The rise of BookTok has created and grouped books into very niche and specific categories, and it has also made collaborating on opinions on these books more accessible. While BookTok definitely has made reading more accessible, there are many negative things that have come from this space, some of which are more prominent than others. Many questions arise from this new subset of media, such as what qualifies as real literature? Have books become the newest form of overconsumption? Are you only a real reader if you read classics? While I have my own opinion on each of these, this is not what the article is about. This article is about romanticization of toxicity in literature, specifically feminine literature.
Feminine literature is especially associated with the “Thought Daughter” phenomenon. A “Thought Daughter”– a term that became immensely popular on tiktok in the past year– describes a girl or young woman that is highly introspective, reserved, intellectual, sentimental, and prone to overthinking. This term took off, and many book lists were put out by creators highlighting books that supposed “thought daughters” should read. Some common ones I’ve seen are Lolita by Vladmir Nabokov and The Virgin Suicides by Jeffrey Eugenides specifically. While both of these books are great in their own right– they provide interesting narratives that really make the reader think– a problem arises from the videos romanticizing these books, specifically the aesthetic and the treatment of women.
Lolita by Vladamir Nabokov is portrayed on TikTok as a cute love story. I can’t tell you how many videos I’ve seen of “if you like this aesthetic you should read…” about Lolita. Every picture is of pastel frilly bows, dainty mary-janes, ruffle socks, and cupcake babydoll dresses, soft lips and lightly curled lochs of hair. However, this is absolutely inaccurately portraying the book. Despite what tiktok may have you think, Lolita is not a cute love story. Lolita is a gruesome chronicle of predation, obsession, of nefarious and disgusting acts that should not be romanticized in any way, shape, or form. Nabokov himself condemned the actions in his own work, saying that “Lolita is a serious book with a serious purpose. I hope the public will accept it as such”. Even regarding the cover, Nabokov made it clear that it should feature no girls as not to fetishize the subject matter. Additionally, within the book, the main character Humbert Humbert makes a plea for his fictional memoir not to be published until both himself and Dolores Haze (Lolita) have died. This showcases that even in the book, the subject is treated as taboo and shame.
After reading Lolita and seeing Nabokov’s comments, I was absolutely appalled at how people treat the book on tiktok. Many view the life of Dolores Haze as enviable. They view Lolita as the height of romance and affection. This, however, is extremely unhealthy and is something that I find extremely concerning, especially considering the age of many of the book’s readers. Lolita has extremely strong subject matter that should make the reader feel uncomfortable. The fact that it is being perceived as a romance and not a horrible chronicle of terrible actions completely erases the book’s purpose and Nabokov’s message.
A similar phenomenon has happened with Jeffery Eugenides’ The Virgin Suicides. This book is purely seen for its suburban-feminine aesthetic– an allegory for strong sisterhood and distanced yearning. But people ignore what is at the heart of the book– what is literally in it’s title. This is not a cute story about four sisters wearing pastel dresses and being mysterious. It’s a tale of prolonged abuse, despair, again– obsession, religious guilt and trauma, and horrible gut wrenching depression that people overlook immensely. On the topic of his work, Jeffrey Eugenides said, “I guess it could be read as a satirical response to romanticism”. That said, the book is criticizing those who overlook the danger and plight in one’s life and only see the beauty, completely disregarding hardships and absolute despair one goes through.
This view is extremely harmful, especially to the book’s modern “target audience” of young teenage girls. The book is a criticism on the over infantilization and unhealthy male infatuation with hyperfemininity. In fact, what gets me most about this book is that the message of the book is that the girls’ suicides are overlooked due to the narrator’s odd obsession– that’s what the reader is supposed to take away. Instead, readers (akin to the narrator) overlook the tragedy that the book is, treating the suicide as a “mystery” to focus on the aesthetic while all the facts are there. The suicides are not a result of mistique and femme-fatale style romance. They are a result of actual trauma, loneliness, and society’s focus on the wrong thing.
Earlier, I mentioned a “target audience” for these books. I don’t mean to be an old prude when I say this, but I genuinely believe that no one below the age of sixteen should even think about picking these books up. Not because they’re “inappropriate”, but because they place impossible and unhealthy expectations on young people, especially girls. In a world where girls constantly dress for the male gaze, act for the male gaze, and generally exist for the male gaze, these books can go over young girls heads. What I mean by this is that both Lolita and The Virgin Suicides are satirical (an no, “satirical” doesn’t have to mean “funny”). They are criticisms and commentary on the male gaze, criticisms and commentary that can be misinterpreted by younger audiences to be truth. This is also one of my greatest criticisms for BookTok in general: complex books are marketed toward younger audiences which they then misperceive, causing their mindset to become skewed as a result.
And believe me, this isn’t just an issue with these books. Another common book that is misinterpreted is American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis. Many view Patrick Bateman as a cool an edgy guy, while the entire book is a satire commentary on masculinity from the perspective of a gay man (Easton Ellis), as well as criticism of the rise of ruthless Corporate America in the 1980s.
These books are extremely important to read as they provide insightful opinions into the toxic standards that society, specifically men, place on young adolescent women. However, even though these books are about young adolescent women, doesn’t mean that young adolescent women should read them. The subject matter is deep and can potentially be damaging if perceived in the wrong light. I believe that as a society we should be more cognizant of what young teens are consuming because of the unhealthy standards and stereotypes it presents. This doesn’t mean just saying no, but explaining and understanding why certain media shouldn’t be romanticized.