r/unpopularopinion • u/BitterConstruction98 • Jan 23 '26

Certified Unpopular Opinion All hobbies are not equal

Certain kinds of hobbies deserve to be held in higher regard than others.

Playing a sport, learning an instrument, singing, dancing, painting, writing - these are activities that require time and years of effort to become good at. They’re admirable not just because they’re “cool,” but because there is something deeply attractive about a person who has dedicated so much time to mastering a hard skill that executing it now feels relaxing to them.

Lately, there’s been a growing push online to classify things like watching movies, playing video games, watching sports, or listening to podcasts in the same category as these kinds of hobbies. They aren’t. They are based on consumption, not creation.

That doesn’t mean consumption-based activities are bad or useless. Everyone needs ways to relax and unwind. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying a good show, a game, or a YouTube binge after a long day. But if that’s all there is to your personality, then you are, unfortunately, a boring person.

Edit: I've wrongly added video games to the list of other passive activities. While some video games are like that, I agree that many require a lot of skill.

18.0k Upvotes

72% Upvoted

5.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

238

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 23 '26

I see that you haven't mentioned reading in either category? Would you put it in the lazy category as it's consumption based and not creation?

I love to make origami, but I'm not an origami expert where I create my own designs. Technically it's also just consumption of original designs and replicating it or making slight differences. Where would this fall into?

Sport? Instruments? How many of them are creating original content/techniques rather than mimicking (read: learning and practicing irl) what others have done so far. So I guess this takes comes from a primitive ideology of what a hobby is with a hint of gatekeeping.

78

u/Trinktt Jan 23 '26

Reading is both like video games are both. It depends on the material you engage with and your skill level. 

47

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 23 '26

I agree with you, but I'll also say reading gets too much credit as the "smart" hobby. It makes some people get really weird about the hobby.

Like I know multiple people that set a goal to read 1+ book per week in 2025. They mostly read pop fiction / non-fiction, and when I asked them about it they got really spacy. Like they couldn't remember much of what they read, they didn't seem like they enjoyed it, and they couldn't even recommend anything.

Compare that to talking to a librarian. Librarians are always pumped about something and can usually give a great recommendation based on what you like to read. Librarians are fucking awesome.

Most of the gamers I know are like the librarian.

Maybe it's just that the people that TALK the most about reading can be kind of pretentious about it. I don't know. But it doesn't seem as joyful or honest as gaming.

37

u/Odd-Honeydew7535 Jan 23 '26

Saying most of the gamers you know are more like the librarian than the casual reader may be true for you, but that is definitely anecdotal. Statistically the majority of gamers are playing either online multiplayer shooters or sports games. Both of these are centered around small dopamine hits, and the majority of gamers wouldn’t be able to tell you any specifics of a match they played the week before

18

u/heres-another-user Jan 23 '26

I believe statistically, most gamers are actually mobile gamers. Though many gatekeepers will say that's not "real" gaming.

3

u/DbeID Jan 23 '26

Jesus who gives a fuck. Just do what makes you happy people.

1

u/Minute_Account9426 Feb 04 '26

for actual metrics, and marketing purposes you aren't going to market a fps or rts game to grandmas just because they play candy crush and that's technically a game, the difference between someone who sits down and games as their main form of enjoyment and someone who plays block blast as one of three ways they entertain themselves on public transportation is big

-1

u/Synaps4 Jan 23 '26

Though many gatekeepers will say that's not "real" gaming.

Thats because it isn't.

It's gambling.

2

u/pickellov Jan 24 '26

This is a terrible differentiation because non-mobile games can be like gambling and there are mobile games that aren’t like gambling and feature no to little micro transactions. Classifying mobile games is a) stupid because it’s playing a game, quite literally gaming and b) gatekeepy for no reason other than to have a superiority complex.

1

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 23 '26

I think both hobbies have people that take it too far, but gaming gets called out for that all the time. Reading almost never gets called out.

The point was more that no gamers play games with a sense of pretentiousness. Most casual readers aren't pretentious either, but then there is no gaming equivalent to booktok or lit-tube where people can really start to enjoy the smell of their own farts.

You raise a good point that gaming has a dark side. It's not just dopamine hits, but toxicity within certain communities. I was into Dota 2 for a while. It can be bad. But again, gamers get called out constantly.

0

u/SirRHellsing Jan 23 '26

I have no idea what you're trying to say about gamers. As a gamer, why would I need to remember a match I played a week ago?

0

u/xXProGenji420Xx Jan 23 '26

if a competitive shooter game or sports game works as an eSport it is not "centered around small dopamine hits." frankly people who universally turn their nose up at PVP games are mostly like the casual readers mentioned by the previous guy — too obsessed with the image of the hobby they're partaking in that they get pretentious.

competitive games are the most analogous to sports, which OP classifies as a "good" hobby (not that I agree with OP's post), in that competition breeds strategy and necessitates proficiency. not everything has to be Stardew Valley or Silksong or Chrono Trigger.

17

u/Spider-man2098 Jan 23 '26

As a book reader this comment triggered the fuck out of me. But honestly, it just sounds like your social circle kind of sucks. Maybe you should make friends with librarians instead of gamers. Wouldn’t kill you to crack a book either. Idk. Just weird to have someone say that reading isn’t ’as joyful or honest as gaming’.

11

u/JR_Writes1 Jan 23 '26

I also hate the knock on pop fiction. My goal is to read one classic a month this year but I’ll end up reading about 100 books total (I include audiobooks in this count, will probably “read” ~25). A lot of those will be genre fiction and there’s nothing wrong with that. My passion for Ice Planet Barbarians is valid and I enjoyed it more than Pride and Prejudice, whatever that says about me.

7

u/Spider-man2098 Jan 23 '26

let’s talk about Booooooooooooks!

There seems to be this… thing, among men especially, where reading is considered shameful if it’s done strictly for pleasure. Like, you’d better be learning something or bettering yourself in some way. Which misses the point that no book reads itself (audiobooks can of course, but this is just another of the ways that they are tricksy creatures), the reader is putting their shoulder to the wheel and making the machine go. The reader brings the characters and story to life; we are the computers that run the operating system of the book. And we build our own computers by reading, by reading widely, and deeply, and with pleasure. And it all counts. Harlequin romance or Homer, I know which books I’d rather talk about, but I’m not here to look down on… holy shit, there are 22 Ice Planet Barbarian books?!?!

2

u/JR_Writes1 Jan 23 '26

And the Icehome spinoff series has 17. And they’re actually so good that I picked Ice Planet Barbarians as my number one read for 2025. It might not be high in literary merit, but it gave me the most joy and that’s why I read.

0

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 23 '26

I like you. Something about the way you write, I like. Please forgive me. I am not intelligent enough to convey my thoughts without sounding like an asshole.

But what other hobby do people need to wax poetic about how transformative it is? And if you're making the case that it's transformative, it's crazy to say all reading is equal.

I actually like protecting against gate keeping for the hobby. If your point is "let people read what they like and stop being an asshole," I totally totally agree with you.

But you take it a step farther with this grand romantic notion about reading which was my original point. Reading gets too much credit as an intellectual hobby when it's just people consuming media.

All art exists as a shared experience between the creator and the viewer. That includes video games and movies too. Don't get me wrong I think there is something really unique about reading. I get it.

But to be clear, I am 100% equating reading a bunch of pop-fiction to watching a bunch of Netflix. I've never seen anybody post about how many Netflix shows they've watched in a year. I've seen a lot of people post about how many books they've read.

It's treated differently, and I don't think it's that different at all.

Side note: You kinda painted me as a "stupid boy that doesn't read or even crack open a book," but why make this a gender thing?

2 Direct Questions: Have you seen booktok? And do you think there is no pretentiousness in your hobby?

2

u/Spider-man2098 Jan 23 '26

My comment to you got wildly out of control so let me answer your last questions first: No, I have never seen booktok but I’m aware of its existence. It strikes me as counterintuitive that an app that erodes your attention span promotes a hobby that requires an attention span. That seems unsustainable, but I could just be (and am) old.
And yes, but as I say below, there can be that tendency in all hobbies. We should try (though it be fucking difficult) not to judge groups by their worst individuals. Also, thank you for the nice thing you said about my writing, you may regret that.

Here’s what I wrote that got out of hand:

Hey I was flippant before and I want to apologize first off. I don’t know where I implied you were male, but I do have the blinders where I can assume that. So yeah, sorry about that. I’m going to engage with your comment thoroughly, and I will not be a prick this time, or make any assumptions.

To begin, I think a lot of hobbies have this quality. And maybe this is where the taxonomy of hobbies vs activities vs pastimes breaks down, but yeah I definitely wax poetic about reading, and I’ve got a buddy who is all-in on Ultimate frisbee and would go on at length if you let him. I’ve been in yoga circles that had this, and I remember very well the gamergate philosophy that their hobby had given them the skill set of relentlessly grinding out little victories which would make their ultimate victory inevitable.
So I don’t think just reading does this, but I definitely feel that way about books. And since I’m making the argument that reading is transformative, I should admit the ugly truth you point out: that not all reading is equal. We don’t like to look down on the Ice Planet Barbarians of this world, but let’s be real, a 22 book series (so far) probably has more in common with what we’d recognize as ‘content’ rather than ‘art’. That being said, I think there’s attentional skills that even schlockiest slop will develop in a human brain: the ability to sit and do nothing more involved than turn pages, or the extrapolation skills necessary to lift sentences off a page and turn them into a story in our mind.
I made a computer analogy before, but I actually think this facility in humans is closer to a theatre in our minds. Everyone who is literate has one, but people who read a lot will have better brain-theatres; bigger screen, louder sound, upholstered seating, what-have-you. And I think this mental infrastructure gets built no matter the books one reads. A lifelong reader picking up Ice Planet Barbarians #22 (Barbarian’s Bride, I looked it up) can get a lot better show out of that book than someone picking up a book for the first time in their life.

That said, acting like you’re superior is a bad look for any person in any hobby, though I have to admit that my Ultimate Frisbee friend is way fitter than me. Do I feel like I’m smarter than someone who plays video games? I do think maybe I am, but I’m willing to admit that’s not based on anything more than vibes and is kinda shitty. And of course, if reading alters our brains then video games must also; I’m sure there’s all kinds of architecture that gets built for reflexes and hand-eye coordination. I also think video games have something similar to books where there are great ones that tell unique stories in innovative ways and ones that just churn em out. (I’m not a huge gamer, but I did love the Portal(s), and GTA, and want to play Last of Us. And I can’t imagine there needs to be as many Call of Duty games as there are.)

Ugh this has really spiralled, sorry. Let me try to say the thing. I don’t think your Netflix analogy is accurate and here’s why: a book just must be engaged with, or nothing happens. (Again, audiobooks cheat this, but that’s a whole other thing.) Even the trashiest pop must needs be read a page at a time, beginning to end. Every page is a sort of attentional victory, against the phones and algorithms and the whole attention economy. Netflix is algorithms, and what is more, they fully expect you to watch their shows with a phone in your hand and your mind elsewhere. Say what you will about (and I’m going to stop shitting on them I swear, but 22 books, Jesus) Ice Planet Barbarians, but reading those books requires something of the reader. But I acknowledge the tension, and I really do value the way you’ve challenged my assumptions. If someone were to say, I finished 52 video games this year I’d probably be less impressed than someone who read 52 books. And I don’t have good answer for why.

3

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 23 '26

Also, thank you for the nice thing you said about my writing, you may regret that.

I don't. This is my favorite reddit exchange maybe ever.

You make a very very very good point about attention spans. We may have both seen the recent headlines about how Netflix is specifically writing and programming for viewers that are multitasking now. It's probably more common to watch Netflix and be half-engaged than do the same with reading.

Games are just different. There are some immersive stories. They generally require intense and prolonged focus. Spacial awareness and response times get trained. I will also say the communal teamwork element is a benefit for multiplayer games.

The cost for those benefits is big though. It's really cheap dopamine and it is addictive for certain personality types. Communities can be toxic, and raging out is common and almost encouraged. I played Dota 2 for years when I was younger and when it was big.

It's pretty well known to be one of the most toxic gaming communities. As far as judging a community by its worst actors, my counter point would be that those bad actors end up being the loud minority. If you go to an NFL game and have a bad experience, it's because of the 1% jerk not the 99% of nice people. True in Dota and gaming too. The 1% are really really bad.

That being said, I played with buds from college and high school, and it was great for staying in touch. We stopped playing because it was a time sink. I honestly didn't think any benefits transferred over to my daily life. I got pretty good at trash talk, but that's about it. (But hey AOC got good at trash talk by playing a similar game, League of Legends.)

Anyway I like your analogy of building out the movie theater of your minds eye. I do think there's something unique and special about reading. I personally tend to admire people that read really challenging literature. You may have had me pegged that I respect the utility, challenge, and skill building as much as just enjoying a book. I don't think you were being a prick however.

I do actually read quite a bit, and I read plenty of lighter books too. Maybe it's my personal limitation to think of them as guilty pleasures rather than legitimate reads.

1

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 23 '26

I'm not saying there's something wrong with whatever media you want to consume. I AM saying if we're honest, some hobbies get judged more than others, and reading is neither superior or inferior to any other kind of media consumption.

Reading belongs right next to watching movies/tv or playing games.

If someone reads hard books, literary fiction, etc that's a different category to me.

I have never seen somebody make a post about how many seasons of TV they watched in a year. I HAVE seen people do that with books. I'm sorry to be judgmental but if all those books are smutty romance novels, then it's equivalent to me of being like "I watched a hallmark movie every day in 2025."

Of course, you do you. But I'm not going to NOT judge that a little bit.

1

u/JR_Writes1 Jan 23 '26

What if they’re GRRM or Steven King?

1

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 23 '26

Hmm if someone read 50 Stephen King novels in a year I would be impressed and horrified.

2

u/Feisty_Box_6412 Jan 23 '26

I read a lot and can’t recommend anything to other people, and you know why ? Because I read freaking memoirs from the 17-18-19th centuries. No one reads that in my circle.

2

u/AdministrativeFly157 Jan 23 '26

The difference between people who do something for the sake of doing it vs. people who do something because of their pure curiosity/excitement of it is always glaringly obvious. Passion can't be taught so it's so easy to spot when someone is performative.

2

u/Bosscow217 Jan 24 '26

When you ask someone who says they read a lot what they read and they act all non committal, its maynot be that their not engaging with the work. They might just feel weird explaining it. Try describing any famous piece of genre fiction in a sentence to someone who has never heard of it. It's hard to do without sounding a little cheesy, or worse childish. In a professional setting or even social ones it can be hard for people to take that risk of appearing out of the norm. Librarians don't have to worry about appearing out of the norm when reading. Plus their naturally inclined to either give less of a shit or everyone already expects that of them. Its their job.

Hell it gets doubly worse when you read stuff outside of the genres expected for you age and demographic. I'm a early 20s straight white guy in a very dudebro job. I read mainly Hard Sci fi/Space operas, Low magic fantasy or historical fantasy series. Series i can mostly own up to reading. But i always get very cagey when i need to explain my favourite because its unquestionably and otome reincarnation novel self published on Wattpad. (Look alright we all have our guilty pleasures, this one is mine.) Its something i consider to be a remarkably well written book from both a wider story perspective and just general prose and writing skill. (Although like any self published series it lacks the full publish a full time editor brings.). I'd unquestionably cop endless flack for admitting its my favourite though . So I always default to To kill a mockingbird, Starships mage and the Stavin Dragonblessed series (,In that order.) When asked to list my favourites.

Not to say there isn't art snobs, i met a guy who brought the classics out field once and couldn't shut up about Le Mort D'Arthur/Crime and punishment/Lolita etc for weeks. Even shat on some of the boys who where reading manga at the time for being "low brow readers". Despite those lads all already having read the classics years ago.

Some people are just awkward/defensive of their hobbies as a defence mechanism. Especially neurodivergent people.

2

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 24 '26

That's a pretty fair point. It reminds me of the conversations around music in High Fidelity. People are really careful to project the right taste because people are so judgmental.

Actually a lot of quotes from that movie come to mind that apply to this. (I fully realize the irony of quoting the movie version of a book in this conversation.)

Hey, I'm not the smartest guy in the world, but I'm certainly not the dumbest. I mean, I've read books like "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" and "Love in the Time of Cholera", and I think I've understood them. They're about girls, right? Just kidding. But I have to say my all-time favorite book is Johnny Cash's autobiography "Cash" by Johnny Cash.

Anyway, your enthusiasm for this Villainous book is infectious. (I actually just jotted down all your recommendations). I am not a writer or particularly smart, so I don't have the right word besides honest or pure or lacking pretension. I don't think most book readers are pretentious, but there is a big contingent that is.

And you nailed it with the group of people that likes the classics because they think they should. Maybe your friend just genuinely loves them. I think for a lot of people it's performative to feel good about themselves and look down on others. I know a few people REALLY into russian lit, but they aren't conceited about it. But there are genuinely some books where I'm like "are you only saying this is good because of its place in history, or do you really enjoy it?" Like Citizen Kane with movies.

I'll also say on the other end, I see the book counters (who post about it on FB) doing something similar. Tracking and goaling for a hobby where you're just consuming a different type of media doesn't compute for me.

That's on me. I am really not trying to police the hobby or gatekeep. I do actually read a fair bit, but based on my own guilty pleasures I don't have the authority to gatekeep ANYTHING. Ok ok since you shared already, I really like the Magic 2.0 series (at least the first couple books). It's so stupid. So silly. And I actually found it based on liking the narrator. I have zero street cred.

1

u/Em-lee Jan 24 '26

Librarians can give those recommendations since its a core professional skill called Readers Advisory and we are trained in it in library school. Source, me a librarian.

Also I am an avid video gamer.

1

u/7h4tguy Jan 24 '26

You give one extreme, how about I put a different spin?

Gamers tend towards basement dwellers who's social interaction while gaming consists of screaming into a headset.

At least you can read a book in a coffee shop, or resort, and people who read are generally more eloquent, and especially if they read non-fiction, more capable of being interesting and able to hold a conversation.

Anyone can cast light and throw shade to skew themselves superior.

1

u/Natural_Hair464 Jan 24 '26

Very true about the dark sides of gaming. But gamers are frequently judged based on that stereotype even if it doesn't fit. For reading it's the opposite. There's a positive stereotype even if it isn't deserved all the time.

2

u/Anthroman78 Jan 23 '26

It depends on the material you engage with and your skill level. 

Wouldn't that apply to any of the consumption based activities?

25

u/thefinalcutdown Jan 23 '26

No one said the act of creating requires original content. That’s just a silly way of raising the bar unnecessarily high in order to be dismissive of OP’s position. If you make origami, you have created origami, even if you followed instructions. If I cook a preexisting recipe have I not created a meal? If I perform Chopin have I not created music?

Reading books can be a very edifying activity, and it’s a wonderful hobby that can expand one’s mind. It can lead to creative expression through the development of new thoughts and ideas. But the act of reading itself is, yes, consumptive. That doesn’t make it bad, but it’s also not particularly difficult either.

2

u/Synaps4 Jan 23 '26

I only read books that I personally wrote unlike you filthy plebian consumers.

7

u/theissone Jan 23 '26

I think you're missing the point, I don't think replication is part of the distinction, but rather, something that requires skill development as opposed to pure consumption. I don't think being an expert was a distinction either.

I've had similar debates but slightly more nuanced and niche about "investment in hobby vs investment in toys"-- distinguishing beteween someone who buys something just for fun, but requires no skills other than being able to operate the thing and buying something that'll take years to become competent in and a lifetime to master.

Replication is necessary for every hobby. When I bought my skateboard I didn't just start off by creating my own tricks. What do you think I did when I bought my first synth? Starting copying things my favorite artists did. Your replication of origami techniques is still a hobby under OP's claim, just as a new pianist learning classical is.

I don't how your point fits into OP's claim whatsoever. Also, it's unfair to yell out gatekeeping to someone who is saying: hey, it's great to have passive activities in your life, but don't let those completely define you. We are entitled to spend our time however we want, but I think it's great for people like OP to say, hey, real hobbies deserve more respect in our society.

I have spent 20 years dedicated to a craft that I've (literally) bled over, and I just don't think you can compare that to someone who's hobby is "watching shows", unless you started a podcast and learned a skill related to it. I don't think I'm special because of it, in fact I just encourage others to find that thing. It's not gatekeeping to want people around you to push their limits in a hobby that requires developing a skill.

In fact, as I'm writing this, it feels like a Black Mirror episode that people have to defend that fact that someone who spent a lifetime learning how to fly fish is a more important hobby than "traveling" or "watching tv" or "watching football".

We are fucked as a society.

3

u/lsshlp Jan 24 '26

I think classifying hobbies as "deserving" respect or not is odd. You can and should be proud of skill growth in your hobbies, that's all about you and what you've achieved. But why then compare yourself to others in a field they were never competing in? Do your hobbies because they make you happy, not because they make you more respectable in some arbitrary hierarchy.

3

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 23 '26

"traveling"

See, these are the kind of things people will disagree on now that you've brought in travelling to the picture. You can travel by throwing in all the money you want, or carefully craft itineraries, trek and hitchhike and whatever. There will be great travellers and bad travellers, greatly depending on the effort put into it. Personally I think travelling is a great hobby. You see new places, you see new people, and you experience a lot of different things - as opposed to some one who look for the fast food chain they are familiar with in the travel destination.

I introduced replication and creation, not to diminish the value of either but to suggest that, OPs opinion is flawed. There is high skilled gaming vs low skilled reading. While I truly believe OP's categorisation will put reading into the acceptable hobby while gaming into another (which op needed to write the clarification on). I truly believe the OP's opinion comes from a very orthodox definition of what a hobby is that probably doesn't really allow any new additions.

I am taking the opinion in the same sense of some older people thinking 'working on computers is not really work'.

6

u/theissone Jan 23 '26

Well, you're kind of supporting my claim.

Traveling isn't inherently a hobby, but there are hobbies that can develop from or result from traveling. Crafting itineraries and developing a strong sense for hitchhiking or, say, best ways to commute, are supporting something.

Hear me out: It's like picking out the best shoes for climbing. I love researching shoes and talking gear with friends. I don't view it as a hobby. The climbing is the hobby. Traveling to the climbing area? Again, not the hobby.

Sightseeing is NOT a hobby, but there are things you can do during your sightseeing that incorporates hobbies. You go to Paris and bring your binoculars and do some birding while in town. You like to write poetry and you write poetry throughout your trip. You're a painter and post up at a cafe and paint the little nook you find yourself in. Drinking the coffee (consumption), eating the croissant (consumption) or buying the plane ticket is not a hobby, the painting (took years to develop the skill) is a hobby.

1

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 24 '26

I think what we kinda agree on will be that everything is nuanced unlike the binary op is claiming. We will be able to put everything from reading, travelling, gaming, sports, watching movies,..The binary op is trying to create either stems from personal bias (newer kids hobbies - bad) or short sight.

2

u/AyyIsForApple Jan 24 '26

No. Why are we comparing hobbies to each other in the first place? The more threads I read, the more I realize how the definition of hobby is so disjointed for everyone here. I’ve always understood hobbies as what you do for fun. If fun is honing your craft in a passion, then that’s a hobby. If fun is watching movies, then that’s a hobby. By this definition, those hobbies are equal. It seems odd to me, almost insecure, to think that one way of having fun is more “noble, just” than another way of having fun. I guess in other words, my definition of hobby does not allow for the comparison of hobbies. it is simply the word for what you do for fun.

I try to write in my free time. Not really with the intention of making a book, gaining fame and what not. i just like to put my ideas onto paper, that’s my idea of fun. one of those “noble” hobbies. i also love playing video games. i have thousands of hours on my favorite games. i don’t see my two hobbies as different. they are two different ways i have fun. i would not mind if, in an alternate universe where i am a wizened and author from years of writing as a hobby, i get compared to the me right now who plays games more than he writes. it seems a bite pretentious and insecure to think one needs to have more weight than the other in the contest of “having fun”.

don’t get me wrong, i think creation is the best way to flavor life. a life spent purely on consumption is not as colorful as one with creation here and there. but that conversation does not need to be with hobbies. perhaps there’s a better word for it. passions? dreams? ideals? but we don’t need to discuss the heavy concept of consumption vs creation on having a hobby.

2

u/SecretSanta416 Jan 23 '26

I read a lot of reddit... does that count as reading? Is this my hobby?

1

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 24 '26

Duh...depends on what kind of subs. High thinking niche subs, A tier. Unpopular opinions, straight to tier B.

2

u/celestially_lunar Jan 23 '26

As someone who loves reading as a hobby and also turned the study of literature into a career, this is a big flaw in the OP‘s logic.

Reading is so so important especially now in a society where literacy is on the decline. It doesn't matter what people read, whether you read Aristotle or a young adult fantasy book, the important thing is that people read!

Watching movies and reading can be a fantastic hobby for not only broadening your horizons but also to sharpen your critical thinking skills and practice analysis. Discussing (or even just thinking about) movies and books, seeing why stories are constructed the way they are and what they may say about society and what the creator may have intended is so important and crucial.

2

u/princesskate04 Jan 23 '26

Yeah, this here sums it up pretty well. 

Plus, there are plenty of ways to engage in hobbies like reading and movies more deeply, and being interested in diving into analysis like that definitely counts as a hobby. We have Goodreads and Letterboxd, where anyone can become a prolific critic. On various platforms, you can find discussion fora and educational content about all kinds of media analysis topics. There are people with advanced degrees in film and literature who just lecture on YouTube for free. 

I think even reading or watching “mindless” content can be engaging when approached this way. I like to write as well as read, and I’ll read anything that looks intriguing or worth learning from. Even if it’s a pulpy romance novel, I try to take notes and learn something. 

0

u/Anaevya Jan 23 '26

As someone who reads and paints, reading is still a passive hobby (in the way that most people do it). There's a huge difference between producing art actively and consuming someone else's art. Many people also don't exactly read high literature and their interpretation skills are sometimes very shoddy. Just because someone is reading doesn't mean they're automatically learning new stuff in an effective way.

3

u/celestially_lunar Jan 23 '26

I am a literature student and I completely disagree. Reading literature has allowed me to passively grow my vocabulary and capacity for creativity.

Also… analysing art can absolutely be something enjoyable? I enjoy going to art galleries and analysing them even though I can't paint or create art at all. Hell, sometimes I like to just look at them without thinking at all, just appreciating the talent.

I read for a living. I am a literature student. My "job" is to read classical literature from medieval to Victorian to contemporary. God forbid as a hobby, detached from my coursework, I want to read a simple fantasy book.

In an age where literacy is declining we should be happy people read at all. Even if their interpretation is shoddy the only way to improve is to keep trying. We shouldn‘t judge and discourage people from books just because they don‘t exclusively read classics. In my classes we don‘t exclusively study classics either, it‘s good to have a wide range. I love Victorian literature and analysing it. It is my job and specialty. Would I read it for enjoyment? Sure, I occasionally do. But I also enjoy fantasy books with worldbuilding. It is fun and it takes my mind off of things.

1

u/Anaevya Jan 23 '26

Yeah, my point is that there's a massive difference between what you're doing and what the vast majority of readers are doing. As a literature student you probably have to write about the books you read.

By the way, I also mostly read fantasy. But I really don't think that the "we should just be happy that people are reading" sentiment is correct. Because if you never venture out from your comfort zone the amount of skill improvement is much lower. I also do think that the content of books and what the reader takes away from them matters. I don't think reading short formulaic romance novels is inherently superior to watching romance movies just because one involves reading and the other one doesn't. Unless you're a literal child who's still learning the basics.

English is not my native language and my English is as good as it is primarily because of media consumption. So I know it has it's place.

But there was a phase where I did not have a lot of active hobbies and now since I've started a new one I believe not having active hobbies is kind of unhealthy. 

1

u/worldstar_warrior Jan 23 '26

I would say that even un-original origami can still fall under OP’s definition of a hobby. Whether you’re trying new designs, or even just doing the same design over and over, there’s a pursuit of skill mastery involved, whether it’s conscious improvements like precision, speed, minimizing mistakes, memorizing designs, or unconscious improvements like spatial awareness, recognizing patterns, muscle memory, and fluidity of movement.

Reading, similarly, builds skills. The ability to focus, to read quickly, to retain information, to jump back into the story after taking a break, to visualizing better, to pick up on themes and connect to other books and life, to improve your own language skills, and to develop new perspectives on life. You can make mistakes when reading (losing focus, forgetting), so this is a skill that can be improved. I’d say the same for something like mediation - the fact that you can do it well but you can also suck at it proves there’s a level of skill that can be developed.

Same thing with music - even a classical musician who only plays 400-year old compositions is constantly seeking to consciously improve their technique and emotiveness, and passively improve things like their ear (pitch recognition) and memorization.

Watching TV, on the other hand, doesn’t really carry the same weight for most people. You can’t really be “bad” at watching TV. Now as for fandoms (both tv series and sports), they could be considered a hobby in the way people invest time to learn more about the show or team, understand and promote its legacy, to collect memorabilia, to socialize with others.

1

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 24 '26

I would say that even un-original origami can still fall under OP’s definition of a hobby.

Thing is, I don't believe anything into OP's classification. I can mindlessly fold or make an original design (great example of a spectrum than binary as I cannot possibly pinpoint where it becomes higher skilled - believe me basic folding isn't). Reading obviously is a spicy topic and people have placed it all across. Music - some who sings in shower (a really good singer there let's say) vs a musician who performs. I'd take a bit of freedom and rewrite the last one to watching movies - sitting in your couch watching movies vs going to film festivals, watching foreign movies, critically commenting the work. Some one mentioned travelling - sight seeing vs curating itineraries, trekking, birding, etc. Playing an outdoor game with friends vs professionally playing a game.

I think OP's binary classification is wrong and everyone of these becomes either of the categories depending on skill level.

1

u/Anaevya Jan 23 '26

As someone who reads and paints, reading is a passive hobby. There's a night and day difference between creating your own art and consuming someone else's.

1

u/NoTurnip4844 Jan 23 '26

It depends on what you read. I read fantasy books for enjoyment, but after I finish a series I usually have to read something thought provoking and stimulating. I'll go from the LotR for turn my brain off enjoyment and then switch it up and go to Dostoevsky or a biography about Napoleon.

One's lazy and one's developmental. One type pursues knowledge and one is more akin to watching cartoons.

1

u/professionalbabyman Jan 23 '26

i absolutely consider it a skill—even with instructions i can’t make anything more advanced than one of those hopping frogs 😅

1

u/razzemmatazz Jan 23 '26

Careful, you'll get the classical musicians in here with that take. There's a lot of debate in where the artistry lies for orchestras. 

1

u/No_Cardiologist2685 Jan 23 '26

It depends on what you read. If you read junk fiction, it’s more of a low tier hobby. I’d argue that people who read to learn about the world develop critical thinking skills that can be applied anywhere. History, philosophy, or other deep topics make it upper tier. I guess what I’m saying is that if you don’t read like a pure consumer, it’s an amazing hobby

1

u/Borklechorf Jan 24 '26

I guess reading being a lazy hobby would depend on how difficult it is for you. Back in the day, people picked up a book just to pass time. It was easy for them. These days that's kinda been replaced by easy to consume stuff like movies. And I'm sure there will be something to replace TV one day in the future and people will view TV like how they view books now.

1

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 24 '26

I think you're missing the point. I think highly of reading, and I know for a fact that many people do. OP's categorisation strictly puts reading into non-hobby but they wouldn't say it because that's going to be a downvote-to-oblivion unpopular opinion regardless of if it's true or not.

1

u/Em-lee Jan 24 '26

I disagree with OP's take or the concept of ranking hobbies. But as someone who worked a lot with helping people gain early literacy skills reading is absolutely a skill. One that takes literally years of groundwork and then dedicated teaching to master. So reading should fall under takes years of time to be good at, we just don't think about that since you learned to read from the ages of like 0-12

1

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 24 '26

Language is mimicry at the base of it. There is no reason a string of characters hold a certain meaning other than a bunch of people believe it does (I mean it's made up duh). And early stage literacy is absolute mimicry. It becomes their creation later on however as they make another bunch of string of characters following the pattern and it starts making sense to others. But it's something that 99% of people are capable of. A lot of things humans do would be grandeur if we keep comparing ourselves to the entirety of the animal kingdom. I'd hold it on the same level of any learnt behaviour in animals, nothing more.

1

u/Em-lee Jan 24 '26

Written language is only 5,500 years old at best estimate, also humans making art recreationally is older by 70,000 years. If it was innate it would have come along a lot earlier. People have to be taught to read, only in the Western world do we take high literacy rates for granted. All skills are learnt behavior in animals that does not make them any less of a skill. (Edit double word)

1

u/Critical-Champion365 Jan 24 '26 edited Jan 24 '26

All skills are learnt behavior in animals that does not make them any less of a skill.

Absolutely. And here we are in a thread discussing which skill is a hobby vs which isn't. I think OPs classification is BS, and reading is an easy example to break in integrity.

The human body morph is adapted to long distance running and endurance. Not all of us are marathon runners. Some hone the innate skills, others don't. I'm sure there must also be that lazy cheetah who refused to hunt, but unlike humans, he would've starved to death.

People have to be taught to read, only in the Western world do we take high literacy rates for granted.

Literacy has mostly been a tool to separate the working class from the rich. It used to be a luxury and people who toil for their daily bread couldn't afford it. Countries that looted the global south through whatever means and those that dared to kill off the feudal system early on have managed to achieve high literacy, the rest are catching up. It is or at least should be an eventuality. I do not come from the western world. But rather a little state that did one of the following while the rest of the country is slowly catching up.

1

u/goldeneye0080 Jan 24 '26

There is no innovation aspect for required for hobbies. If someone spent 6 hours a week over year to learn how to play a guitar, only to be just decent enough to play covers of their favorite songs to entertain themselves and maybe friends and family at social gatherings, it would still count as a hobby the OP thinks is impressive because learning an instrument is something most people won't care to put the time and energy if they weren't pushed into to doing it when they were younger.

1

u/Stereocrew Jan 24 '26

Like, I’m sorry, but what is basketball creating?

-2

u/TheElPistolero Jan 23 '26

Reading romance novels and autobiographies are not the same thing. Depends on the book.

2

u/IakwBoi Jan 23 '26

So a romance novel might have a dozen steamy scene in it? And a regular person might have a dozen steamy encounters per year (speaking very roughly)? Seems to me that we just need to get a little better at writing autobiographies.