( No Title )
🖤 Whether or not a taboo, unpleasant, or illegal subject in a piece of fiction has been ‘romanticized’ or ‘glorified’ is an entirely subjective opinion based on a personal reading of the text.
🖤 You cannot assume that an author is trying to make a taboo, unpleasant, or illegal subject seem appealing just because their writing made you feel like it was appealing.
🖤 ‘Glorifying’ or ‘romanticizing’ a subject is not a good reason to say that a piece of fiction should be censored, or that the author or people who enjoy it should be harmed or punished.
🖤 Your personal interpretation of a piece of fiction does not reflect on the morality or psychology of the author of the fiction.
🖤 It is authoritarian to want to censor fiction based on your interpretation that the fiction is ‘romanticizing’ or ‘glorifying’ an unpleasant or illegal topic.
🖤 An author has no moral obligation to explicitly condemn taboo, unpleasant or illegal actions by characters in their fiction.
🖤 It is perfectly fine for an author to present terrible actions and events without holding the audience’s hand to make sure they know they’re wrong.
🖤 There is nothing wrong with writing a protagonist who does evil, immoral and illegal things without the author taking pains to make certain that the audience knows that they’re wrong.
🖤 If you read a book and see taboo, criminal, or immoral actions as romantic, glorious, or something to aspire to, that is a you problem, not the author’s problem.
🖤 An author is under no obligation to be their audience’s morality teacher.
Exactly. I write for an adult audience. I want to tell a story, not a moral lesson. If you can’t figure out that what the characters are doing is bad, then that is absolutely a you problem.
Discussion ¬