Not necessarily but basing an idealogy in fantasy (as he talks about the emperor being god in gladiator) neglects reality. Anger and whatever sense of righteousness you subscribe to should be based firmly in reality, otherwise you’ll find you are acting on nothing but hypotheticals.
I don’t see the issue in quoting works of fiction if you think they express something you’re trying to say. People quote Shakespeare all the time to make a point but nobody cares because that’s old and accepted. No I’m not saying Gladiator is on a level with Shakespeare but there’s a weird imbalance in what you’re allowed to quote in your argument and what not. If the imagery spoke to him, why not?
I liked that the writer stuck with clear and simple english instead of flowering up their prose, but I just feel that using borrowed quips and popart philosophy isn’t an honest way to write. It feels more in line with a teen or a young adult trying to find their voice in the words of others (and we’ve all been there)
I still feel being “disappointed” is harsh. He’s 26 and just wanted his thoughts out. He may have been trying, maybe even subconsciously, to emulate some literary devices more or less successfully in an effort to better convey his feelings but I really don’t think the point was to write great literature.
To theirs credit, the part about watching their mother suffer was very relatable and felt extremely honest. I guess I was hoping that they would open with something like that instead of talking about their philosophy first. You’re right though, the writer is likely young and I shouldn’t expect so much.
You’d be disappointed if he isn’t also a genius writer?
Not necessarily but basing an idealogy in fantasy (as he talks about the emperor being god in gladiator) neglects reality. Anger and whatever sense of righteousness you subscribe to should be based firmly in reality, otherwise you’ll find you are acting on nothing but hypotheticals.
Did… Did you just gatekeep anger?
I don’t see the issue in quoting works of fiction if you think they express something you’re trying to say. People quote Shakespeare all the time to make a point but nobody cares because that’s old and accepted. No I’m not saying Gladiator is on a level with Shakespeare but there’s a weird imbalance in what you’re allowed to quote in your argument and what not. If the imagery spoke to him, why not?
Point taken. I will admit I have been more critical given I don’t believe this is real.
Otherwise the whole of marxism would be off limits
I liked that the writer stuck with clear and simple english instead of flowering up their prose, but I just feel that using borrowed quips and popart philosophy isn’t an honest way to write. It feels more in line with a teen or a young adult trying to find their voice in the words of others (and we’ve all been there)
I still feel being “disappointed” is harsh. He’s 26 and just wanted his thoughts out. He may have been trying, maybe even subconsciously, to emulate some literary devices more or less successfully in an effort to better convey his feelings but I really don’t think the point was to write great literature.
To theirs credit, the part about watching their mother suffer was very relatable and felt extremely honest. I guess I was hoping that they would open with something like that instead of talking about their philosophy first. You’re right though, the writer is likely young and I shouldn’t expect so much.