Apologies if a similar thread was posted, I haven't seen any. So, opinions are a thing nowadays, so much to the point of near truth-extinction. Everything is an opinion, there is no one real "truth", something that appeals to one person might repulse the other, a sexist man might be a well-educated model to another, and so forth with books. Browsing the forum, I've encoutnered a couple of surprising statements, among them are flat out statements that some classic work of highly regarded authors are shit. On the other hand there are older-styled readers expressing that the newer forms of writing, and authors like Rowling, King, and the like are the result of literary regression. Although I've my own opinion, I see no problem with that. But I wonder, is everything really an opinion? Could a once famed classic be considered shit nowadays? If so, then what the hell is "good writing"? Who is to say what is good writing? If there is no such thing as good writing, then what is the point in reviews and critique? Is it a mere orientation advice to help an author better deliver their work to their own reader base? In other words, are books just a fandom thing? Claiming such would mean that there is no point in arguement and discussion between people of different taste, however it still happens. What I infer is that there is still some kind of "general quality" considered good. What is it? Let's discuss. Update: I don't mean to say that we're blabbering - we're not, theory is important - I just wish to take us to the next level of discussion. Let's compare between what's good and what's not, use examples, be less tame about our judgement, for the sake of understanding what we regard a quality work. Take sentence one and sentence two and comapre, judge words and sentence structure within their context and and explain why or why not they are good\bad. Just to clear up, we remain within the realm of storytelling.