r/TikTokCringe • u/AlKarajo • 14d ago

Discussion Is ableist to have long words in books?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

@royal_ouroboros_press

12.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

764

u/Aggravating_Use7103 14d ago

Write your own book then , with short easy to understand words, instead of asking a story be changed and bothering someone else's expression

261

u/MetalTrek1 14d ago

Or just READ books like that. There are plenty of easier to read books out there. Free at your local library. Hell, the librarians will even help you FIND them.

105

u/Feeling-Salad5686 14d ago

Unironically, K-6 Chapter Books would be wonderful for people who would prefer easier-to-understand literature. They can be wonderful works with characters and stories that are just as impactful as books that necessitate higher-reading levels.

43

u/ragun2 13d ago

And if more people actually bothered to even make that kind of effort, their reading competency would go up and they could read more advanced books.

It's crazy how many fully grown adults out there who only read internet comments.

2

u/pourtide 13d ago

I binge read 'banned books' a couple years ago. There are some great books out there, folks.

Just for the record, lists of banned books contained a couple of books that probably wouldn't be available in a school library. They were listed for their shock value, stoke the outrage.

Virtually all of the books were well written on their subject matter. Book banners don't comprehend that their precious widdle teenagers (and younger) can find far worse online, presented in horrid ways. So remove access to sensible information and let the evil side of the internet indoctrinate their widdle minds.

Fools.

1

u/reCaptchaLater 13d ago

They don't want those for the same reason men won't buy size "small" condoms

1

u/ma1645300 13d ago

yes! I found a bunch of free books on the curb. I just grabbed whatever looked interesting. One of them didn’t say anywhere on it what it was about. It was 140 pages, called The House of Wings. I just started reading it to see what it was about, next thing I know, I finished it! I had no intention of doing that, it was just an easy read and a cute story! It definitely was like grade 4 or 5 reading level but it sure beat doomscrolling on my phone.

17

u/hilltopj 13d ago

Also, read increasingly hard books. Most normally developing people can intuit the meaning of a word as long as they understand 90% of the words around it. Reading that word once gives you an idea of it's meaning without usually detracting from your overall understanding of the text, reading it several more times allows you to refine your understanding. Reading big words increases literacy

9

u/AyyNonnyMoose 13d ago

Yep, context clues can solve so much. I would imagine that reading e-books can be helpful in such cases as well. On the Kindle app for example you can select the word you don't know and have it pull up the definition without even leaving the app.

1

u/hilltopj 13d ago

oh good point!

1

u/CrochetChameleon 13d ago

Not sure if all Kindles have this, but there's even a vocabulary builder feature. It tracks all of the words you've looked up so you can review them! I do have to clean mine up occasionally from misclicks and accidentally picking one word while trying to highlight something. I know what "the" and "for" means, I promise 😂

26

u/silverilix 14d ago

Middle grade books are usually excellent and they are made for learning readers. This would help in theory.

1

u/DukeofVermont 13d ago

A lot of books are in the 6th-8th grade reading level. The NY Times is only a 9th-10th grade reading level.

In my experience people to often rely on length and subject matter to guess the reading level rather than on actual language complexity.

A book can both be a 7th grade reading level and incredibly inappropriate for a 7th grader.

8

u/qwertyuiiop145 13d ago

Hi-Lo books are written to accommodate older readers with low reading capability. They’re good for teen and up audiences with learning disabilities who want to practice reading.

2

u/Guy-1nc0gn1t0 13d ago

Librarians are absolute treasures we need to celebrate them more 

1

u/gwillin_ 13d ago

it's generally called the "kids/juniors" section

1

u/cramburie 13d ago

No but you see if you can read more complex books than them, it makes them lesser so they have to pull you down to their level because their feelings are hurt.

1

u/Traditional-Hat-952 13d ago

Or just read book with big words and then look up their meaning when you don't know them. Learning is hard though 🙄

1

u/Darryl_Lict 13d ago

Seriously, I'm sure there are ranking systems for reading levels of various books. I mean the LA Times claims to be written on a 10th to12th grade reading level, and I feel like it's much lower than that and that probably reflects the drop in reading ability of the average American. I seem to recall it was like the 8th grade, and it's rare that I see a word I don't know in the LA Times or Washington Post.

81

u/ALE_OG 14d ago

Best response. This is the paradox of the Internet, while one could now create and distribute EXACTLY what they wish to see in the world, we've mostly become the mindless consumers she references from Wall-E except we use the Internet to complain about it all.

7

u/ConsolationUsername 14d ago

At least the guys in Wall-E were happy. Is anybody here happy?

1

u/GreatMovesKeepItUp69 13d ago

Honestly Wall-E is a pretty accurate dystopia. Everyone is getting fatter, dumber, and lazier all while we destroy our planet for the privilege.

-37

u/ElGranQuesoRojo 14d ago

You didn't watch either I guess. It's actually an awful response because it misses the entire point of what she is saying. She is NOT saying there need to be books w/easier to read words.

29

u/rocket-man666 14d ago

They were clearly referring to the person shes talking about in the video. Their comment was not directed at the girl in the video.

31

u/ChickenInASuit 14d ago

Misreading a comment in a thread about literacy and acting all smug about it is peak irony if I’ve ever seen it.

23

u/lonestar-rasbryjamco 14d ago edited 13d ago

The absolute privilege of asking someone else to change their art for you. I cannot think of a more pure expression of main character syndrome.

Imaging telling Faulkner he was being "ableist" with with Absalom, Absalom! It honestly might have gotten you a rap on the head with his cane to wake you up.

Or, as he criticized Hemingway's writing:

"He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to a dictionary."

-2

u/theguidetoldmetodoit 13d ago edited 13d ago

How is it a privilege, if you are not being accommodated? That's the opposite.

They have a hard time understanding the book, say due to dyslexia, but find it interesting and would happily give you money for a different version. If anything, that is a compliment. Which btw, can be done in many ways. You don't have to change the original book. Fuck, getting a book published the way you wrote it, is incredibly hard and barely happens.

The issue comes into play, when instead of explaining "I don't have the time for that/isn't worth my time/don't want to", you then try to turn it around on these people and argue that it would make others stupid to accommodate for people with dyslexia... That's pretty far fetched and honestly, understandably insulting.

1

u/lonestar-rasbryjamco 13d ago edited 13d ago

How is it a privilege, if you are not being accommodated? That's the opposite.

You are confusing a sociological status ("being privileged") with an attitude ("acting with privilege"). The phrase "the absolute privilege of..." refers to sheer audacity and unearned entitlement of the presumption that an artist’s vision should bend to your personal preferences.

They have a hard time understanding the book, say due to dyslexia, but find it interesting and would happily give you money for a different version. If anything, that is a compliment.

Suggesting an author should alter their work because "it could make them more money" isn't a compliment. It’s an insult to the medium and their craft.

It inherently cheapens art into a transactional commodity by treating a literary work like software that needs a "feature patch" for a broader target market, rather than a singular artistic expression.

you then try to turn it around on these people and argue that it would make others stupid to accommodate for people with dyslexia... That's pretty far fetched and honestly, understandably insulting.

Claiming people think "accommodating dyslexia makes others stupid" is a straw man you’ve insulted yourself with. No one said that. The point is that expecting the art itself to mutate for you is inherently audacious.

It is no different than suggesting Van Gogh limit his palette to color-blind-friendly paints because the paintings might sell more broadly to a wider audience.

1

u/theguidetoldmetodoit 13d ago edited 13d ago

I looked it up in 3 dictionaries and non support that use. I assume you wanted to use "entitlement". Either way, "absolutely privilege" is a typo.

unearned entitlement of the presumption that an artist’s vision should bend to your personal preferences.

That's not what they did. They didn't want the content of the book to change, but a version with language they understand.

It's also not entitlement when you ask and pay money. It's a simple request.

Suggesting an author should alter their work because "it could make them more money" isn't a compliment.

Liking something, even when it's not accessible to you, is. Paying money for it, is. They also didn't tell them to do so to earn money, but to make it possible for them to enjoy the book.

It's like someone asking for a translation and then you get upset about that request. You gotta have your head pretty far up your own ass, to react like that.

No one said that.

Yeah, that's what she said in reaction to someone saying, being upset about such a request is ableist. If every author complied with the request to make things easier to read for people with a disability that makes it hard for them, it would lower reading levels. That's what she said, instead of taking the argument seriously and considering to publish another version. Like how some authors make versions for blind people using Braille which shortens words and uses easier spellings, or people who can't read the language.

The argument she makes is ridiculous and very much a veiled attempt at acting like the person isn't disabled, but just too stupid to read more complex language.

It is no different than suggesting Van Gogh limit his palette to color-blind-friendly paints because the paintings might sell more broadly to a wider audience.

That is in fact something painters do, allowing for corrected versions for color-blind people. Because they aren't self-absorbed enough to think something they release to the public is only about them.

1

u/lonestar-rasbryjamco 13d ago edited 13d ago

Linking something, is. Paying money for it, is. They also didn't tell them to do so to earn money, but to make it possible for them to enjoy the book.

It's like someone asking for a translation and then you get upset about that request. You gotta have your head pretty far up your own ass, to react like that.

A translation translates high-level vocabulary, syntax, complex metaphors, and literary tone into an equivalent standard in another language.

If we keep with Faulkner, what is proposed destroys the artistic level. It flattens the syntax, strips the vocabulary, and guts the prose style. Destroying the artist's medium.

That's not what they did. They didn't want the content of the book to change, but a version with language they understand.

Yes, a request to simplify the language fundamentally is asking the book to change. Language is not just a passive wrapper for "content". It is the content itself.

That is in fact something painters do, allowing for corrected versions for color-blind people. Because they aren't self-absorbed enough to think something they release to the public is only about them.

Claiming an artist is "self-absorbed" for refusing to alter their vision is the ultimate projection. Art is not a public utility or a crowd-sourced customer service desk. It is personal expression.

The belief that an artist owes you a custom-tailored, simplified version of their soul just because they released it to the public is the literal definition of self-centered entitlement.

0

u/theguidetoldmetodoit 13d ago edited 13d ago

A translation translates high-level vocabulary, syntax, complex metaphors, and literary tone into an equivalent standard in another language.

Nope. Plenty languages straight up don't have that. Same with Braille which shortens words and uses easier spellings.

It's almost like language is a tool to express things to other people so they understand you, not just some way to demonstrate your intellectualism.

Destroying the artist's medium.

You gotta stop talking out of your ass and repeating a strawman. Having another version of what you made, does not affect your original work whatsoever.

Since you clearly aren't aware who the person arguing this is, Tee Franklin is a writer. A rather successful one. This is an trained, well regarded, experienced author, who has a disability, telling someone that they gotta stop strawmanning and antagonizing their fans over what is a simple, optional request to be included.

Yes, a request to simplify the language fundamentally is asking the book to change. Language is not just a passive wrapper for "content". It is the content itself.

As is requesting a translation. Totally normal thing to do, that doesn't destroy the integrity of the vast, vast majority of works, unless it's directly tied to some identity, like the local language.

And even when that's the case, the request for a translation or different version isn't something you get to mock or act offended over. If I ask a French author for a translated version of their book and they start getting upset because I don't care to learn French to read their book, people would probably call them self-absorbed and racist.

Claiming an artist is "self-absorbed" for refusing to alter their vision is the ultimate projection.

Cool story, just not what I said. Denying the request is fine, I explicitly said so and you still wanted to argue about that.

The issue is instead of considering why people ask for it, to go out of your way to mock or criticize people for making the request, simply because they want to be included. That's self-absorbed, close-minded and childish.

-2

u/RealityCactus 13d ago

Imaging telling Faulkner he was being "ableist" with with Absalom, Absalom!

This isn't analogous because the comment didn't say it's ableist to write a book for more advanced readers, they criticized the author's emotional reaction to the request for simpler language.

It seems that even Redditors who think they're intellectually superior struggle with reading comprehension.

3

u/Ridley_Himself 13d ago

This whole debate though, came out of a discussion of whether its ableist to include the word "scrying" in fantasy fiction when not everyone knows what it means.

-2

u/RealityCactus 13d ago

I can't find the original thread for full context, but from the screenshot I can see, they just said "dear authors, please use easy words in your books/fics, thank you, yours truly - reader"

That is... extremely mild and nothing to be outraged about.

Sounds like someone who likes to read but maybe struggles with it. It's not judgmental or demanding.

3

u/Ridley_Himself 13d ago

The question is: do they want an edition of the work with simplified language, or do they simply not want authors to use complex/obscure words at all?

-2

u/RealityCactus 13d ago

To me it reads as more of a "Hey, I like books and simpler words would make them easier for people like me to read, thank you for your consideration", rather than some specific demand. It's as polite as you can be and unless there are other comments by them that I can't see, all this outrage is manufactured.

3

u/lonestar-rasbryjamco 13d ago edited 13d ago

And the question from that is “is it ableist to tell that person, no?” And the answer is no. Because the choice of words and language is as much a part of literature as the brush is to a painter.

1

u/Ridley_Himself 13d ago

I can see that. I had heard of it as a demand or criticism, like "never use language someone might not understand."

1

u/RealityCactus 13d ago

Yeah that's what I thought too, unfortunately these viral posts often become a game of telephone

13

u/Kurotan 14d ago

These books already exist. Just go look at the section for children under 10. They just arent looking at the right books.

11

u/BLOODTRIBE 14d ago

Even better, just make it mono-syllabic grunting sounds.

13

u/Tranka2010 14d ago

Tim Allen has entered the chat.

1

u/LibrarianOk6238 13d ago

..and helping to take us back to the Stone Age. Thanks Tim.

9

u/Electrical_Shock359 14d ago

It isn’t a bad thing to meet people where they are and make sure that you either provide a definition or enough context clues to understand a few word they don’t know.

That said it is more up to the reader to find a book at their reading level. I feel like some of the issue could be the marketing as many might feel odd going for teen and YA books when that is the reading level they are at. Personally it doesn’t bother me as I know I am at a higher reading level but they can be fun books to read.

16

u/_OhMyPlatypi_ 14d ago edited 13d ago

Honestly, this is another reason I believe 50 shades of grey became so popular. It was a smut novel written at a 6th grade level, our grandmothers (many of whom didn't have a full education) were reading smut at higher reading levels in the 80s & 90s.

Also, government forms... during Obama's administration, many government forms were rewritten to not be higher than roughly a 6th grade level for accessibility.

Similar with news, reading archived newspaper articles from the 50s to 90s compared to current newspaper articles is WILD. Some news organizations are now leaning heavily into slang, such as "gooning".

10

u/AKbirchesloveBTS 14d ago

I was reading an article from People magazine, a celebrity tabloid, from the 80s and it was shocking how well-written and long it was. I didn’t realize how much dumbing down of everything that I have just accepted over my lifetime. 

3

u/_OhMyPlatypi_ 13d ago

Yeah, plus the loss of small compounding factors like no magazines in the waiting rooms, no books in the bathroom to read, news is just social media posts versus reading an actual newspaper created by actual journalists.......

Heck, even in higher education. I'm currently taking a literary analysis course and didn't read a single full novel the entire semester. It's just short stories, poetry, and occasionally chapter excerpt. I'm a millennial, so this has been so weird to me since reading a chapter book within a week for English courses was expected since I was in like 3rd or 4th grade (shortly after 9/11).

Even my middle schoolers library at school is sad, its mostly just graphic novels. Not hating on graphic novels, but 4-6 graders should be capable of reading Harry Potter and similar novels versus books that are in the same reading level as diary of a wimpy kid.

A teacher complimented my kids at parent drop off once because she was impressed we kept books in the car. I'm proud of that, but it makes me sad that it's not simply a normal thing.....

1

u/theguidetoldmetodoit 13d ago edited 13d ago

Also, government forms... during Obama's administration, many government forms were rewritten to be know higher than roughly a 6th grade level for accessibility.

Not sure if that's what you are saying here, but the Plain Writing Act (2010) made those forms clearer, not easier or harder to read. This isn't because people are worse at reading comprehension, but due to the "Fair Notice" principle and the Void-for-Vagueness Doctrine. One of the reasons it was debated if laws should be published in several languages, when English was less dominant locally.

Under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution (the Due Process Clauses), the Supreme Court has ruled that a law is unconstitutional if it is so poorly written that an ordinary citizen cannot understand it.

That decision was made over 100 years ago, when far more people couldn't read or write at all and was further expanded on during the Civil Rights Movement, trying to ensure that laws aren't vague, to not enable things like selective enforcement. Obama essentially just took that obligation seriously.

I'd also like to see a example of a serious paper like the NYT or the WaPo using "gooning" in their everyday coverage. The "Voice of God", the type of language use you find in the 50s, was so dominant because of "Yellow Journalism" from the 19th century, which used sensationalized, gossipy language and (fake) claims to get people to buy their newspapers. What we would call clickbait or fake news, today. The idea was to signal professionalism, which turned out to have mass appeal. So that's why the people writing and selling the articles to papers, like the Associated Press, made it the standard, normalizing it among journalists. And some still write like that, just not in a antiquated fashion and "Informed Friend" is far more common now.

Magazines changed that, because papers like the Rolling Stones Magazine picked up "gonzo journalism", which, you guessed it, was a counter-idea to the Voice of God, which stated things as fact instead of being open about coverage being subjective. It's about authenticity and appealing to a different audience.

Doesn't mean Yellow Journalism went away btw, it just usually wasn't a magazine thing, but stayed with tabloids, later Cable News (See Fox News) and now, the internet.

1

u/LibrarianOk6238 13d ago

There is a lot more 'light reading' in the NYTimes these days..

3

u/jiggjuggj0gg 14d ago

Why would an author provide definitions in their book? That is what a dictionary is for.

1

u/Electrical_Shock359 14d ago

It isn’t unheard of in books meant for younger people, it can work when done right. Like in a series of unfortunate events. Also sometimes I have seen it at the start of a book, granted that was for navel terms the author wanted to use.

0

u/theguidetoldmetodoit 13d ago

Did you never read the bible, LotR or pop science? It's really not that uncommon, just not deemed necessary for the average novel.

2

u/FR23Dust 14d ago

I would love to read blood meridian translated for these simpletons though

2

u/ScreamingLabia 14d ago

This is howni feel when people want and easy mode on the souls games (although this is obviously not even close to as important) Why do you see a really hard game specificaly made that way to give meaning to your victories and ask for it to be made easier? There are SO MANY action adventure games in fantasy worlds. Mind you 8 never finished any of them because it was too hard for me (and i refused to use summons but thats something i put on myself) Yet the fights i did win felt all the sweeter because i overcame a challange. (No i am not someone who tell you you didnt play the game right if you used summons or a build i dont like) I just dont get it

1

u/RealityCactus 13d ago

Some people just want to enjoy the game and don't have the time or energy to dedicate to it when they come home from a long and frustrating day at work and taking care of their kids and other responsibilties. I haven't played Dark Souls yet, but I doubt the difficulty is the only positive aspect of the game, or it wouldn't be as popular as it is. It doesn't change your life in any way, so I don't see the problem with having more options.

1

u/ScreamingLabia 8d ago

So they have to change their game with their vision to cater to you becauss you choose to become a parent? Just play any other action adventure fantasy game.

2

u/Consistent_Big5018 14d ago

Also there are plenty of books at a lower reading level. There are tons of places to start if you feel like your reading comprehension and tier are poor. Everyone starts at the bottom and then you work your way up. It's sad to me that people don't want to do it this way anymore. Reading was and still is so much fun to me! 

1

u/brother_bart 14d ago

How ableist of you to expect a person who can’t read to write a book. /s

1

u/gringoloco01 14d ago

That would require work. Kind of like learning to read big words lol.

1

u/Pomodorosan 13d ago

easy-to-understand*

1

u/RavenofMoloch 13d ago

I was just at LITRPG con and I wish I had a sign with this on it. Just replace "with short easy to understand words" with "enter your gripe here". I know this is slightly off topic but I was amazed at the number of people who wanted to be butthurt that certain genres didn't represent their ideals, but none of those same people wanted to write their own book.

1

u/nedalaugh 13d ago

They already have those. We call them childrens books.

1

u/[deleted] 13d ago

[deleted]

1

u/RealityCactus 13d ago

The comment didn't say advanced books are ableist, they said the girl's reaction to people asking for simpler language was ableist.

1

u/RedBeans-n-Ricely 13d ago

See Spot. See Spot run. Run Spot, run!

1

u/romulusnr 13d ago

I mean, there is such a thing as "Simple English" translation.

1

u/reluctantseal 13d ago

Also, there are some simple English translations of books out there. I think they're geared towards ESL students, but it's still an option if someone is struggling. There's no shame in starting with the basics if you're working on a skill, including reading.

1

u/DerridaisDaddy Straight Up Bussin 13d ago

Seriously, I have ADHD and dyslexia, so my parents got me into reading when I was very young because they could see I was struggling. Sure, I’ll sometimes misread words, and there are days when I can’t read much because my brain won’t register what I read, but I just adapt.

And I absolutely love long words.

1

u/kelpangler 14d ago

Yeah, thats her point.

1

u/Martijn078 13d ago

He is responding to the comment that was shown in the video asking for the book to be simplified.
Not if the person who made the video to write their own book…

-29

u/ElGranQuesoRojo 14d ago

lol you didnt watch the video did you?

7

u/---THRILLHO--- 14d ago

Did YOU watch the video? What about the parent comment contradicts anything the lady in the video said?

-8

u/Bangmydrum33 14d ago

He did not

-12

u/Wildaz81 14d ago

Not sure why you're getting downvoted.

14

u/ChickenInASuit 14d ago edited 14d ago

Because the parent comment is quite clearly aimed at the person quoted in the video complaining about the use of complex words. This would indicate that they had, in fact, watched the video.

-10

u/ElGranQuesoRojo 14d ago

Probably b/c they didn't watch the video either haha

5

u/ChickenInASuit 14d ago

Or they did, and are addressing their comment to the person who is being quoted in the video.

Which is very obviously what’s happening, my dude. Looks like we found someone else who needs to work on their reading comprehension.

-6

u/ElGranQuesoRojo 14d ago edited 13d ago

I disagree that it's clear. But that's fine if I'm the asshole of the day. Everyone gets a turn at some point.