81–85 of 85 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 1930s had radically different opinions on race, gender, religion, and a host of other things as compared to today.
Define "radical"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 1930s had radically different opinions on race, gender, religion, and a host of other things as compared to today.
Define "radical"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can enjoy a book while still noting that the characters in it are not doing good things.
Yes, but the public denouncing of the books signifies that one views all books as moral instructions aka there are not fiction books.
What is bad is insisting that no one can point it out. That we all must pretend that acting like that is being cool free-spirit and visionary. That we cant analyze a book and make conclusions about what it celebrates, what it criticizes and what it just describes without any value judgement attached.
Somewhere along the lines people developed extremely thin skin toward what you can say about famous pieces of art. You cant really analyze them nor their characters. You must show only unfailing admiration of the characters and the book itself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but the public denouncing of the books signifies that one views all books as moral instructions aka there are not fiction books.
Note that comment is toward "then going into rhapsodies about how free-spirited and unencumbered and holy and mad and visionary it all is". It is entirely valid comment. It is entirely 100% valid to make such comment even if you actually like the book. What is bad is insisting that no one can point it out. That we all must pretend that acting like that is being cool free-spirit and visionary. That we cant analyze a b…