i didn't say that! | the explicit vs the implicit

[@spookyfirst9514]

7:48 That's the oddness of social media that I don't accept or personally tolerate. On the one hand, authors are told to respect reader/reviewer spaces 'or else', then the same people turn around and scream even louder when an author steps back and refuses 'to take it'. This is bullying behavior, and nobody has to put up with that. We have the right to engage with our peers, and that comes with an equal right to say no and disengage.

[@FNownATzz]

0:42 "Art is subjective, what one might appreciate another may not" Fourth Wing is a NYT #1 Best seller meanwhile you, Abi, Monty, Vanya etc gotta keep me on life support during the Loins cause it's so boring

[@GenderPunkJezebelle999]

I mean, I look back on stories. I wrote 10 or 15 years ago, and I see things in them now that I know I didn't intend at the time. So much of writing is dialogue between the author and the reader. For anyone to say that, if a reader interprets the work differently than the author intended, the reader is stupid, seems really weird to me

[@spookyfirst9514]

There are people who cannot perceive nuance or implied information/knowledge. There are others who overlay depth and meaning that was never implied or even explicit. I had a therapist hand me a trashy amazon/barbarian book. He said, "The day you can read this, and it doesn't trigger you, you'll know you've healed." It took five years before I could read that book without throwing it at a wall. The day I was able to read it and laugh? I bought the rest of the series. I no longer have those books, but it was an interesting way to gauge how my mind changed over time.

[@TwoForFlinchin1]

What made you not like the book?

[@spookyfirst9514]

@@TwoForFlinchin1 That stays between myself and my therapist. I shared the incident to underscore the point of the video: that not everyone perceives a story the same way.

[@PBJT292]

Interpreting written text is an artful expression in it itself. Written word isn’t someone’s mind laid on a page; it’s a reflection of what that mind produced. Reading is deriving the mind of the writer from what was written. It’s subjective. It’s why there are so many religious denominations for the same words and so many dissenting opinions on legal decisions. Fiction embraces those differences of the readers in ways that they aren’t in non-fiction. I believe this because of his I define art: The record of feelings.

[@spookyfirst9514]

24:47 In my opinion, Shad didn't achieve his goal. Redemption isn't earned through emo behavior and crocodile tears. I'm an accepting reader, I went in looking forward to reading about the world he worked so hard on. And I did enjoy the world building. The rest didn't work. For a first novel, he had a lot going on, so much I wished he had broken it up into two books so all of the elements could be worked out. (The Cool-Aide Man moment remains my favorite scene, I still laugh over that one.)

[@amerrywolf]

34:02 I agree so much with this! When I first watched reviews of Shad's work and people complaining about how his MC had no flaws, I felt the same struggle when I wrote my debut novel. I thought my MC was flawed but other people didn't see it that way, and I realized a lot of flaws were in the MC's head and personality. Those can work, but they do need to lead to real consequences. Maybe a simple way to put it is that, bookwise, flaws + consequences = flaws, while flaws alone = MC feeling bad but no consequences.

[@raynorchen5602]

Not everything needs to be explicitly said in order for something to make sense in the narrative. A lot of times more meaningful messages and stories can only be told implicitly by context clues. And Shad's "rebuttal" that Daylen is not explicitly redeemed sounds like such a cope.

[@raccoon9469]

To respond like that to a negative review shows a severe lack of personal fortitude. The whole post reeks of reddit level "ACKSHUALLY" energy.

[@llamasmeowing2061]

Speaking of Jan, and how he took the feds at their word. He himself also communicates extremely directly, and his incredible fascination and proficiency with explosions (and the tasting chemicals) makes him read as kinda on the spectrum, at least in my perception, but I didn't really think you intended that, lol

[@llamasmeowing2061]

36:00 Main Character Syndrome mentioned! Rah 📝WTF is my work ethic 🖊 🖋 winged "lizard" spotted!!!

[@rainyfeathers9148]

James Herbert's 'Once' narrator. The main character, Thom, was peeping on lady fairy knocking one off. The narrator did the 'she's not a child but' thing, read it for yourself and tell me that's not a child. JH's always doing it that with female characters👀

[@brokenentertainment327]

*summoned by the words world building* But more seriously, I think when Shad said he was repulsed by Sodomy he may have been taking it specifically as the wrong interpretation that Sodomy is homosexuality. I've seen people separate the two before. In the world of the book, it's weird to draw the line there. Like "oh sure he did these horrible things but he still had standards!"

[@AJadedLizard]

Can we talk about how many typos are in Shad's tweet? Good Lord. You don't ever win by engaging with assholes online. Even if you're right, you still come out looking like them. You're better off just ignoring stuff like this and telling your followers to do the same (not telling them to mass flag the video).

[@FNownATzz]

Why am I not surprised to see Shad up there again....

[@rainyfeathers9148]

I see a lot of that 'villainous' good guy bs, I'm like does this character not know right from wrong (don't get me started on anime and manga🤣). And of course the trash character gets rewarded/redeemed by the victims, for not just good deeds, but actual trash deeds too. It's... it gives overgrown toddler...

[@rainyfeathers9148]

I think I'm an implicit reader🤔

[@spookyfirst9514]

12:47 Rage baiting is never a good look. It's a phenomena I don't understand. One of the things I value most in reviews and discussions about books is seeing how other people perceive the same things. Why? Because I'm a walking encyclopedia of weird myths, legends, and trivia. I might find ten different associations in one character that literally nobody else would.

[@davidboost22]

📖

[@iisbobby3523]

The only work I can think of that was both implicit and explicit, was a heart of darkness by Joseph Conrad. The first half of the book implies that Marlow has seen some thing's in the past, and from the way he speaks about the nature of empires. From my interpretation he is lying to himself in order to cope with the fact that the resources and material that are extracted from places like Africa and the far east aren't exactly done humanely, but a common excuse back then (a hundred years ago and during Conrad's time) was "well at least we are giving them progress and aren't like those other empires, that steal and destroy. We're giving them infrastructure, education, and etc." This falls flat when you read more of the book and realize how those resources are taken. Now my interpretation comes from someone who has a council communist perspective so take what you will from that.

[@rosaliehawthorn]

I know this isn't entirely related to the topic of the video, but people forget about unreliable narrators. Just because the narrator says they're redeemed or a good person, doesn't mean they are. Just because they say the world is one way, doesn't mean it actually is. For one example you used, in ACOTAR, I like the crack theory that Rhysand is, in fact, controlling Feyre's mind (as Tamlin has implied many times). It'd explain her 180, her fast switch to his side, her immediate "worship" of them despite his poor treatment of her, liking things about him and their court even though she's shown distaste in it before. Some examples being her hatred of Tamlin's tithing, but her being comfortable with Rhysand taxing. Her hatred of being a pampered housewife to Tamlin, but becoming a mother/painter/basically a housewife and stay-at-home mother to Rhysand and being happy about it. Hating Tamlin being protective and restrictive, yet being happy with Rhysand even when he prevents her and gets mad at her when she speaks out against him and doesn't act in a way he's explicitly allowed her to. Being mad at Tamlin for whipping his soldiers when they acted directly against him, yet comfortable with Rhysand misting people for doing much less. It's not intended to be read that way. It's intended to be read as a straight-forward romance. Feyre's supposed to be a reliable narrator. But that's not the only way it could be read, and I find all the different ways it can be interpreted and the implications that can be taken from the text to be fascinating to explore.

[@KirkpattieCake]

I agree. That's what I love about book discussion.

[@AkosKovacs.Author.Musician]

Well, fuck me sideways, the Crown Prince of hypocrisy has spoken. Shad is the last person who has any right to condemn someone for clout-chasing. The only reason his book is still talked about is because of him drama fishing. Make no mistake, he's not an idiot, he knows what he's doing. He could've just ignored James' post but taking things in stride brings no clout - coming out the gates swinging, kicking up dust and clamour does. He is a drama queen. Treat him as such.