circamoore posted:
If the purpose of writing is communication, the author did a piss-poor job of delivering that communication, because no one knows exactly what happened at the end of this "story." It doesn't matter how many people purchase a bucket of shit for $9.99, it's still a bucket of shit.
But it is probably good shit, if you are growing roses it might be just what you want. If you put it in your sandwich, then complain about it being shit, then that says more about you.
I love how you give up on addressing all the arguments that completely invalidate yours and choose to reply to easiest to refute.
Because people have been doing exactly that to any post where I put more than one paragraph, I was restricting my responses.
I have challenged people repeatedly to explain how (other than reader projection) the question of a real concrete relationship (or not) between Kaoru and Uta could be a central theme, when the possibility only entered the text in chapter 36, and I have been met with a resounding silence (once we exclude people deciding to pick on a context sentence for an easy win).
Not to mention the related point, also repeatedly raised - Uta and Kaoru started the story being tortured by their feelings, and ended the story having come to terms with their own feelings and eachothers - how is that not a resolution?
The writing has not been perfect. My central theme over and over again is that it is more useful to see the quality of the work as a nuanced multidimensional whole - an aggregate of strengths and weaknesses, successes and failures of storytelling, rather than to write off a flawed work as "bad writing". For many of us the strengths in this work outweigh the weaknesses - it is positive for us, "good", even if not perfectly so. Perhaps for you it isn't. That doesn't mean one person's taste is better than another, it means they are different.
Good, bad, strong, weak, succeed, fail - they can all only be judged in context, with a purpose, and everybody's context is different; some things work broadly, some things fail broadly but nothing is universal. People weight different points differently, have differing assessments of a particular point, and don't even use the same set of set of points.
Popularity/success of a work is a strong indication that it has "worked" for many people, that in their contexts it did something right.
The experience of different people reading the same work is connected, but also unique - that's fandom in all its ugly splendor.
I'm going to risk an analogy, even though they always seem to bite me in the ass. Let's talk about fun.
I expect there are a lot of neurodiverse people here (it is a forum for a web manga site after all; if you aren't, you know someone who is).
As a neurodiverse person Imagine some kind happy party-going extrovert butting in on whatever you are enjoying doing and telling you that you need to get out and have some fun. Imagine that well-intentioned but clueless bastard thinking they have the universal and exclusive definition of what "real" fun is.
Now imagine they are confidently asserting that the thing you enjoy is "bad" because it doesn't meet their expectations of it.
By all means talk about what does and doesn't work for you, but don't presume that people who perceive things differently are wrong or blind.