case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2015-02-03 06:48 pm

[ SECRET POST #2953 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2953 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 034 secrets from Secret Submission Post #422.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Re: OP

(Anonymous) 2015-02-04 01:18 am (UTC)(link)
Yes, that's true. But I think the issue of whether or not it works can be considered separately from the issue of whether or not Scalzi wrote an undiverse cast because he's not very socially enlightened or because he made a deliberate choice to do so in pursuit of a parody. I'm not saying he succeeded in writing successful satire, I'm saying that he was attempting it.

sarillia: (Default)

Re: OP

[personal profile] sarillia 2015-02-04 01:25 am (UTC)(link)
I agree that those are separate issues. At this point I just have kind of a kneejerk reaction when people immediately start declaring that someone has missed the point instead of acknowledging that there's an argument to be made for whether the satire did its job or not, which you didn't do exactly but your hypothetical example you used to illustrate your point mentioned it.