No replies to this topic

[bushwhacker2k]

Okay, I haven't even finished the first chapter and I'm done reading this.

What I see trying to be enforced is the morality of the situation, having to choose between stopping an obvious evil right in front of you or allowing it to flourish in fear of greater backlash.

Why do I think this fails?

Because there is no morality of the situation. The greater backlash they can fear is already in effect, he is IN YOUR BASE, KILLING YOUR DUDES. HE IS RAPING YOUR WOMEN... and they aren't doing anything about it... and when someone does do something about it? He is called down without even really addressing what he did wrong.

They are trying to enforce the morality of a situation with quick and easy ways like having the majority of the group being people most readers can't associate with (stubborn old men). He never explains why it's really a problem and they definitely never explain why they themselves aren't doing anything to defend themselves.

The problem is that no one reading will feel any conflict, any mixed emotions. They know what the correct path is, so they can't address both sides.

For this reason, I have stopped reading Narsha. If anyone wants to discuss this or give me reasons to read further then I'd appreciate it. Thanks for readng.

Edited by bushwhacker2k, 08 February 2012 - 12:10 AM.