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.
At the risk of being part of the problem, if the reader has been witness to all those events and her reactions shouldn't the process already be evident? In which case the explanation is either redundant or intended as more than plain summary, such as a moment of character growth. Reading what I've typed it sounds super pedantic but I wonder where you draw the line of subtlety?
I say that's my ethos because it's kinda what I'm thinking right now, but it's entirely possible I'll write it out and decide it's terrible and try something radically different. Right now I'm imagining that the story's principle cast all represent different Enlightenment viewpoints, and that a bunch of the conversations in the book are essentially debates between these worldviews which the civil war becomes an extension of.
deleted by creator