Fun reading vs. 'Serious' reading

The first English book that I read that was over a hundred pages was a fantasy book called, "Dragon Lance". It was a series type book with several different stories that intertwined and created a very enjoyable read. Ofcourse, that was then. Being the first book that I read seriously, I was hooked onto the fantasy genre for a long time- I read series that ranged from the more dark and serious (Dragon Lance was abit dark, and other fantasy that tend to kill off its protagonists more than giving them a good ending was considered dark to me, especially the 'Assassin's Disciple' series) to the more lighter fantasies (Pratchett's discworld is a brilliant example).
The first English literature book was probably a Tom Sawyer book, ofcourse back then I really had no desire to finish the book and mostly skimmed across the content with little interest. The first literature that I really took interest in reading was Amy Tan's "Joy Luck Club", which I read quite late into my middle school years, it was THE book that inspired me to discover the depth as which these books that are considered 'literature' went. I proceeded to read "Catcher in the Rye", "The Great Expectation", "Death of a Salesman", and so on.

The fundamental difference between a 'pick-up' book and a literature is length, the immersion factor, and the depth.

'Pick-up' books are easy reads, it's ability to quickly immerse you into the character's world and deliver a quick punch into a world totally alien or relatable, is very very fun. You do not need to decipher the author's intention or message in these books, there probably is a scarce amount of it- if not any (with exceptions). The length of these books can also vary greatly: we can pick up a book that has only one book in the total 'series', or it could be spread out into several books that can expand generations of the characters within the story (even Narnia books do this).

'Serious reading' is abrupt and sometimes it's a cold shoe that you have to step into. The characters can be stale, or perhaps too realistic, and it destroys the 'fun', at least for me, in reading. But it does something more brilliant than the generic plot-device existent in alot of lighter reads. For example, I dreaded reading "Madame Bovary". I hated the characters: the woman was a dream-chasing lady in 'distress' who couldn't look at what was given to her, the main 'man' was a coward who was ignorant to his wife's dredge and lived in an illusion of a perfect life. But int the end... It works! Although it was a terrible feeling, I could relate to Madame Bovary's fantasy-filled world where she day-dreamt more than pursueing what was more realistic, I can relate to Charles Bovary's cowardice to accept reality, and the author had a very clever use of shifting perspective that brought all these different characters into reality.

Fun reading, serious reading... who cares? Drop books that are supposed to be 'fun' if they don't fit with you, read the 'serious' literatures with a pencil in hand and try to interpret the messages the author writes down. I personally love both types, although sometimes biased against some books, I still acknowledge the power each writing possesses.

-Yoon