{"version": "1.0", "type": "rich", "title": "Quantifying the Weepy Bestseller", "author_name": "kontextmaschine", "author_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "provider_name": "kontextmaschine", "provider_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "url": "https://kontextmaschine.com/post/135472881873/", "html": "<a href=\"https://newrepublic.com/article/126123/quantifying-weepy-bestseller\">Quantifying the Weepy Bestseller</a>\n<p><a href=\"http://xhxhxhx.tumblr.com/post/135454756257/quantifying-the-weepy-bestseller\" class=\"tumblr_blog\" target=\"_blank\">xhxhxhx</a>:</p><blockquote>\n<p>The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity:<br/></p>\n<blockquote><p>It\u2019s not that emotions are absent from the most serious of serious literature. Rather, what is missing is a kind of explicit articulation of belief, what we might call, for lack of a better word, \u201cconviction.\u201d Over time we seem to institutionally value novels that downplay the clarity of their own beliefs.<br/></p></blockquote>\n</blockquote>"}