“Life’s too short to read a bad book,” James Joyce once said.

In another week of literary happenings, former UK Prime Minister Liz “the Lettuce” Truss released her controversial memoir, “Ten Years to Save the West,” and I did everything possible to avoid reading it. Of course, I perused several reviews, which gave me sufficient information about the kind of crap tripe she is peddling in it.

It was then revealed that the book violated the rules set for ministers publishing works about their time in office, which is a whole other story. But the question we need to ask is: Should we read books that we know we are likely to hate, especially in such a polarised world? Or should we be open to reading everything, even if we don’t necessarily agree with it?

Polarisation in literature

Truss’ book was released earlier this week and recounts her time as the UK’s shortest-serving leader. This includes details about how her government was run and her conversations with the late Queen Elizabeth II. Some reviews have described the author as “unstoppably self-serving, petulant, and politically jejune,” and even fairly right-wing publications have called her “so un-self-aware she’s almost an innocent.” Personally, that was enough for me to ignore it.

Over the years, many books have been released that go against our principles. We live in a world where demagogues and despots are so common that it’s hard to navigate the internet without being confronted by them. A good example is the autobiography of Elon Musk, CEO of X, formerly known as Twitter. The book, authored by Walter Isaacson, was received fairly favourably. I must admit I didn’t get a chance to read it, but I heard about the hoopla and the subsequent scrutiny over several inaccuracies. Did it make me want to read it? Possibly. But at that point, I didn’t want to invest time in something that would make me cringe, especially having recently read a disappointing book about media tycoon Rupert Murdoch.

Read: The Fall by Michael Wolff: a dull portrait of Murdoch – review

I very rarely DNF (do not finish) books, even if I want to scratch my eyeballs out and scream wildly throughout. However, as much as I pride myself on trying to hear the other side of the argument (not always successfully, especially if you catch me in a bad mood), there are times when I feel like I’m wasting my time if they’re not making the same effort.

The New York Times columnist Pamela Paul states that “Reading is a pleasure and a time-consuming one. Why bother reading something you dislike?”

But she caveats this with the fact that reading something you hate “helps you refine what it is you value, whether it’s a style, a story line or an argument. Because books are long-form, they require more of the writer and the reader than a talk show or Facebook link.”

The risk of missing out in literary exploration

Lindsay Detwiler disagrees with this sentiment. For the author, “Every piece of literature that makes it through the publishing process has something to offer.” However, does that still apply given the proliferation of AI-generated books and the numerous poorly self-published books littered with inaccuracies and errors? This is where Detwiler believes that: “It just takes a dedicated, literature-savvy person to understand this and to find one thing to cling to.” Michaela from Bookish Reviews also says “Hate-reading definitely made me a better reviewer”. There’s some truth to picking up a book whose premise you don’t like and then being mildly surprised.

“Lolita” by Vladimir Nabokov, the scandalous novel from 1955, was one of those books for me. For those unaware of its content, it offers a disturbing yet alluring read. The protagonist is a French literature professor who moves to New England and writes under the pseudonym Humbert Humbert. He describes his obsession with a 12-year-old “nymphet,” Dolores Haze—and we’ll leave it at that. As a long-time domestic violence campaigner, it made absolutely no sense for me to read this book, yet Nabokov has a delicious way with words and satire, ultimately portraying Humbert as a narcissistic, pathetic man without ever having to say so explicitly. It shows that we may end up accidentally shutting ourselves off from a world that we had no idea about.

Guardian pop culture journalist Hannah Jane Parkinson makes a good point about ensuring you pick up a book in the first place before tossing it across the room. “The relief of calling time on something one is not enjoying, and which is not enriching, brings a warmth and lightness,” she writes – a kernel of truth lingers in that thought.

Read: Goodreads review bombing: action taken to preserve trust

Strangely enough, there is a whole section of Booktube that dedicates their time to reading books that their fans know they will hate. Sara Without An H is one of those such people, who took it upon herself to read Goodreads’ worst books.

Expert opinions: life is too short to read books you hate

Bestselling mystery author E.L. Johnson, who has faced the sting of critical reviews, told How To Be Books about the impact of negative feedback on authors. “From a writer’s perspective, it can be soul-crushing when you get a review from a reader who warns others not to read your book, or to not finish it, because they disliked it. It serves as a warning against bad books, but it also means that many readers won’t give that author a chance when the story just might not be to that reader’s taste,” Johnson said.

Johnson acknowledges various reasons why a reader might abandon a book. “Sometimes a story won’t resonate with a reader, or the writing might be poor, it may have been poorly edited, or the characters might all be dislikable. Readers need a main character to root for and identify with, or if the main characters is unlikeable, they at least have to be interesting. Without that, the reader simply won’t turn the page,” she elaborated.

Read: Legal risks of memoirs: Rebel Wilson claims against Sacha Baron Cohen

Regarding the dilemma of continuing with a disliked book, Johnson advises, “As the organiser of a book club in London, I often tell my members that life is too short to read bad books. So if a story or author isn’t to their taste, I have no qualms about putting one book down for another, and don’t think people should feel bad about not wanting to finish books they don’t like.”

Allison Wells, a certified fiction editor and award-winning author, echoes Johnson’s viewpoint. “I get paid to read books all day. As a certified book coach and fiction editor – as well as author – books are my life. And it’s way too short to spend reading books you don’t like,” Wells stated.

The Well Versed Publications owner also spoke about the subjectivity of reading preferences. “It’s perfectly fine to not like a book. I say repeatedly, not every book is for every reader. Just because I love a book doesn’t mean you will. A certain book might be a best-seller, but if you don’t vibe with it, you don’t vibe with it. Read the books that make you happy,” she advised.

What Mastodon users say

In our limited poll on Mastodon, one user reiterated the standpoint that life’s too short to read books you hate, however, if they wanted to know what the opposition is thinking on a subject that’s important to them, “I can find a summary”. While another user said that as an academic, this means “sometimes you have no choice but to read books you know you aren’t going to like.”

Others stated that they had accidentally read a book they hated, but wouldn’t usually set out to do so. One person added: “Not regularly, but it has happened and will again. And when it does, I usually approach like an academic; trying to understand why and how it sucks, which makes the process enjoyable for me still.”

There are days when reading books you hate feels like a masochistic act. As part of my work, I read a variety of books, some of which can make my brain spin. However, closing ourselves off completely from other books can also be a disservice to us. We may end up missing a real gem. The trick is to weigh the pros and cons and, most importantly, read when you truly have the capacity and frame of mind for it.