[ SECRET POST #3058 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3058 ⌋

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, 042 secrets from Secret Submission Post #437.
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.

Comments

Re: Ughhhhh

[ariakas]

While some commenters are getting a little over-emotional based on what they perceive as a value judgement they disagree with, they're not wrong in that critique should focus on the writing, not the man. I know you posted what you actually wrote below, and most of it's just fine, to be honest. But rather than "creepy" I'd have gone with "not terribly believable" because that's how it seems like you actually feel, as you didn't buy the age gap as it was written. Saying that it wasn't justified well enough implies that you would have been fine with it, or at least less put off, if it was well-justified, does it not?

To be sure, a lot of writing is pure self-indulgent or pandering fantasy (see: every hot 20-something natural blonde Dirk Pitt bones in Clive Cussler's novels, no matter how old he gets, or the seven-foot-tall billionaire with ripped abs falling for the plain Jane heroine of a romance novel) but that doesn't mean it's exempt from the criticism of being a pandering/self-indulgent fantasy. There sure are a lot of people implying that in this thread, too, which couldn't be more wrong. To be sure, some authors will shrug and go "whatevs, I write what I wanna write" and there's nothing you can do about it, but that doesn't somehow invalidate the critique that what they're writing is unbelievable, vapid wish-fulfillment in any way whatsoever.

Re: Ughhhhh

[(Anonymous)]

I see no one getting over emotional, and if people were, why would you imagine it's because people disagree with the value judgement? I think 50 year olds with 22 year olds is about as pathetic as OP does, but I still most definitely think it's neither their nor my place to suggest this writer is "creepy" for writing it. Agreeing/disagreeing with the value judgement is totally irrelevant; the fact is the value judgement has no place in a writing critique.

And on the exact same note, disliking and judging "vapid wish-fulfillment" or "pandering/self-indulgent fantasy" is also one hell of a value judgement, and reflective of your own personal taste, so yes, that would invalidate the critique. It's not critique at all.

Re: Ughhhhh

[herpymcderp]

+1 I see no real difference between someone wanting to write about their self-insert Mary Sue teen girl fantasy or their silly save the world Gary Stu man fantasy, and in either case I don't care if they write it.

I might not want to read it, but it's not automatically wrong or creepy for people to have fantasies.