Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bellefleurdelacour98 t1_je0rhbo wrote

> Your description sounds like the problem lies more with you than the story really

Welp nope, the story sounds every bit as creepy as it is. I don't give books passing marks or cut them slack just because they're old. It's very important to address books by today's standards and criticize them. Expecting today's people to react favorably to very problematic plot points (we literally have a pedophile here in the story) is absurd. Critiquing a book by today's standard is the healthiest thing to do, not shutting up people and telling them it's ThEiR pRoBlEm lmao

−7

gnatsaredancing t1_je0zj9a wrote

>I don't give books passing marks or cut them slack just because they're old

Weird but okay.

>It's very important to address books by today's standards and criticize them.

So you can feel smug by doing something silly and irrelevant?

>Expecting today's people to react favorably to very problematic plot points

That's not at all the expectation. But it's good to cultivate reading comprehension by means of judging stories in a context where they make sense. You might as well stop reading if your intent is to intentionally fail to understand books so you can misrepresent the stories.

>(we literally have a pedophile here in the story) is absurd

Because that helps prevent ridiculous statements like this one that do nothing but demonstrate your failure to understand the definition of the word and the context of the book causing you to misapply the word.

>Critiquing a book by today's standard is the healthiest thing to do,

Considering how many problems with that way of thinking you managed to demonstrate in a single paragraph, I'd say that's a laughable statement at best.

You're basically advocating intentionally misunderstanding and misrepresenting stories for no clear gain.

7