In the increasingly fast-paced and hyper-commodified digital age, where nuance has been traded for rage bait, where long-form storytelling falls at the feet of slime and Subway Surfers, books become a rare respite. Not so, on BookTok. Booktok is a growing community on TikTok and other social media platforms, which primarily consists of creators holding up stacks of their favorite books, with brief quotes or summaries to recommend them to viewers. There are hauls, reading vlogs, skits and book recaps. In many ways, BookTok is a beautiful development.
It’s a huge community, amassing 107 billion views globally and 40 million posts as of 2024, all bonding over their shared interest and encouraging each other to read more and speak openly about their passion. BookTok has encouraged many young readers to pick up thoughtful and well-crafted books like “Pride and Prejudice,” “To Kill a Mockingbird” and “The Secret History” that they may have otherwise disregarded. BookTok is also primarily made up of women, providing many with the opportunity to talk about literature without fear of being lectured or belittled.
Additionally, BookTok has taken on a role in many women’s paths to sexual liberation. Fiction allows people to explore their desires from a safe distance, and BookTok gives readers a space to express interest in social and sexual taboos where they are supported rather than judged. Many of the most popular BookTok books are written by women. In a world where women’s sexuality is often depicted and controlled by men, being able to be sexual on their own terms and through the lens of their pleasure — not their objectification — is a cathartic and subversive act.
Many of BookTok’s critics are opposed to it for the very reasons it is revolutionary. There’s a lot of puritanism and fearmongering present in many people’s initial response to BookTok. People are posturing as if women being horny means the imminent death of media literacy. However, outside of this poor-faith criticism, there are some genuine problems with BookTok.
Most visibly concerning is BookTok’s overconsumption. A lot of the content focuses on owning books as a key component of being a reader, highlighting the aesthetic bliss of literary consumption via shots of color-coordinated bookshelves, messy but tasteful piles of novels, and stacks of books to show what voracious readers the creators are. Like in many fan communities, loyalty to one’s interest is proven by investment in it — in this case, hundreds of dollars worth of investment. The implication is that to be a reader — a real reader, not just a person who reads — one must own lots of books.
Not only does this overconsumption create a wasteful culture, but it perpetuates a financial hurdle for an activity already fraught with socioeconomic barriers. There are still significant racial and economic gaps in reading performance and fewer people of color in higher education, specifically in positions of power in academia. A culture of exclusion in a supposedly welcoming space could further enforce the idea that being a reader is limited to upper-class people. Many members of BookTok have expressed frustration at the elitism in literary spaces, considering many romance readers are not taken as seriously as their counterparts in other genres; however, creating a monetarily-dependent social stratum is equally discriminatory.
BookTok’s other primary fault is the tendency for many creators to promote consumption of literature as an act that can be separated from interpretation. It isn’t stupid or immoral to read for pleasure, but refusing to think critically about a work on the basis of a “let people enjoy things!” mentality is a dangerous ideology to promote.
Regardless of the reader’s intent, themes and implicit messaging in books can impact both individuals and larger cultural trends. This mindset treats books as if they are fast food, made for easy consumption, to be devoured and moved on from without further thought. Yet, one cannot be sustained on fast food alone. Many insatiable readers would be better off sinking their teeth into a metaphorical brisket, something that requires effort, necessitates gnawing on gristle, which may provide less instantaneous pleasure but proves to be a more fulfilling experience.
Aside from the harm the anticriticism mentality has on individuals, it also ties into a larger shift towards anti-intellectualism, where encouragement to use logic is viewed as elitist and any critique of popular media is treated as killjoy pessimism. As book bans become more widespread and “anti-critical race theory” legislation prohibits teachers from discussing historical events, all in favor of limiting information and sustaining the conservative propaganda machine, BookTok could be a force for change. Creators could encourage viewers to read banned books, support local libraries, and be thoughtful about all of the media they consume. Women who have learned more about themselves and their own bodies from BookTok could use their platform to advocate for their bodily autonomy. Escapist media is a necessity for many, but it must coexist with action. Now, more than ever, BookTokers must use their platform for collective good.
Comments