# The Internet's Brutal Honesty About Literary Merit

Literary Hub's irreverent advice column "Am I the Literary Asshole?" takes on a question that lurks behind every bookstore conversation and writing workshop: Is it elitist to think most writers simply aren't very good?

The column, pitched as a "drunken advice" format, leans into the tension between democratic publishing ideals and the uncomfortable reality that quality varies wildly across the literary landscape. The framing acknowledges a cultural anxiety that has intensified as self-publishing, social media, and algorithm-driven content discovery have flattened traditional gatekeeping structures. Everyone can publish now. Not everyone should be read.

This taps into broader anxieties within publishing circles. As traditional houses consolidate and midlist authors struggle to find readers, the conversation has shifted from "Is this publishable?" to "Is this worth anyone's time?" The rise of BookTok and Goodreads discourse has democratized literary judgment, placing teenage readers' opinions alongside professional critics. Meanwhile, MFA programs continue churning out writers who may never publish, and the market remains brutally indifferent to effort.

The column's tongue-in-cheek tone masks a real question: Can someone maintain intellectual standards without becoming insufferable? The literary world has always contained hierarchies. Modernism built itself on difficulty. Canon formation requires judgment calls. Yet contemporary discourse celebrates accessibility and inclusivity. These values collide when someone admits, honestly, that they think most writing is mediocre.

Literary Hub positions itself as a space where such provocative questions get asked without sanitization. The magazine has built its brand on blunt, unflinching literary conversation, treating publishing not as sacred but as a human enterprise full of contradiction and failure.

The column's appeal lies partly in permission-giving. It allows readers to acknowledge what many think privately: that taste matters, that not all writing deserves equal enthusiasm, that the sheer volume of published material makes selectivity necessary rather than snobbish.

THE TAKEAWAY: Literary culture increasingly permits honest hierarchies alongside populist values, creating