I agree, to an extent. I do believe that works ought to be judged primarily on their own merits and faults, which is probably where some of the critiques of WoT on its comparative levels of violence and emotional/physical relationships come into play. I think that is a fair critique to do, as long as it keeps it within the framework of that story itself.



Yes, that is an amusing example of wish (non)fulfillment, I suppose



Cultural differences, no? I do agree with what you say here, but the WoT profanities have never bothered me one way or the other. It was always the faux ornateness of the prose that grated after a while, as it seemed the descriptions were an attempt to cover up characterizations that were never fully realized.



Ha! I still think the harshest profanity was a Romanian one I pieced together from clues that a Romanian publisher left me a couple of years ago. Something about telling someone to go bugger himself on the crucifix headstone of his mother's grave.





Of course, just because something may be valid, does not mean that opposing viewpoints are automatically invalid. I dislike a lot of the mechanics of the storytelling in this series due to my experiences with a wide variety of writing and can defend that fairly well when I choose, but doubtless others can emphasis elements of the writing that "work" for them and can make strong cases for considering that viewpoint. Might not change my (or others' opinion, but presenting it is better than nothing, I believe.





Well, I agree that for that particular scene, that does imply. But I'm also thinking of how that reticence to explore what is going on with those teen heroes creates an emotional distance that makes for stilted characters. As for the violence, that can be added to what I interpreted without changing it, right?



True. Sometimes I wonder if I'm really an American at times, considering how much casual violence irritates me and how little sexual frankness shocks or bothers me