![]() ![]() there’s no way in hell this amount of scrutiny and critique would be levelled at a straight romance novel, because it is implicitly understood that romance novels are about the romance, not about making political points. queer people are allowed to have books that just exist about queer acceptance and queer love. Queer people are allowed to have fun books centred around queer romance. ![]() they’re not trying to make political points and i honestly think its ridiculously unfair that examining this book under the lens of nuanced political theory is even a valid form of criticism. ![]() its just supposed to be a book about queer romance. I get if you dont like their style of writing, or if the dialogue and scenes were too corny for you - that’s fine and completely acceptable, but slandering the book on the basis of its politics is so ridiculous because its not about politics. the book isn’t meant to be a political thinkpiece aimed at changing people’s lives and lobbying a grenade into the political sphere. I dont wanna really get into the rwrb discourse but i keep seeing the book getting slandered here and on twitter so i am going to say: i know that Red White and Royal Blue has sketchy political points and the Alternate Universe that Casey McQuiston created isn’t a Utopia and its flawed – but its really stupid to me that people seem to be fixating on this. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |