I’ve only just finished part one, so there’s room for growth of course.

But, it feels like the author puts in grotesqueness at least once every chapter for no reason. For example, when the priest gets pushed over then kicked in the asshole so he shits his pants (and for those who haven’t read, I do not mean he gets his ass kicked, I meant literally foot to asshole then shit comes out) and that’s all that happens to him. He was then carried off to safety with no further injury. Why even write that. Sure, it could be some odd metaphor about how he’s dirty just like everyone else but there are about a dozen better ways to get that across, surely.

I’m failing to see how such a crass book became an LGTBQ+ powerhouse of a musical. Surely there were other stories with similar narratives and less babies sniffing piss, right?

I suppose I don’t want an actual explanation. I’m more ranting, but I’d be interested to hear others’ thoughts

  • Dr. Bob@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I read the book decades ago and absolutely hated it. Just gross and depressing. I never saw the musical but friends tell me it takes basically nothing from the book - just the core idea of telling the story from the perspective of the wicked witch, who was bullied in her youth.