bellefleurdelacour98

bellefleurdelacour98 t1_je0tde0 wrote

Reply to This one by LM Montgomery did not age well by Bookanista

@ all the people ROYALLY missing the point: she isn't even saying it aged up badly from its publication, she's literally saying it's aged disgracefully from when she read it AS A CHILD. She has a completely different memory of the book from her childhood! And now, with added wisdom, she's not liking the book anymore and she's marveling at how as a child she didn't even notice most of the weird things in it. Happens all the time. Some of my favorite kids books turned out to be absolutely trash quality lmao.

10

bellefleurdelacour98 t1_je0sjz7 wrote

Reply to comment by Pusfilledonut in This one by LM Montgomery did not age well by Bookanista

Ironically I still laugh at those cartoons even with the added knowledge of how creepy it is (I mean, it's the looney tones, there's worse than that lmao). But the moment I try to say "you can't deny it's creepy, when you think about it" and people automatically assume I'm OfFeNdEd and incapable of watching old cartoons without swooning from the oFfEnSe or whatever they think it is lol

3

bellefleurdelacour98 t1_je0rhbo wrote

Reply to comment by gnatsaredancing in This one by LM Montgomery did not age well by Bookanista

> Your description sounds like the problem lies more with you than the story really

Welp nope, the story sounds every bit as creepy as it is. I don't give books passing marks or cut them slack just because they're old. It's very important to address books by today's standards and criticize them. Expecting today's people to react favorably to very problematic plot points (we literally have a pedophile here in the story) is absurd. Critiquing a book by today's standard is the healthiest thing to do, not shutting up people and telling them it's ThEiR pRoBlEm lmao

−7