Unpopular Opinions

Just realised. Possibly ultimate unpopular opinion: I hate Hermione.

She isn't intelligent, she doesn't love learning. Anyone who thinks she ought to have been a Ravenclaw is delusional.

Hermione is competitive and likes being the best. That's it. There isn't even any indication in the books that she reads for pleasure. She reads her textbooks.

That's why she juxtaposes against Luna so well, because Luna has a real research fetish. It doesn't matter to Luna if she's right. It matters if she's absorbing information.

So yeah, Hermione isn't nearly as smart as she seems. Sorries.

Although I think it becomes pretty clear that bravery really is her strongest suit. The only times she chickens out of anything is because she doesn't think the consequences are worth it. She can be bold. I don't think she's an idiot, but she's not exactly a genius. She just happens to retain well, be incredibly ambitious, as well as bold.

I never got into John Green stuff, and the little bits of his writing I've read... not impressed.

Me too! I had a guy boarding at my house and he had every single book, but I couldn't get into it at all.

If people rant and rave about a movie or book, I almost automatically despise it. I end up with high expectations and typically they fail. It's why I can't stand most chick flicks or certain classic novels.

You must learn to underestimate the thing people are raving about so that when you see it you go "OMG, so much better than I anticipated!"

I loved A Royal Night Out. Apparently critics disagree? Could be down to the hotness of Jack Raynor (fans self). Can't say for certain.

I forgive classics, because evidentally there are reasons they are classics. But they have to reach me beyond "oooh it's classic so it must be good." But give me a classic over a YA novel every day.

There it is - I hate YA fiction. It's all soooo trivial to me.

I don't think that's really an unpopular opinion? I think a lot of people say that?

I don't read books by authors I dislike.

For example, I loved John Marsden's Tomorrow, When the War Began series, but then I heard him doing an interview where he said sometimes when women say no (as in, "No I don't want to sleep with you") they don't really mean it, and I had to stop reading those books.

And I can't read Robin Hobb because her opinions on fanfiction aren't informed by evidence, it's all circular arguments. My cousin met her and she's apparently a very nice person, though. I just can't read her books.

I have three reasons for saying that, even as an adult with only a year and a bit of college left, I absolutely love YA novels.

1. The market for them is just bonkers. If I get a job in a publishing house as I would like to, that'd be the place to work. So I read them for the knowledge of the genre, in part.

2. The tropes are so obvious that I can read a longer YA novel in like a day. It doesn't make me work hard and it's almost a game to see how many of the YA tropes they use.

3. I love the creativity of the novels. Harry Potter, after all, is classified as a YA. The first book is more middle grade, but the writing level increases as Harry grows up. Others use myth, legends, history, or create entirely new worlds like the HP one. I can't dislike anyone who has creativity. Nonfiction bores the hell out of me because it's somebody writing about the amazing things somebody else did. I don't want to read something written by someone who has to talk about other people and what they actually did. If someone can create a new, imagined scenario and story, I don't care if it has every YA trope imaginable. I'd rather read that than nonfiction.

I think fact is more interesting than fiction.

Nonfiction is basically fascinating. There is so much stuff that people wouldn't (don't) believe if it hadn't been proved, because it just seems like it shouldn't be true.

Like how the Romans had a type of concrete that was stronger and more durable than the stuff we have today, but we can't replicate it because we don't know how they made it.

Or how one of the reasons humans have been so successful evolutionarily is because we domesticated wolves and turned them into dogs and were able to literally track animals to death. Most animals are made to fight or run but humans can just keep following something until it dies of exhaustion, especially when assisted by dogs.

Or that magic was considered a real thing for centuries and its decline in England was due to the rise of Doctors and Surgeons from around the fourteenth to sixteenth centuries. But most people would still not be discriminated against for being a "witch" because they were really just midwives and were more valuable to the community. Also England didn't burn witches, witches in England were to be hung and there were no witches put to death by the government anyway (although there were unofficial witch hunts).

Or how there's different types of dominance in genetics and if veela have x-chromosome dominance, Selwyn would only pass his veela powers to his daughters.

Nonfiction is almost as good as fiction, if you look at it from the right angle, and fiction laced with fact is the ultimate in writing.

I like nonfiction too. I've found biographies to be so interesting. It makes you realize how interesting everyone really is. Nonfiction about medical information bores me, but historical nonfiction is especially interesting. Right now, I'm on a true crime documentary kick. Watch Dear Zachary. Literally the one of the best documentaries I've seen.

This isn't really an unpopular opinion, but it's something that's not really common. I've become very comfortable in poor parts of town. I have friends who won't go down certain streets, will be careful about the music they listen to, etc, and won't make eye contact with people. I go out into the community with my students in the poor part of the 8th most dangerous city in America... and the sketchiest looking people are the nicest if you smile.