The majority of writers in English write books with the expectation that a majority of their readers will be native English speakers. And for the most part, this is true.

The vocabulary of native English bibliophiles is, on average, much wider than the vocabulary of someone who learns it as a second language. This is nothing inherent to speakers of English; almost everyone speaks their own native language better than a foreign language.

Complex plot lines are not unique to English either, but it is more noticeable when you consider the added mental strain of reading in a non-native language. Regardless, there are plenty of authors, as you have found, who will write simpler prose with more linear storytelling. Each writer has their own style. What might be meaningless filler to you could be considered flavourful world building or character building by someone else.

Literature is like food: people tend to prefer food from their culture over foreign foods, and if you don’t like certain cooking styles or certain flavours, you can certainly find food that better matches your preferences. And it’s also similar to how some people think rice is flavourless and boring while for others, it’s an integral part of the meal and it would not feel complete without it.

So pretentious assholes like me can grumble-brag about how hard it was to read James Joyce’s Ulysses. Also so you can tell that somebody’s a liar when they say they’ve read it.

Stephen King was on a lot of cocaine when writing his most famous books. A lot of them have weird stuff or stuff that isn’t all that coherent.

But yeah I mean reading literature in another language really is a whole different experience than just conversing in that language. Many authors bend or break conventional rules for literary effect, and many languages even have dedicated language constructs and idioms for literary writing. I’d even go so far to say that being able to effectively read literature in a language is a step beyond fluency and reflects a deep understanding of the language.

you mean like not including any formatting so youre stuck reading a giant, unbroken wall of text?

There are some who are convoluted to be convoluted, and I don’t enjoy that.

But there are some who use more advanced vocabulary simply because different words have different meanings and communicate different ideas. Bigger or less common words can allow you to add substance that is more difficult to communicate with shorter, simple ones.

Some of us need stimulation. A three piece jigsaw puzzle won’t do it. Give me the 10,000 piece puzzle.

I rejoice in an author who writes for pleasure and meaning, who asks difficult questions, who doesn’t limit themselves, who creates and exploits paradox.

It helps my intellect grow, captures my attention, and leaves delicious remnants to decipher long after completion of the material. The ability to read again with a different perspective is beautiful.

So no, it’s not pretentious or confusing. It is just more difficult for some, immensely pleasurable to others.

I’m an indie author. Idk how common my experience is, but here goes.

I’ve self published one book, but I want to go back and make a 2nd edition, after I finish book 2. My primary goal in writing was to get anyone to enjoy it. I realized onky after publishing that accessibility is important, and I’ve adapted my writing style. How I realized was that my relative who have English as their second or third language couldn’t understand my writing.

The only people who managed to finish my book were all writers, I believe. In order to get through m book they needed to accept that sometimes my writing didn’t make sense to them, so they continued regardless.

I think it’s twofold, bad writers and attempts to write “deeply”. A lot of authors that right good stories are not good writers, George Lucas is an excellent example of this. He builds good worlds with interesting stories but everyone I’ve talked to agrees that A New Hope (written by him) is just super poorly written. The second one includes writers like George R R Martin who include a ton of setting, descriptions, and expose in an attempt to make their books feel more like literature than modern novels. Occasionally this works but in most cases it seems to raise the difficulty of reading the book without adding to the story. In many ways this is just a different flavor of bad writer, though I think more often these authors do it on purpose compared to those in my first group.

Like The Hobbit, where he takes a paragraph to describe the door on the hobbit’s home?

Some of the most over-rated, blathering, pretentious bullshit I’ve ever read. Someone who feels compelled to create an entire language for his characters is just showing off. Bunch of Emperor’s New Clothes ego-stroking trash.

And at this point I’ve read a few thousand novels, and a few hundred educational tomes (stuff that’s great for insomnia) and Tolkien has that beat by a thousand miles.

Totally understand you. I think it’s made to show off. But also sometimes it’s made to make book more interesting like a detective. So a reader who could connect these dots feel superior above others.