Reviews - Monsters: A Fan's Dilemma

3.1k reviews for:

Monsters: A Fan's Dilemma

Claire Dederer

3.82 AVERAGE

mikaaa's review against another edition

5.0

challenging emotional reflective fast-paced

heatherjk's review

2.75

challenging informative reflective medium-paced

ava_rene's review against another edition

3.75

funny informative reflective medium-paced

'We don't love the deserving; we love flawed and imperfect human beings, in an emotional logic that belongs to an entirely different weather system than the chilly climate of reason'

The 'good' of this book:
Claire Dederer is funny. I truly enjoyed her writing style and I did actually chortle at some of her jokes.
I found the conversations on why people might participate in 'cancel culture', objectivity vs. subjectivity in criticism, and how capitalism has changed our role as audience into a role of consumer to be interesting jumping off points for conversation. There were also some nuggets (see quote above) that made the read worthwhile for me, in that I just needed to see some words written and published.

The 'bad' of this book:
I agree with other reviews that Dederer just doesn't always stick the landing for what she's trying to say, or maybe doesn't have something concrete that she's trying to say. I understand that the topic of how we interact with stained work is extremely personal, and it would be difficult to give a concrete thesis... Unfortunately I have flea-bag-syndrome where when I read a book I sort of do want it to tell me what to think and feel; I'll decide if I take the suggestion, but I want to be given something.

There were also certain topics I wanted her to dive deeper into or simply address. While she touches on how our money can support "monster's" careers, I found the ultimate conclusion of 'we don't really have any power as consumers, so feel whatever you want to feel' to be a bit shallow. A deeper dive into the practicality of love would have made the work feel more grounded to me. I was also hoping for some discussion on how it can affect victims to see their abuser's work being loved, but I guess I can't choose the topics that every book I read covers.

beebrowni's review against another edition

informative fast-paced

Each chapter really brought its own insights to this idea of grappling with horrible people (mostly men, but not all) making genuinely beautiful art. As someone who studied ethics of phenomenology through a feminist lens, this book doesn’t dip into deep or current conversations about an artist’s motivations to present themselves in the world in a certain fashion. I still learned a LOT due to Dederer’s extensive research and amazing integration of quotes.

Where she ultimately lost me was her inability to hash out the difference between people loving their abusive step-dad vs her “love” of Roman Polanski. Her brief blurb at the beginning about parasocial relationships was unconvincing in its lack of structure. This work also fell very flat in the last chapter and I felt it was rambly when discussing if people are discussing an artist they love them.

Fav chapters were The Fan and The Genius (3 and 5)!

I was really upset by this quote (pretty sure last chapter or the penultimate), “Monsters are just people. I don’t think I would have been able to accept the humanity of monsters if I hadn’t been a drunk and if I hadn’t quit. If I hadn’t been forced in this way to acknowledge my own monstrosity.” I hate that some people believe they aren’t born with empathy…I firmly believe in writers and creatives having the power to think about another’s struggles without having to experience the exact same pain/hate/fear.

I would also argue with her sentiments around objectivity and subjectivity. I remain unconvinced that society doesn’t privilege certain people’s experiences as authority. Despite our differences, I love many questions she asked and feel good dwelling in my thoughts/this conversation.