So I was websurfing as usual when I came across a subreddit called “r/writingscaling”. Now, just from that name alone you’ve probably already realised that this cannot go well, but I was so intrigued that I opened the place and began searching through the posts.
They were mostly dumb stuff like “Bleach vs Naruto, which was better written?” or “Rank these movie lines” or “Vinland Saga vs Rurouni Kenshin, what’s better written?”
But the real shocker was this post:
Now, in isolation, this is just a regular post. But oh-ho – you have NOT seen the comments.
User “sloppiestsecond5” posts the following comment:
There’s a bit to unpack here.
First of all, you would be right to assume that from this response, sloppiestsecond5 considers the likes of Naruto, Kaoru Hana (The Fragrant Flower Blooms With Dignity), Horimiya, Made in Abyss, and Blue Box to be complex works.
This is just a fucking insane thing to think.
In what universe does the slice-of-life, stream-of-consciousness, anti-plot Horimiya—which is pretty much universally considered a simple starting manga/anime—be complex enough to be named alongside Made in Abyss?
Horimiya quite literally dissolves its own premise into cotton-candy fluff by like Volume 5; there is no complexity.
There is only mundane high school anxieties, misunderstandings, and other totally normal romance tropes that have no ambiguity in their meaning or execution.
And Kaoru Hana? The story is known specifically for being refreshingly uncomplicated; that is the main fucking draw. That is what the fans advertise it as. The series focuses on clear communication, healthy relationships, overcoming trauma and prejudice.
It’s wholesomeness bottled up in a pretty mason jar.
…and Naruto? Really?
Let’s see what our friend had to say about Kaoru Hana (and Horimiya) when questioned:
fragrant flower is just so fucking ridiculous. LOOK AT THIS SIZE DIFFERENCE THEY WANT ME TO TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY. SHE LOOKS LIKE A FUCKING MIDGET.
fragrant wants to sell this grand, star-crossed-romance conflict so badly, but the problem is that the drama feels hilariously disproportionate. The girls school treats the boy school like it’s a maximum security prison filled with sex offenders like it’s so overblown and dramatic and it’s just straight up dumb. It would be different if it was a comedy but no… like… we’re supposed to deadass take the fact that these girls REFUSE and will tweak TF out if Waguri even LOOKs at a man because of reasons ig idk.
The MC is cool. Waguri barely exists outside of “nice girl who likes the MC.” She’s less a character and more a reward dispensed to validate Rintaro’s growth. No meaningful flaws, no complicated desires, no sense that she exists when the MC leaves the room. Waguri is just a cardboard cut out of a woman and she has negative discernable personality traits. I’m so tired and bored by fem characters who’s whole purpose is to be (insert MC)’s love interest. Especially when the MC is allowed to get all this depth and character growth but Waguri could be swapped out with a house plant and nothing would change. My left hand has more chemistry with my pubic hairs than Rintaro has with Waguri.
Horimiya isn’t bad it was just mid to me like nothing special but people love it and swear it’s best romance OAT like what. Hori and the emo dude have good chemistry and they feel realistic enough but idk it just felt normal mid to me nothing crayzay.
sloppiestsecond5’s hatred for Kaoru Hana is so hyperbolic that I don’t think they can justify it by saying the works were “just mid to me” or “had flaws that outweighed the pros imo.” anymore.
Let’s start with their critique of The Fragrant Flower Blooms With Dignity (AKA Kaoru Hana).
As all great critics do, they begin with the claim that “fragrant flower is just so fucking ridiculous.” Why, you ask?
Well, it’s because Rintaro and Kaoruko’s height difference is too large.
It’s 4’10” vs 6’3”. Yes, that’s big, but that cannot be a genuine critique. People in real life have this kind of height gap. Perhaps all this does is highlight sloppiestsecond5’s lack of suspension of disbelief.
Next, we go to a total misinterpretation of the core of the Kaoru Hana. The poster claims that the drama is “hilariously disproportionate”. Disproportionate to what? To your expectations?
Kaoru Hana essentially tells the reader that they are going to tell a story about an emotional utopia filled with tears and radical empathy overcoming institutional classism. The setting and genre of the high school romance is simply a vehicle to show how humans ought to act, not how they really do.
Do people call Romeo and Juliet realistic? No! No one ever does that!
Because it’s not meant to be “realistic”, it’s meant to be exaggerated. The impulsivity of teenage love causing real tragedy? That part is realistic. But the escalating string of deaths leading up to a dual-suicide of the main couple? That part is tragic fiction.
In the same vein, Kaoru Hana is merely an exaggerated, optimistic subversion of the star-crossed lovers. Simple.
Admittedly, it is somewhat the fault of the fans for being vague about their statements that Kaoru Hana is “realistic”, because the premise is most definitely not. What is realistic is the depiction and mechanism of emotion that the characters display—how exactly Rintaro feels about not being good enough for Kaoruko, or how Kaoruko doesn’t want to burden others with her problems.
Oh and of course, the final feminist critique.
“(Kaoruko) Waguri is less of a character and more a reward dispensed to validate Rintaro’s growth.”—Bet you felt real clever about that one, huh? Kaoruko is a character, even if she may be a simple one (which goes against the poster’s claim that its complex).
Kaoruko has “no meaningful flaws”? She literally does (her unwillingness to ask for help) and that’s part of her entire conflict!
Kaoruko has “no complicated desires”? Untrue, but if it was true, how would that be an issue? A simple desire does not necessarily beget a simple character, ignoring the fact that simple doesn’t even mean bad.
Kaoruko has “no sense that she exists when the MC leaves the room.”? That is just a failure of the imagination, and impatience on behalf of the reader who can’t be bothered to wait for a character’s slow development and inner conflict.
sloppiestsecond5—after terrible take after terrible take—finishes their rant off with a little jab at Horimiya that really encapsulates their entire media literacy ineptitude.
“people love it and swear it’s best romance OAT”—you are 100% allowed to disagree with this (obviously exaggerated) take, sloppiestsecond5, but the fact remains that you brought this up in a post about stories that are considered complex and profound, not stories that are loved but that you think are bad.
You are conflating “best” with “complex”, which is one of the single biggest common mistakes in all of modern criticism. You aren’t saying that the story is both complex and bad, you are just saying the story isn’t actually complex, therefore it’s bad.
But of course, it’s not over yet.
After seeing this absolute lobe-melter of a comment, I responded with an expression of my genuine disbelief.
sloppiestsecond5 then responds to every one of the comments (including mine) in their thread with the exact same copy-pasted response:
I thought sloppiestsecond5 just had an insanely low bar for literary complexity. But no—they actually don’t even have a fucking bar.
They are not using their own opinion to inform what is considered complex, but basing it entirely other people’s opinions. Not just that, but the thoughts and feelings of “stans” specifically.
Why?
Why cherry-pick your “critique” based on a presumption of complexity based on the most vocal members of a work’s fanbase?
sloppiestsecond5 either fundamentally misunderstood the original poster’s question, or they intentionally hijacked the premise to show off their pre-written hate-boner for some popular works (guess which I think they did?).
It is much easier to assume that when the OP asks for opinions of “works with deep writing that you still think kinda sucks”, that means something that is both “complex” and “kinda sucks”. Not just any random story you consider overrated because “stans” disagree.
Is it not simply a bad-faith argument to claim that these “stans” represent the general opinion about a work’s complexity?
This poster is a “Top 1% Poster”, and I think that tells us a lot too. Their brain is so rotted by internet discourse that they forgot how to make good criticism or have actual opinions. Critical consumption shouldn’t be about tier lists (yes I know how hypocritical that sounds), it should be about the identification of genuine flaws and good writing.
It’s just simply absurd that someone would genuinely rather abdicate their own critical sovereignty to a bunch of internet “stans” than admit that they got filtered out by a simple story about teenagers being nice to each other.
In any case, sloppiestsecond5 is just making a bad claim, defending it with a weak position, and acting like the people that called them out are the stupid ones with their passive-aggressive responses.
TL;DR - the literacy crisis IS real.
Thanks for reading, and make sure if you don’t have something nice to say, then at least make it make sense.