I was in this discord book server and to say the least it was........ questionable. I'm not going to say any names or anything like that for privacy obviously, I'm only going to say my experience that I had in there.

I joined the book server and started to chat normally. And I said two things.

"I could never get into it because in my opinion it was so weird, it has like a lot of anti-irish stereotypes in it" (Talking about ACOTAR) and ""For me I don't really care if they add more from the books or not. I mean the Harry Potter books have so any racist things in them like the name Cho Chang, or the bank goblins. I really hope the whole new Harry potter show gets canceled. JK Rowling has enough money as it is which she already donates to places that harms people." (Talking about the upcoming Harry Potter TV show)

And I got a warning for these things. ""Hi there! I just wanted to throw a gentle reminder in here that we don’t allow any sort of chat that borders on bashing authors or yucking someone else’s yum. I understand and appreciate we all have different opinions on books and authors but let’s be mindful of how we’re speaking about them here please. We aim to keep this a positive place and don’t allow discussions on hot topics such as this to keep it that way! Thank you for understanding! "

Now if you ask me, I was not being rude. I stated my opinion; I didn't say that everyone else had to share these opinions with me, I didn't say that if they liked ACOTAR or whatever they're a bad person. Nor do I think I was bashing an author. I was calling out the racist things written within Harry Potter (like the name Cho chang) along with what JK Rowling does, which there are plenty of articles about, that's not bashing an author to call them out on bigotry, where there is proof of said bigotry.

There's more, but that's all I will share. I don't want to give out too many details in case someone recognizes it or anything like. I just thought it was a bit insane. Especially for a book server. A place where you're meant to discuss books at, which at times will include the author.

Another thing that I will say is that me along with someone else in the Server were talking about Media literacy, the crisis that's going on, Project Hail Mary and how the author in an interview said that his works don't hold any social commentary and how that's insane, and one of the mods replied with "I guess that would depend on what you mean by media literacy I suppose. If you mean the analysis of books, not necessarily. It just depends on the themes you’re pulling out of the books. If it deals with any sort of political or social issues that cause controversy, then no we don’t allow it. Any other analysis and discussion is absolutely allowed. You can discuss any books you’d like in our ⁠unknown channel or any of our genre chats." (The person I was chatting with asked about a warning why they got after talking about Media literacy and the others stuff said above, and this was the reply)

I just find it hard to think about a book server that doesn't allow the discussion of social issues presented within the book. That makes it extremely difficult to analyze, critique and discuss the book because social issues and commentary is what makes up so much of books at times.

Anyways, I just wanted to share this experience, because I thought it was just a little bit insane. There was more that happened, but as I said, I don't want to give more information than I already have in case someone might recognize it. I already feel like I shared a lot of information as is. I just think when talking about books, there are things that will always be discussed be it the author or the social themes and commentary within the book. Books do not exist within a vacuum.

Just a little PSA that 'The Nose' is one of 7 russian short stories that George Saunders "analyzes" in his book 'A Swim in a Pond in the Rain'. It's an excellent book for aspiring writers and, I would argue, pretty interesting for a reader as well. Do check it out if you want to read his thoughts on the short story!

"we don't say that soldiers are brainwashed to kill other people; that's basic training"

I would politely disagree here, there are plenty of people who are critical of the military and military recruitment industry who would say that it's "brainwashing" when you look at the military/defence industry and its methods. I understand the point Moore is trying to make in that it's more of a metaphor than something with an absolutely concrete definition, but using the military as an example to say it's not brainwashing is a poor choice here imo.

"we don't say that soldiers are brainwashed to kill other people; that's basic training"

I would politely disagree here, there are plenty of people who are critical of the military and military recruitment industry who would say that it's "brainwashing" when you look at the military/defence industry and its methods. I understand the point Moore is trying to make in that it's more of a metaphor than something with an absolutely concrete definition, but using the military as an example to say it's not brainwashing is a poor choice here imo.