[ SECRET POST #6746 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6746 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[Gargoyles]



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 13 secrets from Secret Submission Post #965.
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

[fscom]

07. https://i.imgur.com/bbaSzzq.png

[(Anonymous)]

I don't know/ever read this book but I don't like the looks of it.

[(Anonymous)]

Legal cannibalism: the book.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

yeah, I'm good! I agree with OP's secret.

secret op

[(Anonymous)]

I can give you more (non gory details) if you want. It is an extreme horror book that is desperately trying not to be one.

[(Anonymous)]

It sounds like a bad book from the summary. But this comment sounds like a "depiction equals endorsement" stance.

And now I'd be interested in seeing a book about legal cannibalism that actually is as interesting and thought-provoking as this one is apparently thought to be.

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT
Ah, I didn't mean to imply I think the book endorses legalizing cannibalism. That's just the snappiest description I can give it without spoilers/grossing people out. I have read the book and there's not any way to misconstrue that what is depicts is abhorrent.

[(Anonymous)]

I never heard of it either but now I wish OP had said what they find objectionable about it!

secret op

[(Anonymous)]

It's extreme horror trying not to be. And people who recommend it are always, "It's got a complex study on environmentalism/sexism/blah blah." It isn't. It's basic as fuck and the only reason people think it is an amazing book is because of the shock ending.

Re: secret op

[(Anonymous)]

Now I am disappointed. I have seen it all over booktok but always got the impression that it was in your face cannibal horror that was proud of itself. :/

Re: secret op

[(Anonymous)]

It is open about being cannibalism. But it is trying hard not to be extreme horror. But that is what it is.

[tabaqui]

Why do you have that reaction? I read the Wiki page of the book, it doesn't interest me; do people say it's like, super deep or something?
Oh, nvm, I saw you already replied.
Reading the Wiki plot summary, the ending did not come as a shock at all; seemed like it was going along that kind of direction, anyway.

[(Anonymous)]

It's as subtle as a brick to the face. So when people are all shocked about that, I have to question their reading skills.

[(Anonymous)]

I’ve never heard of this before but after reading the comments, I totally would do the same.

I’m like this with a few books. I’ve attempted recommendations of terrible books and I judge the person who recced pretty harshly ever after. And usually anyone else who makes claims about the greatness of those books. But in totally fine with people just reading and liking them, it’s the “this the best thing ever!” that narrows my eyes.

[(Anonymous)]

I remember getting this out of the library, remember starting to flick forward to see if it got better, kept flicking through to the end and returned it, but I can't remember anything about the story or what I thought was so meh about it.

[(Anonymous)]

I actually read this book at a friend's recommendation, and yeah... probably the worst book I've read in years. I think the premise could maybe have been interesting if the book went somewhere remotely believable or compelling with it, but I found the whole thing super shallow and just set up for shock value.

[(Anonymous)]

It's DEFINITELY shallow as a book, but I feel like saying it's not subtle and is only for shock value is like saying Brave New World is not subtle and is only for shock value. It doesn't take away from the allegories and literatary value they provide.