[ SECRET POST #5551 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5551 ⌋

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


01.
[Iron Widow, by Xiran Jay Zhao]



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.
[Venom]


__________________________________________________



04. https://i.imgur.com/M0aDyxc.png
[OP warned for NSFW image]


__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________
















06. [SPOILERS for In Sound Mind]
























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #794.
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

Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

This idea of not being able to take a story seriously because it uses historical figures' names and basic images is very new and strange to me. I mean, the book itself isn't all parts serious, it leans into campy fun a lot but also deals with serious themes, another thing that seems to bother a lot of people when stories do both but I don't really get the problem.

Re: Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

DA - I read The Iron Widow and thought it was good enough for the genre, and "campy fun" are not words I would use to describe it.

Re: Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

Riiiiight, because reading a YA novel with a character named Alexander the Great (appellation and all, since that is essentially what 'Wu Zetian' amounts to, it's not like she was born with that name) without any apparent connection to the historical figure isn't going to turn any head at all. Nope, totes a normal writing convention. Nothing to see here.

Just admit you're not familiar with Chinese historical figures and didn't grow up learning about them so to you their names are functionally just names in this context. It's definitely what the author was banking on.

Re: Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

I really don’t think everyone would care about the Alexander the Great example as much as you think they would, so that’s not a great argument.

This is an extremely uncharitable reading of AYRT’s comments, and the author’s intent. And I don’t think it’s an accurate reading either. The most cynical answer isn’t always automatically the correct one.

Re: Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

If the book is intentionally campy fun, as that anon insists, then there is nothing strange about readers not being able to take it seriously due to the premise. Would that not be the intended effect? Can't have it both ways and be like both a) How COULD you not be able to take this seriously?? and b)Uh, this isn't MEANT to be taken seriously.

Re: Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

None of that was really what I was talking about, or what I was responding to? And I don’t think I disagree with most of your comment either?

Re: Subthread OP

[(Anonymous)]

Given that the author both explained the Chinese literary tradition of fictionalizing historical figures AND put out a two-part video familiarizing their audience with the historical Wu Zetian, I think it's safe to say that's definitely not what their intent was.