Romanticizing? In what ways? There's a fine line between fiction and reality. And I think readers are smart enough and are aware enough of the distinction of the two.
I think it's pretty obvious what the author was trying to portray, by the way of drawing and scenes.. the way the bodies alone are drawn to perfection has an intent to romanticize.. don't get what you're saying about fine-line though.. how old are you to even be talking about fiction and reality.. geez..
Pretty sure he/she's more mature than you, if you've been triggered by a civil statement/question. Just because the art is "pretty" doesn't automatically mean the author intended it for romanticizing purposes. Just because it's in a form of pretty drawing doesn't automatically make its contents any less grave than it should be. Romanticizing is pretty subjective and depends upon how a person interprets the work.
I agree. Clearly that anon doesn't know what they are talking about. It's clearly not about the art being "pretty" but abut framing: what the author chooses to include in a frame and what they choose to leave out. Showing so much of a character's body parts that would usually becovered beneath clothing, and doing it so often, has the same intend as showing all the graphic details in a sex scene, and doing it in lots of different, graphic, sex scenes. If they don't think that doesn't hint at author's intention, individual readers' interpretation notwthstanding, then they should at least take a storyboard course in order to chip in this conversation.
There's nothing wrong if the work is romanticized. Because people are smart enough to know it's just fiction. That was my point. You seem to be under the impression that I replied to your post with hostility? Because I wasn't.
Also, it's best if you lay off of your ad hominems. Be a good sport. You don't have to make it personal just because you didn't like what you heard. Handle yourself with decorum next time.
You used an Ignoratio elenchi "There's a fine line between fiction and reality" and a generalization "people are smart enough to know it's just fiction". And you wonder why the original poster got triggered?
I think I made my point clear to you in the comment above to justify my first comment. It's quite very relevant to the post, I have not subdued to the elenchi principle. Remember decorum. @annehime
I even generalized, so that there isn't any attack on the person itself. Also because it applies to other people to so ┑( ̄Д  ̄)┍
In case you skipped this:
"There's nothing wrong if the work is romanticized. Because people are smart enough to know it's just fiction. That was my point."
Why get triggered to such a non-hostile, civil statement?
You see things as black and white. Some people are taught not to judge a book by its cover. Look at Sangwoo, he's a fucking saint to other people. Clearly he's the devil incarnate.
Did you not read the replies above? Lol
Clearly not.
Lol ignorance is a bliss.
I'm torn.. romanticizing this is sick and weird since both boys hurt and killed people.. but why the author need to draw sangwoo like a demi-god, then have him be a sociopathic murderer, then have him be very logical and caring towards Bum at times.. ugh the uncle is giving me the creeps none of harada's works ever gave me.. or Itou-san series.. I wuv this.. she made Sangwoo like your demented prince charming.. hul