>How does one learn to appreciate such things?

Depends on one's mental make up as well. E.g. Aspies have a hard time with such things (your description sounds like classic spectrum).

It's not something dehabiliting, but it is like missing a lot of nuance and "dimensions" of the world. I have many of the same problems in person to person interactions (but not with fiction - and I mean the more lyrical, feelings-related part of fiction too).

>"He proposed to her in a park with friends."

As a developer, notice how this loses a lot of the informational content. Did he want to propose? Was he forced to? Did he feel anxious about it? Did she? Why did he chose this place? Does the setting tell us something? Did something in the environment made the experience worse for them?

>But my attempts to change this hasn't work (like forcing myself to see more fiction).

Try books too. I think some authors work better than others. E.g. Borges classic short stories might be a good place to start (The library of Babel, etc). Perhaps some sci-fi. Things with a mental focus as opposed to a sentimental one. You could then incrementally jack-up the sentimental/empathy part of the literature you read.

It's also about enjoying the journey (e.g. the descriptions, emotional states, etc.) not just the destination (the plot, the "what do I get out of this book" in concrete terms).

> >How does one learn to appreciate such things?

> Depends on one's mental make up as well. E.g. Aspies have a hard time with such things (your description sounds like classic spectrum).

> It's not something dehabiliting, but it is like missing a lot of nuance and "dimensions" of the world.

Idunno, wild speculation: Could this be related to the old "Read the book first, see rhe movie only afterwards!" phenomenon? You know, where people recommend getting into a story as pure text first, so you can envision it the way you want, before getting it locked into your head as some film-maker's vision.

Maybe those of us who recommend this order (I frequently do) have some of the traits of your "classic spectrum Aspies".

The traits usually associated with Aspergers are, e.g. "Inability to understand emotional issues", "First-person focus" (struggling to see the world from another person’s perspective), "Abnormal response to sensory stimuli", late or less development of social skills, etc.

So I think the "read the book first" is probably orthogonal, whereas the "I don't get the point of literature/poetry" is closer to a common Aspie type. Getting literature and especially poetry, for example, is (among other things) all about having or developing an intuitive "first-person focus".

How about:

"Welcome to my very old antiquarian bookshop, Daniel"

versus:

"This is a place of mystery, Daniel, a sanctuary. Every book, every volume you see here, has a soul. The soul of the person who wrote it and of those who read it and lived and dreamed with it. Every time a book changes hands, every time someone runs his eyes down its pages, its spirit grows and strengthens. This place was already ancient when my father brought me here for the first time, many years ago. Perhaps as old as the city itself. Nobody knows for certain how long it has existed, or who created it. I will tell you what my father told me, though. When a library disappears, or a bookshop closes down, when a book is consigned to oblivion, those of us who know this place, its guardians, make sure that it gets here. In this place, books no longer remembered by anyone, books that are lost in time, live forever, waiting for the day when they will reach a new reader's hands. In the shop we buy and sell them, but in truth books have no owner. Every book you here has been somebody's best friend. Now they only have us, Daniel. Do you think you'll be able to keep such a secret?"

I read Shadow of the Wind with my roommates as a way of passing time during lockdown. I enjoyed it very much.

This depends a lot on what sorts of things you do enjoy, I think.

There are many ways of enjoying and appreciating writing, fiction, art, etc. You can approach from so many angles.

For example, I love science fiction and fantasy, but I love it in a different way to some of my friends. For me, the real enjoyment is about strong characters, story arcs that wouldn't be possible in another genre, and to some extent about getting to the core of how humans relate to each other and what about them is "human" when you put them in a totally different context.

For some of my friends it is more about fantastical worlds that are self consistent but have different rules to our own. For others it is about prediction of the future through careful analysis of how a particular technological advance might play out. The narrative is simply a useful vehicle for that analysis.

Are there _any_ pieces of fiction that you have enjoyed? Or perhaps biographies or documentaries where the subjects were compelling characters? I would try to find the edges where these things blur a little into interests you already have. But I will admit I find it hard to relate to some extent - I've always loved stories.

First off, if you enjoy movies, then you're already appreciating art. That's fantastic. That's all you need to do: find an art you enjoy participating in, and do it.

That's the trick: you're participating. Movies are easy to participate in: they're very engrossing and they pass by literally even if you fall asleep. But you can also devote your life to them: learning how they're made, comparing and contrasting them, writing about them, etc. That's not better or worse, just another form of participation.

A book can also invite more or less participation. The type of prose you're talking about there doesn't do much for me: the metaphors are all over the place, and so they don't add up to any more than the sum of the parts (or even less). Some do feel like they are intricate jewelry boxes, which you can engage with either as a whole or by looking deeply into the parts.

Again, either way is fine: it's like the difference between writing a video game and playing one.

Don't worry that some forms are presented as "highbrow". That's irrelevant. It rewards what rich people like. Which can be great: they've got the time to spend looking at it. But the idea that it's inherently superior because of that, that's just gatekeeping douchenozzlery. The same kind as you get in comic books or sci fi or anything else where some prestigious people get to declare that they've got the only kind that matters.

The nice thing about this essay is that it's short. You can read it a few times and see if pieces of it engage you. You can talk about why some of the phrases were written the way they were; you can hold that discussion right here as an impromptu book club.

That's the really important thing: not the "colorful part of life" that you're missing, but the chance to bond over it with others. If that's not for you, you're not missing anything at all.

Try consuming fiction with friends who enjoy it. Watch a show with them, see a play. Then talk to them about it. Even if you don't find the content enjoyable, you might find their enjoyment of it enjoyable.

Vicarous joy is a gateway drug to real joy.