We're Arguing About Speech Marks Now?

You've probably seen the bubbling fiasco on #BookTwitter in which we are apparently now fighting about speech marks. It has always been of interest to me as to why people cannot:

a) mind their own damn business

b) accept other people's preferences

c) have a respectful conversation rather than simply insulting the other person or being passive aggressive

This is a rising problem on #BookTwitter as we see it day by day become more divisive and more insulting. It is very upsetting that this is what Musk's playground has descended into, but I have to say that I am not surprised at all.

We're Arguing About Speech Marks Now?

Yes, we are. This started with a post in which a young person began reading Margaret Atwood's A Handmaid's Tale and posted a picture of it on Twitter. I will not be naming names but I'm sure with a bit of a search, you could find the account for yourself. They were quite shocked to see that none of the speech in the book contains speech marks and, if you were not given a heads-up, then I can understand how this might have happened.

I have to be honest that this is not something I personally think about very often and I have a habit of not really caring whether there are speech marks are there or not. I perhaps edge on finding lots of speech marks everywhere more annoying than not including them at all. But that's just me.

This person's post was just about the fact that they were stunned by the flow in the lack of speech marks, inferring that they were not used to this kind of form in writing. And I think that it is brave to admit that when you're entrapped in a social media world like #BookTwitter which is hell-bent on pseudo-intellectualism.

The post was met with varying levels of empathy. One of which was passive aggressiveness wrapped in a deceptive 'genuine concern'. This person has been a constant gripe on this social space in which (again, without naming them) they profess opinions in a way which honestly makes me believe they have no communication skill. Stating that someone needs to 'expand their genres' if they are uncomfortable reading something for the first time is a form of narcissism of course.

A common thread on social media, especially on #BookTwitter, is this sort of pseudo-intellectual gatekeeping in which people profess a statement such as this and then the comments are filled with 'but I...' from other accounts. The original poster will then reply to many with 'well, that's a valid reason' as if they are some sort of professor or expert on the topic whereas they are no more an expert on reading than I am an expert on biosciences.

It's narcissism, we know. But what else is it?

Main Character Syndrome is the New Narcissism

I would like to start by stating that I am talking primarily about #BookTwitter as I don't really engage much with other sub-sects of the site. I have actually watched #BookTwitter go down the hole in real time. It's both fascinating and upsetting.

With the rise of 'brodernism' and other #BookTwitter groups, I feel like our small world is separating into cults and there are charismatic sociopathic and sometimes even completely stupid 'cult leaders' as it were. These people who profess something that everyone else feels the need to get validation from (see above for the example on the speech marks argument). This has been cultivated from what I like to call a severe case of 'Main Character Syndrome' on the internet. I only recently found out what this means and so, let's take a look...

Main Character Syndrome is defined as someone who has a form of narcissism in which they believe they are the central figure in the experience of life. This often comes at the expense of other people in a way that is passive aggressive, unkind and unhelpful - it is also linked with narcissistic personality traits. To profess yourself therefore, as an expert or a savant on a particular subject/topic without having actually done any of the real-life work to become someone that people should listen to is this very act. I have the feeling that this is also far more prevalent in women who are chronically online than it is for men.

Again, without naming names - let's take a look at the statement that if you are somewhere in your reading journey and you are experimenting with new titles and forms, you post it on Twitter in genuine sincerity about where you are in your life. This is then met with the Main Character Syndrome of a pseudo-intellectual chronically online woman who professes that you need to 'expand your genres' and then she replies to each comment with something 'validating'. My response is just this: as you are not an expert, and as you are not someone that people should listen to, why do you feel that it is therefore in your power to 'validate' or 'invalidate' anyone?

All I can say is that the way in which #BookTwitter is falling apart is probably more due to this kind of behaviour than anything else.

Conclusion

Thanks for letting me rant a bit but it really is becoming a problem. There is absolutely no excuse for passive aggression towards people who are really trying to enjoy their reading experiences, sharing them with people they believe can offer them some sort of social hand. I don't think that if you're reading something that someone else doesn't think is particularly 'intellectual' or you are surprised by something that someone else thinks is 'standard of the genre' that you deserve to have this kind of passive aggression directed towards you.

Why? I have no way of describing it but an insult would probably be better than this gossipy rubbish. It's almost like someone laughing at you behind your back. It's extremely bitchy and I do not condone it at all. It could really put someone off wanting to join in. With #BookTwitter in peril and the numbers of readers dwindling by the year, we cannot afford to be this divisive and snobby about it.