This is more cringe than Ruby’s poetry attemptsView attachment 3132557
Damn, whose cringy ass comment is this?
A rule of Tattle is to keep it on Tattle. If you actually can't take it anymore, just stop watching lol. it's never that serious, trust me. Also mentioning the website by name feels unreasonable, she should have the chance to ignore the content if she wants to, hence the rule about keeping it on Tattle.
Ruby Granger #46 Actively making time for boredom
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Ruby Granger Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Good lord. I shouldn't be shocked that Ruby made another years-too-late video that's sloppily presented and edited and misses the point of the argument she borrowed, and yet...
She harps on for what felt like most of my adult life wagging her finger that "IT'S YOKAY TYEU ADMOIYRE AYY BEEEYEUTIFOL BOCK COVER BECOSS BOOKTH ARE PHYSICAL OBJACKTHH". At no point does she address the core argument of influencers like herself only focusing on the superficial "aesthetic" aspects of reading and not engaging with or even reading the text itself at all.
It's the chief thing that influencers like her and Jack Edwards are notorious for: Having book-centric platforms hosted by dishonest, self-aggrandising grifters who don't actually read, who never have anything to say about a book beyond lazily-recited plot blurbs. Their content is geared toward waving pretty covers at the camera, using bookcases and stacks of hoarded books as props to "prove" that they're bookworms, while using their videos as a delivery tool for unrelated ads, sponsorships and merch scams, yet offering no thought, critique or substance on any book's content. It's as cynical, hollow and cash-grabbing as it gets.
That's not all of BookTube or Booktok, but that's the worst of it, and it's telling that both Ruby and Jack come from the same management company and have the exact same "aesthetics only, substance never" approach to content. They both recycle other people's content uncredited, lie endlessly, scam their fans and will do anything at all for just a tiny bit more cash. They both hoard books to show on camera, but never read them. They both make regular book content, but never offer any original thoughts of their own. It's also hilarious that Jack already made this video and even he was six months late to the discussion and just copied other people's ideas.
Also someone really needs to sit Ruby down and explain to her that "visual essay" does not mean "a GCSE-level essay lazily copied and read aloud on YouTube in an artificially sped-up, mush-mouthed babble". Explore a topic that you have genuine knowledge of, passion for or at least curiosity about in depth. Make it something new, or at least something that's not been done to death. Research it thoroughly. Don't just pick the topic every BookTuber made the same video about a year ago and awkwardly parrot someone else's well-worn arguments with "PROFASSA MOGRET POMPLECROFT TALS US THAT..." or "ALAXAAAHNDA FRIMPLINGTON argyeees that...." supporting quote interjections that you Googled or stole from lecture handouts like some homework-copying faux-intellectual robot.
She harps on for what felt like most of my adult life wagging her finger that "IT'S YOKAY TYEU ADMOIYRE AYY BEEEYEUTIFOL BOCK COVER BECOSS BOOKTH ARE PHYSICAL OBJACKTHH". At no point does she address the core argument of influencers like herself only focusing on the superficial "aesthetic" aspects of reading and not engaging with or even reading the text itself at all.
It's the chief thing that influencers like her and Jack Edwards are notorious for: Having book-centric platforms hosted by dishonest, self-aggrandising grifters who don't actually read, who never have anything to say about a book beyond lazily-recited plot blurbs. Their content is geared toward waving pretty covers at the camera, using bookcases and stacks of hoarded books as props to "prove" that they're bookworms, while using their videos as a delivery tool for unrelated ads, sponsorships and merch scams, yet offering no thought, critique or substance on any book's content. It's as cynical, hollow and cash-grabbing as it gets.
That's not all of BookTube or Booktok, but that's the worst of it, and it's telling that both Ruby and Jack come from the same management company and have the exact same "aesthetics only, substance never" approach to content. They both recycle other people's content uncredited, lie endlessly, scam their fans and will do anything at all for just a tiny bit more cash. They both hoard books to show on camera, but never read them. They both make regular book content, but never offer any original thoughts of their own. It's also hilarious that Jack already made this video and even he was six months late to the discussion and just copied other people's ideas.
Also someone really needs to sit Ruby down and explain to her that "visual essay" does not mean "a GCSE-level essay lazily copied and read aloud on YouTube in an artificially sped-up, mush-mouthed babble". Explore a topic that you have genuine knowledge of, passion for or at least curiosity about in depth. Make it something new, or at least something that's not been done to death. Research it thoroughly. Don't just pick the topic every BookTuber made the same video about a year ago and awkwardly parrot someone else's well-worn arguments with "PROFASSA MOGRET POMPLECROFT TALS US THAT..." or "ALAXAAAHNDA FRIMPLINGTON argyeees that...." supporting quote interjections that you Googled or stole from lecture handouts like some homework-copying faux-intellectual robot.
Her latest is just another video where the topic doesn't remotely interest me, so I just thumb it down and leave. Sometimes you just need to walk away from all her nonsense and get on with your own life. At this point, since she failed to interest me with her Exeter and Oxford content, I can't imagine her ever having anything else worth sharing that will inspire or enlighten me, or change my life for the better. She really is getting stranger by the minute. Don't even get me started on the whole "aesthetic" trends going on over the past several years. Just be yourself and stop trying to fit into a category. Good lord.
I thought the hand-waving was even worse than usual in this video, but then I saw this, and it makes sense. The next generation of flies has hatched to continue the legacy of their ancestors!
I'm also not convinced she knows much about early modern England, or anything else at this point. Truly. Ironically, much of her content may hurt her application; it shows that she is willing to present and publish work with copious errors and then just . . . leave them like that. Imagine being taught by Ruby. Horror at its finest.
I saw in that brief glimpse at her computer screen that she's talking about a "manuscript" and referring to "pages" - now, I don't know convention for loose letters written on paper (not my field), but a manuscript codex typically has "folios" and there's a standard way of citing these (no time to explain right now bc I have to leave for an appt).
Anyway it's 100% clear to me here that any "old book" to Ruby is a "manuscript." Does she not know what a manuscript is? hint: MANU SCRIPTUM. Didn't she actually study this topic? The work is too late to call it an incunable, but I'd let that slide, had she used this word instead. It's just an early printed book.
In this train wreck of a video of hers. Rumbster says (12:18), "Now this isn't to say, women are the only people to read novel. It's like, far from that, and it is an assumption we definitely need to, like, move past and overcome."
Raise your hand if you also had an assumption that women are the only people to read novel, because WE need to move past this. She says this after rambling about how this ridiculing of booktok tends to have a sexist undertone, which, I think anyone can agree to a certain point. Sometimes people attack something only and only because girls seem to enjoy it. But who in the right mind would think that this means only women read novels, like how did she... physically say those words and not hear it, nor have a problem with it.
Her stupidity and greed are the only things that are high quality.
Oh wait, that's not all. "But we must also remember," she says, tapping on the desk obnoxiously because she's making a point and you have to pay attention. "That 80% of people who buy novels are women in the U.K, and United States, and Canada."
By saying "remember", she's saying that she already knew this fact, and also expected that you, too, knew this, and must remember. Also, duck the rest of the world.
Instead of jumping on a wagon that has left the station a year ago, she could have talked about how this trend of buying special editions can be viewed differently in different countries. Like how so many people just don't give a tit, especially in countries that have a culture of reading a lot. Or how these special editions never actually get read. Because too beautiful and precious. Some of them seem to be designed specifically so that nobody would want to hold it and read it -- too big, too heavy. And these are just from the top of my head.
I can't listen to this anymore. Gotta get ready for uni because the new term is starting soon
Raise your hand if you also had an assumption that women are the only people to read novel, because WE need to move past this. She says this after rambling about how this ridiculing of booktok tends to have a sexist undertone, which, I think anyone can agree to a certain point. Sometimes people attack something only and only because girls seem to enjoy it. But who in the right mind would think that this means only women read novels, like how did she... physically say those words and not hear it, nor have a problem with it.
Her stupidity and greed are the only things that are high quality.
Oh wait, that's not all. "But we must also remember," she says, tapping on the desk obnoxiously because she's making a point and you have to pay attention. "That 80% of people who buy novels are women in the U.K, and United States, and Canada."
By saying "remember", she's saying that she already knew this fact, and also expected that you, too, knew this, and must remember. Also, duck the rest of the world.
Instead of jumping on a wagon that has left the station a year ago, she could have talked about how this trend of buying special editions can be viewed differently in different countries. Like how so many people just don't give a tit, especially in countries that have a culture of reading a lot. Or how these special editions never actually get read. Because too beautiful and precious. Some of them seem to be designed specifically so that nobody would want to hold it and read it -- too big, too heavy. And these are just from the top of my head.
I can't listen to this anymore. Gotta get ready for uni because the new term is starting soon
Mina Le did a video on this very topic except it's over 30 minutes of genuinely funny and engaging conversation. I like that she doesn't take herself seriously or try to make herself sound overly smart! Even Jack Howard's was bearable and both from 6 months ago. Poor show Ruby!
I've not watched this video yet but I can tell it is going to be a lot of recycled content and it is going to be full of mumbled rubbish. Is this going to be her new thing now and how she will use this scheduled learning of hers to make half done video essays on YouTube? I think that it would at least give her an excuse to hide in her bedroom and play school if it's for her 'job'.
I think that if she is doing a video essay on booktok ect, she should perhaps have a reflection on her contribution to reading consumption online and to be honest, studytube. She could discuss how she has contributed to the online community for reading, the book hoarding and her half arsed reviews about the hundred books she apparently reads every year , her aesthetics about reading and how it's central to her image. I'd honestly be interested if she did a reflection video on her experience being a creator in this genre of content as it would be unique but thats probably too much effort for Ruby.
I think that if she is doing a video essay on booktok ect, she should perhaps have a reflection on her contribution to reading consumption online and to be honest, studytube. She could discuss how she has contributed to the online community for reading, the book hoarding and her half arsed reviews about the hundred books she apparently reads every year , her aesthetics about reading and how it's central to her image. I'd honestly be interested if she did a reflection video on her experience being a creator in this genre of content as it would be unique but thats probably too much effort for Ruby.
"You cannot have the text without the book object" -- the 300+ audiobooks stored in my audiable app and the 900+ e-books in my kindle app,right now tells me that is a lie.
---
I really don't understand how she has a masters in english, where she supposedly spent months examining books as objects, when she says tit like "you have a choice of covers these days. Back in the 2000's books had one cover and that was it."
Books have always had different covers -- international covers, different edition covers, hardcovers. In the 80's, stepback covers had a moment (that I wish would come back) where the cover had a hole cut out of it and then behind the cover would be a piece of artwork for the book, making the cover a mix of both.
Her stupidty really wouldn't bother me so much if she didn't speak like she was an authority on things when almost everything she ever says is factually incorrect.
---
I really don't understand how she has a masters in english, where she supposedly spent months examining books as objects, when she says tit like "you have a choice of covers these days. Back in the 2000's books had one cover and that was it."
Books have always had different covers -- international covers, different edition covers, hardcovers. In the 80's, stepback covers had a moment (that I wish would come back) where the cover had a hole cut out of it and then behind the cover would be a piece of artwork for the book, making the cover a mix of both.
Her stupidty really wouldn't bother me so much if she didn't speak like she was an authority on things when almost everything she ever says is factually incorrect.
Last edited:
I had to watch this video on .075 speed in order to make sense of what she said 
I had to speed her up so she’d get on with it.I had to watch this video on .075 speed in order to make sense of what she said
Following the vid up with an aesthetic Jane Austen insta lay has to be on purpose right??
Ruby Granger 47: faux intellectual robot
Today was my first day back at work after 3 weeks off, and the first evening I'm home on my own, since I spent the holidays with my boyfriend. So I've decided to veg out on the sofa and binge-watch the latest Ruby videos just to chill out. Can't wait! I have a glass of wine and a comfy sofa, this is going to be fun. 
Can anybody tell me what grifted/grift means? I see it often on tattle but google did not have an answer for me
It’s attempting to gain things (money/goods) by dishonest or questionable means, and a lot of influencers do things that fall within the category - undeclared ads, questionable charity schemes (such as Ruby’s Holocaust memorial etc.), hinting at things they want in the hopes of someone gifting them, etc.
She's doing a year of Self Learning at the University of Roobs, Manor campus. Homemade modules will include Edwardian Christmas, bird types and Booktok.
Not joking, this is actually happening.
Ruby is what I would expect when AI was asked to create a dark academia booktuber. Just a lot of ideas from around the internet thrown sloppily together.
Except I think AI would manage to make it more aesthetic and have better editing.
Except I think AI would manage to make it more aesthetic and have better editing.
I'd like to nominate this as the next thread title
Explains all thats going on and has a rhytm!
I couldn't watch the whole thing (unfortunately xD) but what I saw was a presentation given by a 10th grader. I don't even know exactly what she's trying to tell us with the video, or what the point of it is. I also expect someone with a master's degree not to look at the WORLDWIDE platform Booktok from a Eurocentric perspective, which is much less than that and maybe it would be good to really take a critical perspective on gender and the distribution of users of the platform and not give some half-knowledge. Basically it's just data from the US, Canada and the UK on the basis of which she makes generalisations and then says that of course it doesn't apply to everyone. So can someone tell me what the point of the video is? Books are great and the aesthetics are part of the book? Did she even answer the question of whether or not Booktub is too obsessive about it?
- Status