Currently Reading: 1984 by George Orwell
That’s right! I finished A
Clockwork Orange! The slang really did get less challenging, which was an
exciting discovery, so I was able to zip right through once I got the hang of
it.
What I’d like to discuss today, though, has pretty much
nothing to do with A Clockwork Orange…
except maybe that they both involve a food analogy…
As many of my close friends know, I’m particularly fond of
coming up with really excellent and accurate analogies. Usually, this is a
practice I reserve for sorting out relationship troubles or complicated
feelings that I can’t quite pin down with a single descriptive word. However,
there is one analogy that I use frequently that has nothing to do with boys or
angst. This analogy has now become a term I use for novels that fall into a certain
category. The term is “book candy,” which I’d now like to take a moment to
explain.
Book candy books are the novels that most wouldn’t generally
consider “great literature.” They include the novels you find in the bookstore
of an airport or in the reading material section of a CVS; the formula books of
prolific mystery or fantasy writers; and the trashy romance novels read on the
beach or by the pool. Usually, these are the books that are driven more by
plots and characters than by ideas. For example, The Da Vinci Code (a piece of book candy) was not written to explore the complex ethical and political
dilemmas that arise from the implications of the mystery Robert Langdon discovers
about the Catholic church. No, the driving force of the writing is how Robert Langdon discovers the
mystery. Again, it is a book that’s about plot more than anything.
Essentially, the common characteristic of book candy is that
it’s not all that challenging; it’s effortless, yet enjoyable reading. Some may
call them trashy books or what have you, but I proclaim them to be book candy.
Because here’s the thing, these books really are just like
candy, but for your brain. They’re satisfying and addictive, but probably not
all that good for developing your mental faculties. Plus, for most, these books
are especially desired at a younger age because they are so much easier to
read, just like candy is more desirable because it’s more delicious. For me, my
childhood book candy included the Tamora Pierce books, the Bunnicula series, and the Mercedes Lackey books when I got a little
older. I pounded through those series and couldn’t get enough of them, just
like when I eat a bag of Skittles.
Now, the reason I prefer “book candy” to “trashy novels” is
that I find it to be a much less derogatory term. I don’t believe that most of
these books are horribly written or not worth reading. At the very least, they
are gloriously compelling and sometimes the plots are quite clever, so to call
them “trashy,” I believe demeans the author, which pains me to do as a
pathetic-attempt-of-a-writer myself. To call them candy is much better because,
let’s face, who doesn’t like candy?? No one abstains from sugar entirely and I firmly
believe no one should. Candy is a great treat and comes in so many delectable
flavors (although it’s a rule that grape flavor always sucks)! And sometimes,
candy is exactly what you need.
It’s the same with book candy. The three series I mentioned
and The Da Vinci Code are some of my
absolute favorite books – including Bunnicula
even though I’m far too old for it now. They were just as great a treat for
my mind as candy is for my stomach.
However, part of the reason I like this analogy so much is
because it continues to the cautionary side as well. Neither type of candy
should be the sole basis of your diet (mental or physical). Candy, delicious
and awesome as it may be, will not sustain your body. It will rot your teeth
and make you fat if you have too much of it. Likewise, book candy is not enough
to sustain your brain. It will make your mind sluggish and rotten if you have
too much of it. Thus, you should only consume both types of candy in
moderation.
As a kid, I could handle a lot of book and regular candy and,
while I still have a pretty impressive sugar tolerance, college caused some
pretty big changes in my mental and physical palates. In college, candy and
junk food were super accessible and often preferable to the “real food”
options. At first, this was amazing! I could eat a bag or two of Runts every
day without anyone giving me grief for it! I could consume chocolate mints all
through my all-nighters with no one to tell me I couldn’t! Hello freedom!
But the longer you’re in college and away from nutrition,
the more you crave real food. There came a time when getting take out from my
favorite restaurant – a meal consisting of cilantro-lime chicken, green beans,
and buttery-smooth mashed potatoes – was far more satisfying than any sweet I could
get my hands on. I came to appreciate real food more than I ever had and to
this day, I often would rather fill myself up with my meal and forego dessert.
Similarly, I came to appreciate more savory reading in
college. The analogy falters here a bit since in college, book candy was much
harder to come by than actual candy. Most of the time you had for reading was
occupied by your required reading and book candy hardly ever was consumed.
However, the analogy holds because the end result was the same. In being
exposed to this banquet of great literature, I came to realize how much more
satisfying it was than the easy reading.
However, part of the reason I started this reading project
is that it’s really easy to fall back into bad eating/reading habits,
especially when you’re working and feeling lazy. This project makes my mind
stay sharp and healthy, the same way having a workout regiment or a calorie
counter does.
Though don’t be fooled into thinking I won’t indulge in my
mental sweets from time to time. After all, candy is still pretty awesome.
