Gibberish? Well, I'm not the one who just used the term "half-digested post-modernism", which means literally nothing. But whatever dude.

I’ve reread this manga and it jumps all over the place! Maki starts out in this video game company and one day signs a jokey slave contract? Sure ok! And she turned from this unsure butch to being some friggin suffocating doormat who’s only aim is to make Liz happy. “I worked on all this food but I’ll remake it all if there’s one thing you don’t like!” get some self RESPECT Maki

Video game company has been completely forgotten about as now Liz has some other random deal with an old senpai, I think the only thing that I wasnt expecting was her to full on cheat, but maybe it’ll make Maki grow herself a backbone. And Liz is changing so much I’m getting friggin whiplash. They should’ve just stuck to the original story idea as that was pretty interesting as it was

I’ve reread this manga and it jumps all over the place! Maki starts out in this video game company and one day signs a jokey slave contract? Sure ok! And she turned from this unsure butch to being some friggin suffocating doormat who’s only aim is to make Liz happy. “I worked on all this food but I’ll remake it all if there’s one thing you don’t like!” get some self RESPECT Maki

Video game company has been completely forgotten about as now Liz has some other random deal with an old senpai, I think the only thing that I wasnt expecting was her to full on cheat, but maybe it’ll make Maki grow herself a backbone. And Liz is changing so much I’m getting friggin whiplash. They should’ve just stuck to the original story idea as that was pretty interesting as it was

The exact point I was making: bad writing.

What I have in mind: Confrontation with Maki hitting senpai (as if), Liz protecting her, and Maki leaving as a result. Then while talking about how things will go back to how they were, senpai brings up the matter of her husband. Just to twist the knife.

hey should’ve just stuck to the original story idea

And it's still there. This is a story about Liz. Or more precisely, about Kita Izumi and her fantasies.

There's no such thing as "good writing" and "bad writing", there's just the things you like, and the things you don't.

Ah, yes, complete subjectivism—the literary theory of a child, or a narcissist.

Let’s call it “artistic competence,” then. There’s such a thing as technical skill in crafting art that’s separate from an individual’s enjoyment. Coherent structure, plausible and consistent characterization, execution of scene transitions, etc. don’t guarantee that a person will “like” a work, but they exist nonetheless.

And certainly, sloppy pieces of shit may supply someone’s dream ship, and that’s all that matters to them, or one scene strikes an emotional chord based on some random childhood memory while the rest of the plot makes no sense, or a character is just so darned cute that inconsistencies of characterization go unnoticed.

One: "Technical skill" is a straw man in this discussion, this was about whether things can be intrinsically called good and bad, not skillfully executed.

Two: Skill itself is arbitrary. "Skillful execution" even more so. Those are nothing more than social conventions. Call that complete subjectivism or whatever, the point is that you're still trying to systematize things into good and bad based on arbitrary values. Which is foolish.

But it’s not an accident or random subjectivity that certain works consistently are perceived as being more effectively executed than others.

I thought we'd got over that debate way back when Duchamp started calling his ready-mades art.

And seriously, that argument is as flawed as can be. There's a million real-world examples to show this, and unless you only surround yourself with like-minded people, you're gonna have to realize that this effective execution you speak of is a fallacy.

This is gibberish--a mish-mash of semi-Platonism (your hallucination that I'm talking about "objectivity") and half-digested post-modernism. The juvenile idea that "social conventions" aren't "real" indicates that we have nothing further to say to each other on this subject.

I did not write comments for a long time but this post made me write a serious comment first time ever. As a person who has devoted my life to education - PhD in one of the top schools in the US - I will make a comment about subjectivity from the perspective of science. A scientific fact is observable for all people and using experiments you can get the same result again and again over time. Only those ideas can be claimed as absolute true, and neither your fancy language nor your overly offensive comments cannot make the point you claim true. If and only if there is one contradicting case which is let's say my opinion asserting "this is a good writing", your definition of good writing cannot be universally correct and becomes subjective. I believe the definition of your good writing is false and further I propose a discrete claim that no one can define a criteria for all good writings accepted by everyone. If you can come up with a scientific, namely mathematical proof falsifying this, I would appreciate it and invite you to write a research paper on this ground breaking fact you have newly found. Else, your claims would not be perceived as absolute true by the community that is using science and objectivity as their primary tool. Meaning that you are just bullshitting according to some people and there is no way that you can claim otherwise. Speaking of narcism, you should check some psychology books or even wikipedia to learn more. I do not want to offend anyone but Cecile had some serious points in this discussion worth talking about science more.

I did not write comments for a long time but this post made me write a serious comment first time ever. As a person who has devoted my life to education - PhD in one of the top schools in the US - I will make a comment about subjectivity from the perspective of science. A scientific fact is observable for all people and using experiments you can get the same result again and again over time. Only those ideas can be claimed as absolute true, and neither your fancy language nor your overly offensive comments cannot make the point you claim true. If and only if there is one contradicting case which is let's say my opinion asserting "this is a good writing", your definition of good writing cannot be universally correct and becomes subjective. I believe the definition of your good writing is false and further I propose a discrete claim that no one can define a criteria for all good writings accepted by everyone. If you can come up with a scientific, namely mathematical proof falsifying this, I would appreciate it and invite you to write a research paper on this ground breaking fact you have newly found. Else, your claims would not be perceived as absolute true by the community that is using science and objectivity as their primary tool. Meaning that you are just bullshitting according to some people and there is no way that you can claim otherwise. Speaking of narcism, you should check some psychology books or even wikipedia to learn more. I do not want to offend anyone but Cecile had some serious points in this discussion worth talking about science more.

You know a lot about science, supposedly, but you know nothing about literary theory. This puerile rigid binary between “objectivity” and “subjectivity” is irrelevant to the discussion. I have spent my life studying literature and narrative art, and this ponderous intervention of yours is typical of scientists who venture into an area where some terms are apparently similar to those of science but are deployed quite differently.

You and cecile have effectively refuted the claim that standards of craft in narrative are scientifically objective, a preposterous claim I never made, and one that would be perceived as “not even wrong” by people who know what they’re talking about.

We have ventured far afield from this series and its barely competent writing, so I’m done with this.

EDIT: Speaking of “narcissism,” scientists may know its definition, but people in the humanities know how to spell it.

last edited at May 27, 2020 7:33AM

Literary writing has a well-established and defined know-how. So well-established that it's subject of university studies and it's the basis for 99% of the stories you read and watch. And it exists for a reason. It's not just "you should write this way because it's right" kind of thing. There's a lot of theoretical and practical knowledge that have been accumulated for hundred of years as to why literally writing works this way.

Well, even crap like Liberty has its sympathizers, but there's no doubt it's deeply flawed, writing-wise.

last edited at May 28, 2020 5:49PM

I’m so confused with this manga... What’s the point of all the unnecessary drama with the ex. And the slave contact?? What??? So the main characters aren’t even technically together? I’m so lost..

this started really well... then i just got super lost

Oh no...

Someone needs to get slapped hard, and for the first time ever, it's not Liz.

I'm piss off now Liz ex need to go

I'm piss off now Liz ex need to go

Someone needs to get slapped hard, and for the first time ever, it's not Liz.

Absolutely, although no doubt it will be her turn again soon.

last edited at Oct 20, 2020 3:08PM

I'm piss off now Liz ex need to go

Yes, she needs to go....and she can take Liz with her. Unless Maki likes having no standards for a gf other than being a girl, Maki could find a less toxic gf. Hell, I'd ship her with a straight girl who's just nice to her and she'll eternally pine for over Liz.

last edited at Aug 25, 2020 12:26PM

Oh fucking give me a break already author-san

I'm not 100% sure how to feel about this manga.

I'm not 100% sure how to feel about this manga.

I feel angry, this could have been an interesting story about a shitty love interest not being shitty anymore but instead they forced a third party to force those two apart so they can get back together and the love interest does zero personal growth because magically the two of them getting back together fixes everything.

last edited at Aug 25, 2020 12:50PM

Whet da hell

My God. Maki is such a dead fly. Is so annoying...

My God. Maki is such a dead fly. Is so annoying...

And yet she’s only the third most annoying character in a series with only three major characters.

While remaining very, very annoying.

Yeah, fuck this manga, pointless melodrama while no one talk about anything

What a fcking bitch, she and Liz and honestly i wouldnt be mad if she manage to make them brake up, been with a piece of sht cheater like Liz its not worthy at all, also Maki been soo pathetically submissive makes me mad as well.

I wanna slap every girls