Non-native.

Is smirk not meant in an arrogant manner?

George RR Martin and the word “Nuncle”. It took me a long time to realize he meant “Uncle”.

You know… you attitude of accusing everyone of being an enemy the moment they do not fully share your opinon always reminds me of the stories my grandfather told me about the Communists and Nazis. There was always a point where someone was not pure enough in his opinion and got thrown out of the groupe. Not saying you follow any of suche idologies but when you became so self-rightious and blind that you cannot see the other person as human being anymore that is flawed then you have lost your path.

I dont like her opinion and that is true, though. She nevercalled forthe death of people.

I find the people who feel so self-rightious that they sent death threats to people over a shitty opinon much worse than the people who simply have a shitty opinon.

However, I think the sting would not have been that bad if Rowling was not as famous and did not spent her time so much on twitter doubling down on it after the backlash.

I think it is difficult for people to understand who do not have mental issues. I have in certain situations severe anxiety. People even those who know me well often do not understand that I cannot just help being the way I am. That the feelings that come are not something I can control. People constantly interpret my behaviour as asocial and unfriendly but I am far from that I just cannot help becoming defensive and silent when I am afraid.

I agree…I think she might have even come to accept a different viewpoint if people had not so viciously attacked her.

That is why I am not a fan of this kind of activism. It cancels any debate and debate is the only thing we can use to deal with such complex topics.

She is still very much beloved by many people outside the internet. Most people do not even know what she said or did.

Kafka was kinda lucky that he died before all that shit went down if you think about it. He would have been forced to see all his sisters be gassed to death. Plus, the Gestapo stole the works of is last year in Berlin from his girlfriend.

Tolstoi’s wife…he was like 16 years older than her, basically gave her his diaries to read on their wedding night in which he detailed his affairs with a serf woman (he and his family had total power over) and continued putting one baby after another into her completely squashing any creative spirit the woman had. Later in life he became a religious guru who threw a way the fortune that should have gone to his children and wife. And in one of his novels called the Kreutzersonata he describes how a husband kills his wife and back then everyone thought Tolstoi was writing about his own family. Tolstoi’s wife actually wrote a counter novel to this to explain the wife’s perspective. It was not published until 2008. She also wrote another novel. Her diaries are apprently even worse but then I avoid diaries.

Thats because people do not understand that books are not necessarily there to give you an answer to what is right or wrong in the world. Books have topics or themes but not necessarily a hashtag massage meant to propagade a greater cause. Take an author who writes about rape and does not have the prepetrator punished for his crimes in the novel he writes about. Now some people will say: Hey, does the writer support rape? Why does he not condem the happens? Because the writer might want to show how sometimes rape might happen and is never being actually punished in our society due to reasons…like the prepetrator being rich, the people not believing the victim etc.
The real good authors do not give you the answer to morally complex situation on a silver platter…that is what interpreation is for. A good writer does not throw you over the head with is opinions but allows the reader to discover his own truth through the text.

The problem of our society is that some people want to turn books into the bible meant to teach people what are the right views and what not, but that is not what books are for. Books are not the bible or the Torah meant to brain wash people they are there for entertainment and expression of art.

Another problem I see is that some people are just completely unable to give proper criticism: Criticism is not good crictism if you go personal like calling the writer a pedophile, going on twitter and pointing out single passage taken out of context and claiming this is homophobic or sexistic. That is harassment and soiling the reputation of a real life person who has feelings, kids, a family and a livellihood. I hope at one point one of these authors loses his patiences and sues the these people if they go too far.

Real criticism takes the context of the text, the era and proves that criticism based on the text and not based on your personal bias. And now to the most important point: self-importance and hinsight bias. Many people do not understand that their personal experiences as a gay person might not be the only truth there is. There are many gay people who have different experiences and just because some person might write about issues in a way the other person disagrees with does not mean he or she is homophobic or wrong. The arrogance to think that your experience is the only experience is not a valid basis for literal criticism just just arrogance of the highest level. At last, hinsight bias which is one of the worst ways to interpret a text and something people have been doing for centuries. Take for example Franz Kafka. Many people know he had a bad relationship with his father so they interpret every little shit about daddy issues into his text without ever actually making the effort by trying to find their own interpretation. Kafka was a real life person with a far more complex life than just his father being an asshole and his texts are far more interesting to be read without reducing everything to this one point. I am also gonna make the same point about JK Rowling and how some people are now trying to do active revision of her work because she has fallen out of favour with people due to her toxic opinions on trans people. Claiming now in hinsight that she always was a transhobe and that it can be found in her text needs more than just personal opinions. You need to prove it by the text, but most of the time it is just a flimsy text passage taken out of context. And that is the real problem: many people simply cannot seperate the voice of the author from the voice of the character.

Another thing, I think some people are actively trying to discredit authors and take a joy in doin so by going through books and pointing out problematic passages. They are a common mob and they should not be catered to because they ruin the joy of writing and reading in equal measure. They are just common bullies and should be ashamed of themselves and find a different hobby.

At last, I have come to the point where I say: Writers should write anything they want and do not deserve personal attacks for it even when it comes to topic like rape and pedohpilia. Nobody should be personally attacked for writing a fictional book because at the end of the day it is not real.