What is the issue with a writer being straightforward with what they have to say? This isn't me saying every piece of fiction needs to make it blatantly obvious what the themes or morals are but I see this criticism a lot.
What is the issue with a writer being straightforward with what they have to say? This isn't me saying every piece of fiction needs to make it blatantly obvious what the themes or morals are but I see this criticism a lot.
Counterpoint: when you tell instead of showing, you get the "Who is John Galt?" speech
Counter-counterpoint: books are literally already telling, and being obtuse about what you're trying to say just robs it of purpose and meaning. Just because someone had a terrible point to make and made it ineptly it doesn't mean one should be obtuse as a rule, like if Ayn Rand was more subtle in her writing it would still be bad prose attempting to convey a vile message, it would have also just left it open for weirdos to try to rehabilitate it as meaning literally anything else as well.
"And Ahiga the Navajo suffered more from the whims and violence the strangers from far across the sea had brought; for one day they would ask but that he work a mere hour's worth in a day, and on another that he work an hour's worth in a minute, and on other days they would commit violence merely because he was within their sight, all this and to say nothing of the nonexistent peace his family had. Almost every day he wondered what the meaning of it all was.
Kill colonizers. That's it. That's the meaning. Kill them all, kill them again, and then kill them back to where they came from, and then kill them there too to really drive the point home. Suffer not the colonizer to live, and while we're at it, imperialists too, disgusting scum sucking leech filled pustules. Also Ahiga is Navajo for 'to fight' in case you missed the message you damn lib."
Don't know about that shit besides it came from Ayn Rand, Soviet Union worse creation
you can read it here
No thanks
:hahaha:
deleted by creator