This week’s Booking Through Thursday question really got me thinking about the kinds of books I read. Here’s the question:

Today is the 7th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I know that not all of you who read are in the U.S., but still, it’s vital that none of us who are decent people forget the scope of disaster that a few, evil people can cause–anywhere in the world. It’s not about religion, it’s not about politics, it’s about the acknowledgment that humans should try to work together, not tear each other apart, even when they disagree.

So, feeling my way to a question here … Terrorists aren’t just movie villains any more. Do real-world catastrophes such as 9/11 (and the bombs in Madrid, and the ones in London, and the war in Darfur, and … really, all the human-driven, mass loss-of-life events) affect what you choose to read? Personally, I used to enjoy reading Tom Clancy, but haven’t been able to stomach his fight-terrorist kinds of books since.

And, does the reality of that kind of heartless, vicious attack–which happen on smaller scales ALL the time–change the way you feel about villains in the books you read? Are they scarier? Or more two-dimensional and cookie-cutter in the face of the things you see on the news?

Truthfully, the majority of books I read that have actual villains in them are usually “supernatural” in nature. The villains are usually vampires, warlocks, witches, or people with some sort of psychic powers that they’re using for evil not for good. Or it is just plain Evil that is the villain in the book.

I’ve never been one for Tom Clancy books or his type of books. Most of my books involve things that although in some cases it *is* possible to do those things, most of them are so far-fetched that there’s not a possibility of it. So I would have to say that 9/11 has not affected the types of books I read at all.

Tags: booking through thursday