Play Book Tag discussion

Questions for this week, and yes, at this point, I am getting others to help come up with questions.

Can a book be meaningful even if it isn’t “good”?
Can a book be “good” without being enjoyable?
What do we owe a book once we’ve finished it—if anything at all? Reflection, discussion, rereading… or is it okay to simply move on?
Do we read differently knowing we’ll discuss the book later?

Yes, a book could give you new info or inspiration even if it's not the best writing. Many books about social issues aren't "enjoyable" to read but educate us and sometimes move us into action.

One thing I like just as much as reading books is talking about books. Others often provide new insights and attitudes that make the book a richer experience.

I sometimes find myself formulating my opinion of the book while reading , thinking how I will describe it either for my IRL book group, or GR grou[s

I find sometimes that a book other people feel is dark, depressing, and triggering, somehow that flies right past me, as I have loved the book so much, the lyrical writing, the themes, etc... that the sad nature of the book doesn't take away from anything in the least. Three examples; My Friends, There Are Rivers in the Sky, and A Constellation of Vital Phenomena. These are lifetime favorites. However, often I don't care about how "good' a book is, if its overly dark and sad and doesn't resolve, transform, and lift by the end. I don't care how good a book is, if I am still unsettled with no hope by the end.

I find with the goodreads raters, that a lot of thrillers are rated as "really good" or given high ratings, and i don't have no idea what that means. Also young or low (er) brow readers will rate really crappy books high, because they love them. That's why you really do have to find "book twins" and I am grateful that this group knows me well.

I am a solid mid-brow reader with higher aspirations. I do like some literary fiction and higher brow books. I can be very comfortable in any bookstore looking at the bestseller and recommended shelves. Which has a mix of everything. I have authors whose style I love. I can easily tell you my faves at any time, and now there are plenty.

And yes I am often formulating my thoughts and writing my review while reading. I have read nothing good yet in these first ten books of 2026. But that feeling of when you open the book and from the first line you aware you are in the presence of a five star read? I just love that! Nothing like it - and I can't wait to experience that again.

There seems to be a bit of a trend in groups right now discussing this type of question relating to reading. I just wrote up one relating to romance reading, where everyone but one author claimed to dislike them and never read them (I never quite fully believe statements like that btw).

Can a book be meaningful even if it isn’t “good”?

Absolutely - and what is meant by 'good'? Does 'good' only mean one worthy of you giving it 5 stars? Only Literary Fiction? Only books where you love the characters? Any book that kept you engaged and reading?

Can a book be “good” without being enjoyable?

Again depends on your definition of 'good'. And also what you mean by 'enjoyable'. Many books are harsh to read, and you can absolutely be totally immersed, even laughing, or compelled to read and rather horrified that you are laughing and still reading. A Brief History of Seven Killings isn't just 'good', it is brilliant and brutal and hilarious and you are horrified that you are laughing at times, yet you keep reading then recommending it to everyone to read.

There's one book I read a few years ago that was part of a book club read at Scandinavian House here in NYC, which was located around the corner from my office. I thought it would be great to read more Scandinavian in translation of contemporary books, not just Nordic Noir, and with people familiar with the literature. Well the group was a disaster, terrible at any discussion and the original leader became ill and never was able to lead the group on the books she'd picked for them to read. What I most remember though is there was this one book that we read which was just god-awful IMHO, and I doubt it was the result of a poor translation. I couldn't even figure out why it was even published in the first place, and especially not why the publisher had it translated into English in the first place, when so many other excellent books never are. Book was The White City by Karolina Ramqvist. That books was neither good nor enjoyable in any way.

What do we owe a book once we’ve finished it—if anything at all? Reflection, discussion, rereading… or is it okay to simply move on?

We owe it nothing. No more than I owe a work of art or sculpture I walk by in a museum or on the street anything at all after glancing at it.

Do we read differently knowing we’ll discuss the book later?

I would say that the only thing that happens if it is a book I know I will be discussing later, like my Feminerdy book club monthly reads, I make sure to highlight or mark or make a note of something I want to mention or an idea to discuss.

Like Robin, I too often find myself mentally thinking about what my review of a book I'm reading will be, or how I would describe it to friends. I discuss books and reading with many friends, family members, even with the guy who cuts my hair. I'm a pretty attentive and retentive reader, so I would say that overall I don't read books differently. I might be more apt to make a note or highlight in a book I will be discussing because there is nothing more irritating to me that trying to find something I remember reading in the book -- I can tell you which side of the page it is on, is it in middle, top, or bottom but not exactly where in the book it is located! I love ebooks because of the highlight and note feature! For example, I just made a 'note' in the Agatha Christie ebook I'm reading of a thought I had as I read as I remember I write it down.

Can a book be meaningful even if it isn’t “good”?
Absolutely. A technically flawed book can lodge itself in my memory, shape how I see something, or arrive at exactly the right moment in life. Sometimes a book's cultural significance matters more than its prose quality. And sometimes a book teaches me something about myself as a reader.

Can a book be “good” without being enjoyable?
We can recognize a book's achievement, such as its construction or innovation, while finding it cold, exhausting, or alienating. I think we sometimes use "good" to mean that it successfully does what it sets out to do, which may or may not include making us happy. [Note: For me, my personal reaction will impact my rating regardless of how "good" it is.]

What do we owe a book once we’ve finished it?
I don't think we owe books anything. Some warrant rereading, some deserve to be discussed, some should be forgotten, some should sit quietly in memory. The book has done its work; what happens after can be mostly internal to the reader. That said, this is one reason I write reviews. I don't want to just discard it and move onto the next without at least thinking through what I liked or disliked about it.

Do we read differently knowing we’ll discuss the book later?
I think they are unavoidably different. If I know I'll be discussing it, I am both reading and preparing to articulate. It's not better or worse, just different. I often make notes (which I sometimes do anyway).

One thing I forgot to mention, mostly because it is ingrained after being a lawyer for 40 years, is that at different points the way you read becomes influenced and changes - by education, training, jobs, etc. What I mean is that what law school does for all who attend and graduate is train you to think, analyze, research, and write in a very specific way, one that is the main tool of being a lawyer, a very specific skill set that through the law school and bar review/exam process, becomes 2nd nature. I have said since graduating law school that I no longer read anything the say I did before law school. I'm always seeing around and about everything, my judgments a little slower to form, and more. It has led me

I believe there are many professions where that happens - journalism for sure, scientists, historians, writers of fiction, performers. And as you experience life, your reading changes and the way you judge what you read changes as well.

An example I used today in another group: the bodice rippers by Kathleen E. Woodiwiss that I just loved in my 20s would bother me a lot today -- 'cringey' as Robin would say -- but I don't discredit that I loved them back in the day nor do I regret reading them at all.

They are still 'good' and 'enjoyable'. Just with a grain of salt perhaps, or a less critical eye than if they were freshly written today.

Another good discussion topic would be to define what we mean by a "good" book.

Can a book be meaningful even if it isn’t “good”? Yes

Can a book be “good” without being enjoyable? Yes! for example, I gave five stars to a well-written, secular novel I think everyone should read, but did not like it at all (the name has nothing whatsoever to do with Judaism or Christianity), Genesis by Bernard Beckett

What do we owe a book once we’ve finished it—if anything at all? Nothing
Reflection, discussion, rereading… or is it okay to simply move on? It's okay to simply move on. If you're reading on your leisure time, do whatever you like after you finish a book.

Do we read differently knowing we’ll discuss the book later? Sometimes.

Joy D wrote: "Another good discussion topic would be to define what we mean by a "good" book."

Okay, lets go. What is a "good" book? I think this is subjective. What I find good someone else might not. To me "good" take on separate meanings depending on the work. Good can be enjoyable, good can be informative, good can be in regard to the writing.

A topic I was saving for next week, but I think we are dipping into.
What makes a classic a classic? Why do some books stick around generationally but others do not?

Can a book be meaningful even if it isn’t “good”?
Yes. The book might not be enjoyable such as dry to bady written, but still have positive qualities that makes it "good" or important or any other word to give it positivity.

Can a book be “good” without being enjoyable?
Again, "good" is subjective and something "good" might be any form of positivity. Enjoyable is one aspect of good but not limited to.

What do we owe a book once we’ve finished it—if anything at all? Reflection, discussion, rereading… or is it okay to simply move on?
I think we do owe something to the books we read. Reflection is the main one and I love discussing books so much. I hate to reread. I never thought I would be one to write reviews of books but I now I find it very important, if nothing else than for me to hold onto the book, even if it's an overall feeling.

Do we read differently knowing we’ll discuss the book later?
I do think I read a little differently if I know I will discuss it later. Maybe more intentionally. Like others have comments, I am formulating my feelings and discussions about a book as I'm reading, seeing how I will explain it and I normally sit with a book a few days after finishing it to make sure those feelings are the same days later.

I'd still save the 'classics' discussion to next week - it's a good one and will likely go quite deep. This week's discussion is big enough.

Like Theresa, I read differently because of my college and grad school studies - in my case, of literature. I sometimes pick up on themes, like the hero myth, or Christian references, that I might not have otherwise. On the other hand, I often enjoy light rom-coms, mysteries with snaky detectives, etc., where I probably won't remember one from another after a few days.

On good vs enjoyable - It's hard to say that Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents is enjoyable because of the difficult subject matter. But aside from the importance of the information, it is one of the most beautifully written books I have ever read.

I also enjoyed some romances and sci-fi in the '60's-70's that would be jarring today. In Rabbit Hole, I put in some caveats about Gone with the Wind, though I loved it when I was 15 years old. Similarly, I remember some TV shows from the era that I loved at the time and thought were funny or touching, and now they seem incredibly sexist and tone-deaf. (Like some of the Brady Bunch episodes about "the battle of the sexes".)

Can a book be meaningful even if it isn’t “good”?
Good is subjective so there can be aspects of a book which suck but other aspects which are brilliant. If I find a book meaningful, I would class it as good even if the writing isn't perfect. If characters are great and I care what happens to them I can enjoy a book even if the writing is not great. I can be very turned off a book by long descriptive waffle, which is common in literary greats. As Theresa said it is also about my training....descriptive waffle is bad in science. Meaningful, to me, just means I found something to relate to in a book, good means I enjoyed it or learnt something.
Can a book be “good” without being enjoyable?
100%. Some non-fiction books are certainly not enjoyable, but I learn a lot, so I'd class them as good. Some stories are very confronting, but they teach me something so again I class them as good.
What do we owe a book once we’ve finished it—if anything at all? Respect. Someone put hours into producing it so keep it and care for it or pass it on so someone else can enjoy it. Never bin a book. (I only read hard copy)
Do we read differently knowing we’ll discuss the book later? No. If I find something I may want to come back to I sticky note the page. If not, my reviews are just gut feelings after finishing the book. The irl book club I was in folded because they shut down the library where we held it last year. TBH it was mostly an excuse to drink wine out of ridiculous vessels (eg a tiny teapot), laugh at each other, eat cheese and swap mushrooms.

I agree that a book can be meaningful even if it’s not ‘good’. However, I struggle quite a lot with books that are truly badly written - so I might find it harder to get something meaningful out of it (if I finish it at all, which I usually won’t).

Can it be good even if not enjoyable? Absolutely. Others have said it all.

What do we owe a book? I’d agree with Jen that an author - any author - deserves respect for having been brave enough to put their hard work out there! But the book itself? I don’t feel I owe it anything. If you want to move on without reviewing, discussing, analysing, thinking much about it, then do. It’s fine simply to have experienced the book or had some fun. And I will get rid of a book if I disliked it (though very very few deserve a bin rather than a potentially appreciative new home). Equally, I find it crazy difficult to give up books I love though. I need to start focusing on sharing the love rather than keeping things on my bookshelves…

Do I read things differently if I know I’m going to discuss the book? I don’t think so. Either I have thoughts or I don’t (and even if I do, they may well not be deep, lol. My first degree was a literature degree and I think I did my dash with deep critical thinking …). There again, I’ve never been in an in-person book group. Even then, I don’t think I’d read differently. I’d just try to think about my reaction a bit more, in case that was useful to help prompt a good discussion.