Idk I loved reading, I just liked the freedom of reading on my own terms rather than just what the teacher told us was 'the right way'. When we studied Latin literature, we were encouraged to come up with our own ideas, which made it interesting even if the text itself wasn't something we would normally choose to read.

As someone who understands that now, I do wish that had been made clear at the time. English lessons just felt like the teacher was somehow unable to get the class excited by a book which only their interpretations applied to, and which was entirely removed from its context.

In novels that aren't painstakingly realistic, however, you have to suspend your disbelief for this and a lot of other things alongside. It's a shock to lose a character who felt like their continued existence was contributing to the plot, regardless of the circumstances of their death.

There does usually have to be a narrative reason for the death, though. It's equally cheap just to kill off people for the shock value.

Death and loss may be a part of war, but are the authors trying to depict a realistic war, or tell a good or satisfying story? Many people may read particular genres to experience suspense and heightened emotions while being assured that everything will be okay in the end.