My favorite book from the MAL x HoneyFeed writing contest 2022

O_T_T said:
Slight issue - Gifted Education Project is absolutely abysmal. It's the definite worst of the finalists, and not too far from the bottom of the contest entirely.

In prose and especially comedy it is childish, and at times outright bigoted. It is populated exclusively by tropes drawn from a hat whose intentions are artificial and origins absent. And, of course, it lacks any sort of creativity - I'm sure by now everyone has heard the classroom of the elite comparisons, but at the very least they could have given it a title that doesn't sound like they just ran it through a thesaurus.

Speaking to you as the creator of this thread in particular, I should inform you that the way you're trying to promote this work is of comparable quality to it. The use of the addition that they "struggl[ed] to write it because of personal circumstances" is an insult. Playing for sympathy is cheap, and completely irrelevant. Recall that there was a point when contests were about the quality of entrants - present subject excluded - and not about sob stories.

Anyway, City of Flowers is better. I don't know if folk can vote once per category or once out of all 12, but if the latter then that's a better use for it.

O_T_T said:
Slight issue - Gifted Education Project is absolutely abysmal. It's the definite worst of the finalists, and not too far from the bottom of the contest entirely.

In prose and especially comedy it is childish, and at times outright bigoted. It is populated exclusively by tropes drawn from a hat whose intentions are artificial and origins absent. And, of course, it lacks any sort of creativity - I'm sure by now everyone has heard the classroom of the elite comparisons, but at the very least they could have given it a title that doesn't sound like they just ran it through a thesaurus.

Speaking to you as the creator of this thread in particular, I should inform you that the way you're trying to promote this work is of comparable quality to it. The use of the addition that they "struggl[ed] to write it because of personal circumstances" is an insult. Playing for sympathy is cheap, and completely irrelevant. Recall that there was a point when contests were about the quality of entrants - present subject excluded - and not about sob stories.

Anyway, City of Flowers is better. I don't know if folk can vote once per category or once out of all 12, but if the latter then that's a better use for it.

Yudina said:
You know, I've seen you post around, and you actually have the worst aesthetic sensibility imaginable for someone who seems to really care about reading and writing. It's like I'm meeting someone with the literary capacity of a high school English essay rubric.

Now, I'm not even saying that Gifted Education Project is some masterclass or that it's even the best of its category, because I think at the end of the day, the book is kind of average (which, for the record, still makes it better than almost everything else on the site),

but you should really learn to know when a book isn't for you as opposed to just senselessly shitting on everyone with your banal unoriginal MFA writing takes.

whereupon said:
For someone who claims to be objective about your opinions it seems that you've colored your own perception of GEP by what you call the obvious comparison of classroom of the elite,

and opted to read no further into the themes.

The jokes not landing for you is understandable,

As for your point about the title running COTE through a thesaurus: look up what Singapore's Gifted Education Programme is, because you're sounding really ignorant right now :)

and should have been your first clue that this book was not written for you.

O_T_T said:
Slight issue - Gifted Education Project is absolutely abysmal. It's the definite worst of the finalists, and not too far from the bottom of the contest entirely.

In prose and especially comedy it is childish, and at times outright bigoted. It is populated exclusively by tropes drawn from a hat whose intentions are artificial and origins absent. And, of course, it lacks any sort of creativity - I'm sure by now everyone has heard the classroom of the elite comparisons, but at the very least they could have given it a title that doesn't sound like they just ran it through a thesaurus.

Speaking to you as the creator of this thread in particular, I should inform you that the way you're trying to promote this work is of comparable quality to it. The use of the addition that they "struggl[ed] to write it because of personal circumstances" is an insult. Playing for sympathy is cheap, and completely irrelevant. Recall that there was a point when contests were about the quality of entrants - present subject excluded - and not about sob stories.

Anyway, City of Flowers is better. I don't know if folk can vote once per category or once out of all 12, but if the latter then that's a better use for it.

O_T_T said:


You're being overwrought about it, but you're essentially just accusing me of being intrinsically wrong about everything under the umbrella of writing. So, can you demonstrate how exactly this is the case? You say you've "seen me post around" - well, which posts, and what is demonstrably wrong about anything I've said, there or here? Or can you show how low my "literary capacity" is, as you are claiming?

As of yet I just have you throwing insults at me for saying this attempt at writing is awful. You've not demonstrated it to be anything else, or me to be wrong in what I said. So, rather than what you're claiming, it could just as easily be that GEP just is bad and I know what I'm talking about. Something is definitely making you assume I'm actually the issue, but what? That you like GEP? That you dislike me?

The point I'm making is that you haven't actually done anything here. You disagree with me out of, I guess, principle, but that doesn't affect my input here.



No, its certainly below the vast majority of entrants, and easily the worst of all 12 finalists.



I'll get to the "not being for me" part at the end of this entire comment, since it's relevant to both of you, but you are absolutely wrong in saying I'm "shitting on everyone." When something genuinely impressive gets posted, I am perfectly willing to praise it. There was an independent animation project shown off about a month ago, and a graphic novel maybe half a year before that, and both of those I gave fairly glowing reviews.

Presumably, though, you're referring more to the entrants of this contest. And certainly, the most common response I've given is negative. But I again don't see any indication of me being wrong - you yourself admitted most of the entries weren't any good. So, again, what convinces you that I'm the problem rather than anyone else?

Another point, the use of "unoriginal" really confuses me. Am I to take it you think someone is only correct if their comments are completely unique from everyone else's? How does that even work?



I don't understand this response. Are you claiming it isn't a fair comparison, or that it's being made too much?

It is still a true comparison. It sounds and reads like a ripoff. Even if you wanted to claim it wasn't supposed to be one, or that it's not the creator's fault something similar already exists, this is still an issue that should have been addressed.



There are no themes. I say that with no exaggeration. No ideas of any kind are explored, not even those that it is claimed the work revolves around.

I would really want to know just what you think they are, what you think is in there.



The "jokes" alternate between random anime clichés, "look it's something sex-related," and, the most common, absent entirely. I recall there was even some ableism and misogyny. I dread to think what sort of person they "land" for.



I'll admit I didn't know Singapore had anything like that. But my point was that it sounds almost identical, and it still does. That it's named after a real thing doesn't change that.



Now, this is a point I've moved down for prominence, as I feel it right to focus on, because of how outright wrong of an argument it is. @Yudina, this is relevant to you too.

You are both making the common mistake - and not just you two, I've had to bring this up once earlier this year already - of assuming that a work's audience are those that like it. That it doesn't matter if someone doesn't, because they weren't supposed to read it in the first place. This is completely incorrect, as an audience is actually anyone willing to try the work to begin with. Or to put it another way, GEP's audience is not "people who like GEP" but "people who read books of the same genre and demographic GEP exists in." I'm simplifying that last part for clarity, mind.

The reason this is such aa issue is because it opens the door for easy dismissal of ideas you disagree with. You both decided it was somehow "not for me," so what I have to say is automatically wrong and you don't have to think about it. In other words, you're cherry-picking to suit your existing opinions rather than entertaining others, and that's exceedingly unhealthy.

With all that mind, you'll find that GEP is essentially "for me," because I read it. You don't get to retroactively assign me as having read it wrong or not having been supposed to because you don't like that I can see its bad. That's just not a valid way to defend the story you somehow like.

BlipXP said:
Thanks for sharing your opinion, but I still reaffirm my own, this time going a bit more into detail.

I still think GEP is a well-written book with gripping narration, witty dialogue, and a plot which, through playing with popular anime tropes, manages to make a compelling point about the reality of certain school systems, and how their values taken to a logical extreme would have an impact on the people subject to them.

You can say the comparisons with COTE are evident and such, and that's fine, I most certainly see it, but I'd argue they're only superficial.

I don't have the time to elaborate more, but in short, while you may disagree, I still maintain my opinion and think it's a good book worth reading and voting for.

OscarHM said:
I feel like you're making the mistake of recognizing a lot of what a work is trying to do and declaring it a mistake as opposed to something very intentional.

Now you don't have to like what it's intending to do but to take things like the often bigoted nature of Darren's inner monologue and put that exclusively down to poor comedy is pretty short-sighted.

I think there's a really clear delineation between the majority of the book where Darren is conforming (both outwardly and within) to the way he was socially conditioned to be. There are some extremely clear points where 'the real Darren' has his inner thoughts shine through and they are a significant departure from his normal facade.

You might not like this framing device, or you might disagree with what it's saying about things like social conditioning, conformity and toxic masculinity but I think it's unfair to be so dismissive of it.