/lit/ - Literature

>>12070880
Imagine that all the ethinicities, or races, are colours in a petri dish. They all leak into one another and mix. But only on the edges. The core stays the same, unless you mix them forcefully. We have races/ethnicities and as colours have different properties, so do the races. Is it not in our interest to preserve the colours themselves and also let the mixing at the boarders happen, to see what new properties we get? Preserve the races/ethinicities but dont undermine the fundamental human nature of sentience(i.e. choosing for oneself)! There is nothing wrong with asking: How are people diffrent based on where they come from?
This whole discussion is not here to fallate your own ego and moral grandstanding.
As for your question of authors talking about race. Diffrences will always be acknowledged in the human discourse. Dont asume we will be less racsist if we eliminate talking about races.

Or to give another metaphor: Humans are like houses - nature and nurture - the foundation of the house is nature, and what we build on it is nurture. If you want a good house you need a solid foundation. If you want a stable house, you need to build on what your foundation gives you. Building a house on sand is not very wise, neither is building a house completly out of sand(generally)

>>11870635
Since we were broaching the subject of anime for a moment here, you know how a lot of manga adaptations are filled with padding and absolutely everything is stretched to take as long as humanly possible, just to make sure they won't catch up with the source material? Remember how fucking annoyed you used to be with that shit, even if the anime is otherwise pretty good, probably wondering why you don't read the much better paced manga this whole time?

That's kinda like long ten-book doorstoppers versus shorter self-contained novels. Even if the former could have something worthwhile in it, something you might actually like, it's simply not worth the time investment and the frustration and the boredom.

>>11730160
Write a whole bunch of short stories and tie them all together by some theme or plot element.

>>11651322
Sometimes a book can be enjoyed more if you are spoiled in advance.

Consider, for instance, the death of a major character. If you didn't see it coming in advance, you'd feel surprise and shock when it happens, perhaps horror and disbelief. Afterwards, you'd feel emotionally numb for a little while, and your perception of the remainder of the book might well be thoroughly shaken. But at this point the book is unlikely to take too long anyway. All these emotions are brief, transient, reactionary: they will have washed out of you by the time you finish the book, or shortly after.

But let's say you were spoiled to this event in advance. What do you feel now? You feel excited, tense, throughout the entire book. The character has no plot armor - every time he enters a perilous situation you're honestly wondering whether this would be the place of his doom. Every time he talks about his future plans you can shake your head in sad irony; every time he gets emotional with other characters you can sniff out a little. You may even begin to distrust the other characters, wondering whether they might betray him. You may find things from the book on the first reading that many others only discover on the second or third. These emotions are longer-term, lasting, and carry on with you at least until the inevitable finally happens.

You're still a dick if you just go around shouting spoilers to people, of course. But if you go on your way to read about the book in advance, and happen to learn some terrible truth of how things come to be, it's not necessarily a bad thing for you.