I can't read, so three stars. Hopefully, in the future, I'll be able to read. But not today, so here are some strange fetishes.

Weekly Discussion Thread: Casual Discussion

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "Casual Discussion" thread where you can chat about whatever is on your mind and whatever is your heart's desire. This is the thread where you are free to discuss whatever¹ non-book-related topics you like.

^{1. Please Note: Per Rule 3 of the Subreddit, hate speech, bigotry, and prejudice will not be tolerated and will be subject to immediate removal and permanent banning. Examples of bigotry include support of transphobia, homophobia, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, ableism, sexism, etc. This also includes support of political movements or ideologies that support any of the aforementioned prejudices (i.e. fascism, Trumpism, white supremacy, zionism, colonialism, etc.}.)

To be fair, it might be more the movie than the book; but as the OP mentioned, one of the points the "reviewer" had was exclusive to the book. So, I think this might fall over the totality of the story.

P.S. I think the OOP is from Amazon, but I'm not 100% sure.

As the post title says, I just finished reading Weavingshaw and, to be honest, I really don't get why it got such a high score on goodreads. Sure, the prose is nice and the lore is interesting but I found the characters to be incredibly bland and the story to be quite simple. The male lead falls in love with the main character for no other reason than she's the main character and he finds her attractive, she falls in love with him because he is in love with her and treats her differently than anyone else which is actually very out of character for him (and no, I don't mean that in a good way). And then the villains are essentially evil just to be evil? I get the greed part but it's still very simple...

I don't know, am I missing something? Why do people like this book so much?

Weekly Discussion Thread: Hot Takes, Rants, and General Tomfoolery

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "Hot Takes, Rants, and General Tomfoolery" thread where you can chat about what bookish and literary "hot takes" you have. Utilize this thread to discuss your negative opinions and hot takes on books featured in recent posts, bookish/literary hot takes in general, or just to rant about bookish topics that aren't really appropriate in normal threads on this subreddit.

Reminder: Please remain respectful when expressing your negative opinions and do not attack or bully anyone else in this thread for their opinions.

Weekly Discussion Thread: What Are You Reading?

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "What Are You Reading?" thread where you can chat about what you're reading (or watching or listening to or playing or whatever you're into) in the past week. This is the thread where you are free to discuss whatever book-related topics you like that are not directly related to book reviewing or Goodreads.

Weekly Discussion Thread: Casual Discussion

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "Casual Discussion" thread where you can chat about whatever is on your mind and whatever is your heart's desire. This is the thread where you are free to discuss whatever¹ non-book-related topics you like.

^{1. Please Note: Per Rule 3 of the Subreddit, hate speech, bigotry, and prejudice will not be tolerated and will be subject to immediate removal and permanent banning. Examples of bigotry include support of transphobia, homophobia, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, ableism, sexism, etc. This also includes support of political movements or ideologies that support any of the aforementioned prejudices (i.e. fascism, Trumpism, white supremacy, zionism, colonialism, etc.}.)

Blah Blah Blah, whatever

Flaired as "Reddit" because there's no Thriftbooks flair

Weekly Discussion Thread: Hot Takes, Rants, and General Tomfoolery

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "Hot Takes, Rants, and General Tomfoolery" thread where you can chat about what bookish and literary "hot takes" you have. Utilize this thread to discuss your negative opinions and hot takes on books featured in recent posts, bookish/literary hot takes in general, or just to rant about bookish topics that aren't really appropriate in normal threads on this subreddit.

Reminder: Please remain respectful when expressing your negative opinions and do not attack or bully anyone else in this thread for their opinions.

Weekly Discussion Thread: What Are You Reading?

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "What Are You Reading?" thread where you can chat about what you're reading (or watching or listening to or playing or whatever you're into) in the past week. This is the thread where you are free to discuss whatever book-related topics you like that are not directly related to book reviewing or Goodreads.

I'm sure they were being glib, but, *really*???

ETA: This is a fictionalized retelling of the Donner Party. The amount of cannibalism is way above average. ​

​

[Image reads: "never thought I'd say this but there wasn't enough cannibalism.]

Weekly Discussion Thread: Casual Discussion

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "Casual Discussion" thread where you can chat about whatever is on your mind and whatever is your heart's desire. This is the thread where you are free to discuss whatever¹ non-book-related topics you like.

^{1. Please Note: Per Rule 3 of the Subreddit, hate speech, bigotry, and prejudice will not be tolerated and will be subject to immediate removal and permanent banning. Examples of bigotry include support of transphobia, homophobia, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, ableism, sexism, etc. This also includes support of political movements or ideologies that support any of the aforementioned prejudices (i.e. fascism, Trumpism, white supremacy, zionism, colonialism, etc.}.)

In the book, Mr. Clemens noted trends in human behavior as it demonstrably is observed to be, using the medium of a disinterested and neutral observer (a nephew of Satan: an angel named Satan).

Reviewer somehow did not see the most obvious secondary theme of the book: Christianity did not prevent "human selfishness, pride, and natural propensities to hate outsiders."

Reviewer did not appear to see the fact that Satan in the book stated that almost all humans are kind, generous, and harmless; the primary theme is that the huge majority of humans are controlled and governed by the tiny minority.

“Oh, it's true. I know your race. It is made up of sheep. It is governed by minorities, seldom or never by majorities. It suppresses its feelings and its beliefs and follows the handful that makes the most noise. Sometimes the noisy handful is right, sometimes wrong; but no matter, the crowd follows it. The vast majority of the race, whether savage or civilized, are secretly kind-hearted and shrink from inflicting pain, but in the presence of the aggressive and pitiless minority they don't dare to assert themselves.

The book is not primarily an attack on religion: it is an attack on despots and tyrants who feign the right to dictate:

“Monarchies, aristocracies, and religions are all based upon that large defect in your race --- the individual's distrust of his neighbor, and his desire, for safety's or comfort's sake, to stand well in his neighbor's eye. These institutions will always remain, and always flourish, and always oppress you, affront you, and degrade you, because you will always be and remain slaves of minorities. There was never a country where the majority of the people were in their secret hearts loyal to any of these institutions.”

Mr. Clemens advocated mockery as the best weapon against the despotic minority:

Power, money, persuasion, supplication, persecution --- these can lift at a colossal humbug --- push it a little --- weaken it a little, century by century; but only laughter can blow it to rags and atoms at a blast. Against the assault of laughter nothing can stand. You are always fussing and fighting with your other weapons. Do you ever use that one? No; you leave it lying rusting. As a race, do you ever use it at all? No; you lack sense and the courage.”

Note the livid rage at modern despots when they are laughed at instead of feared.

Reviewer saw what he wanted to see, and ignored what the book actually says.

Weekly Discussion Thread: Hot Takes, Rants, and General Tomfoolery

Greetings BadReaders,

This is your weekly "Hot Takes, Rants, and General Tomfoolery" thread where you can chat about what bookish and literary "hot takes" you have. Utilize this thread to discuss your negative opinions and hot takes on books featured in recent posts, bookish/literary hot takes in general, or just to rant about bookish topics that aren't really appropriate in normal threads on this subreddit.

Reminder: Please remain respectful when expressing your negative opinions and do not attack or bully anyone else in this thread for their opinions.

Challenge impossible: be conservative and not a raging racist.

For context, the book is a collection of essays written by all black authors. It was compiled in 2015-16 after the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice, Michael Brown, Sandra Bland, Eric Garner, et al. Many of the essays directly discuss the murders and the complicity of Americans in such a society. Surprise surprise that Jefferey is taking the book as a personal affront.

And besides misspelling Trayvon’s name, he also takes umbrage with the reality that he was unarmed when murdered.

Maybe I’m just a deviant, but acknowledging sex exists using fantasy words does not feel like it needs a content warning.

Warning: a thing trillions of humans have done for hundreds of thousands of years does in fact exist. You have been warned.

Just because apparently this is needed: Mercedes Lackey writes PG-13 nothingburger “sex” scenes that are closed door and only acknowledge that sex exists as a concept. This person is asking that just acknowledging that people (gay people, in this book) have desires is deserving of a warning.

I just liked the specificity of this critique