undertaking, and it gets points for gumption. But if you’re going to write a book about being a curmudgeon, it seems especially important to ensure that it doesn’t suck.

This book, regrettably, sucks.

There are easy vectors for criticism here. The prose is clumsy, vacillating between overly familiar dad jokes to nigh incoherent theory in a small volume. It frequently focuses on low-hanging fruit, and while there are arguments, it’s tough to escape the feeling that this is actually a dressed-up list designed to prove “things I like are good, and things I don’t suck

Listen: I am the target audience. I am a proud contrarian, willing to interrogate consensus opinions. I am passionate about the things I love and dismissive of things I don’t care for. And this book offered me no consolation.

The author rejects modes of criticism that he finds insufficiently enlightening. And as much as he tries to mask it, he’s really just singing the praises of traditional gatekeepers and traditional opinions. His notions of “worthwhile” culture are painfully limited.

Here’s what you need to know, filtered through my biases:
-Like what you want
-You don’t have to like anything, even if everyone else does
-Interrogate things you like and things you don’t

This small book of snobbery will appeal to the cultural pearl clutchers who already agree with him. For more discriminating snobs, I recommend reading something excellent instead of something about the virtues of excellence.

[Chris Boutté · Rating 5 out of 5]

3rd read:
I hate on a lot of things and criticise a lot of things. Sometimes I feel like a jerk by doing it, and when that happens, I re-read this book. John Semley explains why being a hater is needed and goes through the benefits. So, if you’re a hater like me, give this book a read.

2nd read:
I just read this book for the first time a few months ago, and I had to read it again. It’s such a great book that I can’t recommend enough. Recently, I’ve started creating new content in a community that is very reluctant to critique literally anything, and this book just kept popping in my mind. After reading it again, it helped me feel less insane because John rationally explains why criticism is needed in this world. Not only does it help ensure we push for more quality, but it also helps us live less delusional lives when we allow others to criticize us. Fantastic book.

1st read:
I serendipitously stumbled across an article John Semley wrote the other day about Nathan Fielder’s new show The Rehearsal. I’m usually not a fan of movie and TV commentary, but John seemed to have some interesting insights, so I decided to grab this book. Once I started reading it, I couldn’t put it down, and I binged 90% of the book in one sitting. John Semley is a fantastic writer and has a unique way of seeing the world that offers something fresh to the conversation.

As you can tell by the title, this is about being a hater, but it’s much more. This book dives into the culture of fandom as well as critics, trolls, and society as a whole. John makes fantastic arguments about why we need people who criticize all forms of art, and he even explains why he respects certain commentators who take the piss out of what’s popular. Semley also does a great job explaining how to criticize in a productive way that ads something to the discussion rather than just being a jerk.

I guess what I really love about this book is the fact that I often don’t understand why certain things get so popular when they seem mediocre at best. When I criticize them or just bring up the fact that this thing is good but not that good, I feel bad like I’m just being a contrarian. Semley’s book helped me realize that criticism is needed, and I’m not crazy for some of my cultural commentary. So, this book gets all the love from me, and I encourage more people to read this book. Now, I just need more books from John.

[Micha · Rating 3 out of 5]

Emily and I had this long discussion about art and consumption and hate and merit where we agreed on pretty much everything, as we often do, even as we sometimes found ourselves wandering into contradictory territory. Read what you like! Watch what you like! Something doesn't have to be "high art" to be enjoyed, and we should interrogate what "high art" is in the first place. But then, we also found ourselves constantly drawn to what challenges us and derive sincere pleasure from that, know that reading something poor-quality feels bad for your soul somehow, and are very cautious of art and media that is produced only to be consumed but never criticized. There are profiteers in publishing and in every other kind of art, and if they can game a book for best sales they will, and that stifles creativity and individuality and democratic thought. So we should hold our media to a high standard, we should engage with it, we should absolutely challenge the status quo. "But I enjoy it," "It's mindless entertainment, and I deserve a break," and "It's just pop culture" never cut it for me, and Semley does a good job of reminding one why we should stand strong as contrarians.

[Dave Irwin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Loquacious but written well. While I enjoyed the book, it is definitely not written in the same vein as other, more sycophantic, pop-philosophy books on critical thinking. Verbose, or to avoid what I see as the trap the author fell into, overly wordy, the book reads like a critical essay from a paper or magazine. Where excessive verbiage in the short form is acceptable, within the longer form of a full length book, it becomes exhaustive.

That isn't to say that I did not like the book. Indeed I found it to be a good history and argument for taking the obstinate view that one does not have to wax lyrical about art as an expression of self. Not all art is created equal, therefore it is good, even justifiable to hate art you find objectionable.

All that is to say, I enjoyed Hater, but feel it would have more appeal if it were written in simpler language.

[Natverse · Rating 3 out of 5]

The concept is really interesting but not sure if this was executed in the best possible way. I thing this in tandem with the topic of public shaming would probably go hand-in-hand, as in it doesn't discuss the dangers of of being a hater in enough depth. But I like the concept of being a contrarian and how society needs that. More examples of how contrarians shape society would have been essential I think.

[Lucas · Rating 5 out of 5]

I was introduced to Semley through his brilliant “Slow Learners” podcast, which does a fantastic job of guiding readers through Pynchon’s Gravity’s Rainbow, and now Vineland. John has a knack for turning complex ideas about media and literature into easily understandable arguments, making his prose a delight to read. I cannot recommend this (or his podcast) enough. THIS BOOK IS WORTH YOUR TIME!

[Manveer Grewal · Rating 1 out of 5]

Couldn't finish it, author did touch on some interesting notes but I couldn't stand his way of writing. Using big words having a tremendous amount of footnotes, half of which are pretty useless.

I guess I'm just already good at hating.

[Dylan Clark-Moore · Rating 4 out of 5]

My first instinct in listening to this is that the wrong people will get the wrong idea in reading it, or seeing snippets from it. At first glance, it may seem like it gives permission to rudeness for rudeness’ sake, and it kind of does. Is the internet’s bitchy office mascot Karen actually noble when she “speaks her mind” or is she just being an asshole? That, argues Semley, comes down to faith.

Personally, I hope reading this has helped me be a better critic - less focused on likability, and more on truth. It’s also a reminder to “eat my vegetables,” as he calls it, when it comes to art, but to do it sincerely, and not to perform high-mindedness.

[Ayesha · Rating 5 out of 5]

An articulate and well written guide to navigating consensus culture, the democratisation of public forums, and understanding the benefits of discernment and constructive hating. A very enjoyable and engaging read.

[Peter · Rating 5 out of 5]

"A non-stop roller coaster! I love this book!" - Peter Travers, Rolling Stone

[L · Rating 2 out of 5]

Short and while the ideas are good it's not very accessible.

[Lael · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting concept for sure. Didn't hold my attention for long sadly. Think it's a writing style conflict on my part!

[Mike Totman · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pompous, long winded, might have worked as a long Salon article.

[Nicole · Rating 2 out of 5]

I'm conflicted with my thoughts on this book.

[Marion Lougheed · Rating 2 out of 5]

Some interesting thoughts, but there doesn't seem to be a central point, other than maybe "think for yourself," or perhaps, "think like me."

[Ron · Rating 3 out of 5]

Didn’t do it for me. But I don’t hate it.

[Sarah Mack · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting and fun read — though not very successful in editing the previously written essays into a coherent narrative. It’s not really a book about hating per se — but I liked it all the same.

[Ezra · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting ideas about "hater"-ism and how it contrasts with just being a "troll" (i.e. a person who acts like an asshole for fun while claiming to do it ironically.) I'd say he's onto something here.

A minor quibble: I remember hearing the term "hate-o-rade" on MuchMusic sometime in the 90s so the term wasn't invented in 2012 (and there's no way I heard the term after around the turn of the millenium because I stopped watching MuchMusic around then).

(N.B. There's a throwaway diss of Goodreads in the book.)

[Richard Simpson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a book that is more about criticism than it is about “hating” per se, although Semley does touch upon philosophers (Diogenes and Schopenhauer are two examples) who definitely took disagreeableness to new levels. He also contrasts “hating” as a thoughtful and possibly even necessary corrective to the infantilisation of modern culture with trolling, where people simply hate for the sake of hating, and go out of their way to cause emotional harm to others just for the fun of it. I liked the book, but I found it a bit of a slog to be 100% honest. It read more like a series of essays than it did a well thought out book level treatment of its subject.