3 ms·

WTF man? Not everyone has read everything already...

by boring_twenties 7y ago

selestify 7y ago
It’s been out for decades, surely spoilers are expired now by any reasonable time limit
- acollins1331 7y ago
  O K B O O M E R
saalweachter 7y ago
While I am fine with the social conventions that hold spoiling recent works as anathema, or even older works within limited contexts (for instance, /r/WoT tries to allow readers to talk about the early books without instantly being spoiled for the later ones), the absurd demands people make to not "spoil" any book or movie people still read or watch recreationally -- and not just as a homework assignment -- is harmful. The metaphors, the concepts, the philosophies expressed in books, even trashy 1960's SF, are important. They are tools we can use to explain, to convince, to argue, to communicate. Demanding that we never speak aloud in any public place the words from any work of art more recent than Black Beauty (is that too recent? Is it OK to at least reference the end of Romeo and Juliet?) is demanding that we weaken ourselves, like Harrison Bergeron in Kurt Vonnegut's short story of the same name, and only communicate at the level of the least well-read individual in any society. If books are not going to contribute to discourse, if we cannot tell other people of what we read, we might as well burn them all, as in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. And at the end of the day, the only thing being protected by fervent cries of "spoilers!" "spoilers!" are the barest, sparsest facts of the story: if finding out the ending of a story is the only reason to read it, you were probably done a favor by having it "spoiled". Journey before destination.
- boring_twenties 7y ago
  While I appreciate your thorough and heartfelt response here, what I don't understand is how your comment would have been diminished in any way without the explicit spoiler? Anyone who has already read the book would get it anyway. Everyone else wouldn't be any worse off, since that simple summary doesn't help understand the nuance of why it reminded of the ending. The only thing it does is spoil the ending. > If finding out the ending of a story is the only reason to read it, you were probably done a favor by having it "spoiled" False dichotomy much? It's not the only reason, but it's certainly a decent sized factor in the enjoyment of a novel. I certainly don't feel like you did me any favors.

WTF man? Not everyone has read everything already...

selestify 7y ago

It’s been out for decades, surely spoilers are expired now by any reasonable time limit

acollins1331 7y ago
O K B O O M E R

saalweachter 7y ago

While I am fine with the social conventions that hold spoiling recent works as anathema, or even older works within limited contexts (for instance, /r/WoT tries to allow readers to talk about the early books without instantly being spoiled for the later ones), the absurd demands people make to not "spoil" any book or movie people still read or watch recreationally -- and not just as a homework assignment -- is harmful. The metaphors, the concepts, the philosophies expressed in books, even trashy 1960's SF, are important. They are tools we can use to explain, to convince, to argue, to communicate. Demanding that we never speak aloud in any public place the words from any work of art more recent than Black Beauty (is that too recent? Is it OK to at least reference the end of Romeo and Juliet?) is demanding that we weaken ourselves, like Harrison Bergeron in Kurt Vonnegut's short story of the same name, and only communicate at the level of the least well-read individual in any society. If books are not going to contribute to discourse, if we cannot tell other people of what we read, we might as well burn them all, as in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451. And at the end of the day, the only thing being protected by fervent cries of "spoilers!" "spoilers!" are the barest, sparsest facts of the story: if finding out the ending of a story is the only reason to read it, you were probably done a favor by having it "spoiled". Journey before destination.

boring_twenties 7y ago
While I appreciate your thorough and heartfelt response here, what I don't understand is how your comment would have been diminished in any way without the explicit spoiler? Anyone who has already read the book would get it anyway. Everyone else wouldn't be any worse off, since that simple summary doesn't help understand the nuance of why it reminded of the ending. The only thing it does is spoil the ending. > If finding out the ending of a story is the only reason to read it, you were probably done a favor by having it "spoiled" False dichotomy much? It's not the only reason, but it's certainly a decent sized factor in the enjoyment of a novel. I certainly don't feel like you did me any favors.