This author seems to fetishise pain and self destruction, difference between this and the ...

there's not any more fetishizing pain and suffering in songhyel's works than what you'll find in just about any other story featuring characters overcoming problems, obstacles, and conflicts both internal and external. the pain and self-destructive behaviors are shown so that the pleasures, comforts, and eventual turn towards self-preservation and choosing life have a stronger impact through contrast. seeing the depth of the hole intensifies the satisfaction of seeing a character climb out of it. or seeing the height of a mountain intensifies the satisfaction of reaching its peak.

what makes the "sense of profoundness" unwarranted? many stories are fake deep, but I wouldn't count songhyel's among them. there's too much depth and nuance for that.

I'm also uncertain and unsure why songhyel's stories feature these topics so heavily, but saying that they're doing the same thing as harada but with a cloak of plausible deniability ignores the differences in what they focus on and how they approach those topics. I'd say that songhyel is more comparable to asada nemui, and even then I think songhyel has a more positive or constructive outlook and approach.

Asada Nemui also doesn’t try to manipulate the audience to feel a certain way or simply fetishizes or takes so srsly the absurd concept or story they’ve come up with. Nemui always has a healthy dose of humour and skepticism in the story that makes its contrived and ridiculous situations more honest, fun, and relatable in its exploration of pain and power dynamics. They doesn’t try to fool the reader into acting like the story is not fetishizing parts of the situation, it’s not afraid to go there and then it still honestly reflects on the nuance.

most, if not all stories involve some manipulation of how the audience thinks and feels about its events and characters. if you feel a certain way because of what is presented in the story, maybe the creator is just effectively using storytelling strategies. some creators are good at creating an atmosphere or emotional vibe, but there isn't much substance to it when you reflect on it, whereas others reward reflection and deeper thought which strengthens that emotional impact. your original comment implies that you think songhyel's stories fit the former category, but your explanation for that is rather shallow.

if you don't like what songhyel writes, or find their stories suspicious because of what they feature, that's your prerogative. i wouldn't have responded argumentatively to a statement of opinion that you didn't like this story, or others by them, for subjective reasons. i'm arguing here to dispute the claim that songhyel fetishizes pain and self-destruction in the sexual sense, (or romanticizes it, like you said elsewhere) and is hiding or being dishonest in some way about their intentions or interest in creating what they do. all we have is speculation, and what is in the stories themselves to base any conclusions on since there aren't any creator's notes or interviews with the creator to speak for themself. their stories aren't framed or executed in the same way as others that feature or focus on sexual assault, rape, and abuse, in a fetishized or romanticized way, so it's a misapplication of the terms "fetishization" and "romanticization" to use them to describe their stories as a whole. the focus, themes and conclusions (for the completed ones) of their stories are just too different! i could possibly agree that songhyel has a nonsexual fetish, or strong fixation on these topics, but claims beyond that would require more evidence to support them for me to agree.

considering that they also have works with fantastical elements (sleeping dead), including an omegaverse setting (takatora and the omegas), and works that are also contrived to explore the suffering and anguish of the characters (multiple, but classmate sticks out on this) it sounds like you just like asada nemui's stories more in terms of content and style, which is a matter of taste/personal preference and not why i'm objecting to your comment. i've liked their stories, too.

and really, I don't know why their stories have the focus that they do, so it very well could be a stealthy way of presenting fucked-up bullshit. I'm wary and have my concerns about that, too. but would there really be a need for subterfuge or to hide those intentions? many creators are doing it openly! it's not something that generates problems, especially if a creator has been doing it since their debut
arguably, songhyel would be more popular doing what's trendy/common and going all-in on straightforwardly presenting rape and abuse for sexual gratification and simple, cheap drama like harada and many other manhwa creators do, so songhyel not doing that in favor of what they have done and are currently doing should count for something in showing that they're not interested in merely showing shocking and depressing situations. they might actually be for the arts and not the charts...

And why would the author explicitly say “I am fetishizing pain and self destruction”? Is that the only way you could conceive that this is their intention? That they would have to explicitly say it? You’re going with the “we don’t know what’s in their heart” argument? Of course this is my opinion, this is just my analysis. You seem to have a different view and that’s fine. Are you saying a shounen romance that is clearly just the Madonna whore complex doesn’t indicate the author is misogynistic unless they explicitly say so? The author will deny this but it’s clear! That’s what analysing a text is man! But yeah it’s still just my opinion and analysis, it’s not objective fact.

what is "this point"? new world order?
"How can you say you want to explore the effects of trauma and abuse while depicting material that is essentially pornographic? Material that ppl likely get off to because it is made for ppl to get off to?"
some sex isn't sexy.
is it meant for people to get off to, though? people treat it as such because of existing cultural/social norms, but even when some things like naked bodies are sexualized, they're not automatically "sexy" or sexually gratifying by default aside from the
nothing in any given story exists outside of the creator choosing to include it, so everything is gratuitous. we can talk about how those choices serve the story the creator set out to make - talk about what the creator tried to say, how effective they were in saying it, interpretations, and (my favorite) connections beyond the story itself. you're asking worthwhile questions
in the hands of most other bl creators, it's meant to titillate and arouse

I'm trying to focus on the stories themselves because there is no creator input to suggest, confirm or deny anything, not using "we don't know what's in their heart" as an excuse. I'm aware that creators often won't be fully aware or admit to things they put in their works, that's what critical textual analysis is for. that's why I've been asking you for more detail about why you came to your conclusions and was hoping that you would point out details, moments, or instances in these stories that gave you the impression that you described as fetishizing and romanticizing things, because I wanted to know where you were coming from, and perhaps to compare/contrast what we're each picking up on. there's some subjectivity to interpretation, yes, but we can still identify specific things to base those interpretations on. I have my blind spots, too, so if I'm missing things, I want to find out what I missed! I'm also wary about these kinds of stories, generally, but I consider songhyel to be a rare creator for what they're doing within that niche, but I don't want to let admiration or past approval lull me into a false sense of security. so I was interested in what you had to say about it even with my disagreement.

In the absence of any specifics for what you said, all I can say is what I've been saying repeatedly this whole time - that the character arcs and conclusions in songhyel's stories so far suggest that they're interested in unflinching portrayals of sexual violence and trauma in all their messiness to show what characters experienced and how they try, fail, and eventually come to terms with and move past those experiences. it's not just that there are good/positive/hopeful endings for the completed stories, but also the journeys shown to getting there, fraught and full of setbacks as they were. I don't get the sense of "this is jerk-off material" from their presentation in the literal or emotional sense that I get from stories like, for example, sadistic beauty (the infamous side stories) or limited run, among many others in BL. the definitions of fetishization and romanticization that I'm aware of didn't seem applicable to songhyel's stories, to my knowledge, so I disputed what you said, but I wanted to know more, because I'm curious.

oops, ignore like, half of this reply. ⁄(⁄ ⁄·⁄ω⁄·⁄ ⁄)⁄
it should have started from "I'm trying to focus on...".
that got long, but I was basically just asking for more details and evidence to support your claims and analysis, as one does in literary/textual analysis.

Idk what it is to you but you can simply scroll back in the comment section and align it with the explicit chapters where the character is degrading himself sexually and see the comments. It’s received by the majority as something to get off to. You can look at Baby Reindeer for an example of art about the male response to trauma and sexual abuse and the self destructive effects to self to see how to handle this topic without fetishizing it. It also has explicit material but it’s treated in a grave manner with a layer of humour and self reflection. It is not shown as “hot.” Baby Reindeer is also based on the male writer’s true personal experience and the majority of the audience did not receive those scenes as something to get off to and comment and say “wow this was so hot, I feel so bad for him but this is so hot.” And this is not the audience’s fault, this pain and sexual self destruction was very detailed, the pleasure mixed with self loathing was and the act itself is nothing less than pornographic on purpose.

do you have any more info on that title you mentioned, so I can look it up? or a link?

It’s a netflix show called Baby Reindeer, it’s based on a one man show that’s based on the writer/author’s personal experience.

were you referring to the comments for new world order or another of songhyel's works in this reply? i've been keeping up with the comments here more or less since the series started, and upon review, the only time i've seen the majority of comments saying stuff is hot or sexy is when hyeondo and seong su were getting intimate, or when people remark on their attractiveness in general, not in relation to any scene of abuse or assault. people talk about being upset, their discomfort, and anger at the perpetrator for those. there was one comment i noticed that was like you say, but that stuck out as an outlier and might even have been deleted since then because i didn't notice it when rereading the comments just now.

i watched baby reindeer. it was good! engagingly tense and made me cringe in sympathy and secondhand embarrassment. made me think of ouroboros because they touch on similar points. the assault and rape scenes in baby reindeer were as explicit as they could be for a television show, imo, and had the help of the lighting and music to convey the unpleasantness of the moment. it's working with different advantages and limitations compared with a webtoon

i still think it's a misuse or misunderstanding of the terms to call the depictions of trauma and suffering in songhyel's works "fetishized" or "romanticized" because that's so contrary to the themes and conclusions of the stories (the completed ones, at least, this one is still in progress and inconclusive rn). pointing to the people who take any sexually explicit scenes as jerk off material regardless of context doesn't indicate much about the scenes themselves. it's more accurate to say that aside from showing them always as being disruptive, distressing, and y'know, scenes of coercion and sexual violence, the creator doesn't visually discourage anyone from reading those scenes purely for sexual gratification by obscuring things, for example. but someone who finds rape hot or simply not a dealbreaker will take whatever they can get, really, and i don't think even the rape scene from baby reindeer would be exempt. sometimes, what a person takes away from a story reflects more about their approach to engaging with it than the story itself.

anyways, after thinking about it for a while, i've been wondering if showing that last explicit scene between seong su and the new black-haired guy with all of that detail and those flashbacks could be an introduction to exploring/refuting the way physical arousal and biological urges are used to minimize and excuse assault and rape in a/b/omegaverse stories and bl in general.

Are you seriously comparing the fictional story of sexual trauma experienced by men written by a woman (we all know yaoi has a huge problem of this, of women fetishising sexual assault of gay men) to an autobiographical story of sexual trauma written by a man who actually experienced it? Also lighting? Lighting in comics is not a limitation at all, there are plenty of horror manga/manhwa/webtoon who can show this is not a limitation whatsoever. I’m talking about the comments on Ourobors.

since you're asking me this question (that i'm reading in a disapproving, accusatory tone) for engaging with what you brought up earlier, i'm wondering what response you were looking for aside from silence or agreement. if you weren't trying to introduce comparison, which i was trying to tactfully reject in my reply, what was the intended takeaway there? i'm only talking about baby reindeer in relation to songhyel's stories because you brought up baby reindeer first.

is it so unreasonable to say that baby reindeer used lighting and music, among other things, to convey the feeling of its rape scene? i was being complimentary about how it used those elements to characterize the scene. in the next sentence, i wasn't saying that lighting is a limitation for webtoons. by saying "it's working with different advantages and limitations compared with a webtoon" i was referring to how a webtoon doesn't have auditory cues, music, and the weight of live human bodies to convey whatever it intends. i was acknowledging that they're different mediums with similarities, but also different strengths and weaknesses in what they can communicate.

when you said that baby reindeer was a netflix show, i was thinking it wasn't going to be something directly comparable to the webtoons that started this discussion if we're talking about how stuff is shown and their impact on the audience (the discussion i thought we were having), because they're different mediums with different tools at their disposal. that's why i said what i did in my previous reply. despite that, they can have some similarities depending on what you're focusing on, and i wanted to make an effort to understand your perspective, because i could be missing something for all i know.

baby reindeer reflects real experiences, but the show is not a documentary. it's a fictionalized representation of someone's experiences which can still be analyzed and interpreted like you can analyze and interpret other fiction and media in general and discussed in relation to other media. it's not outrageous to do that.

perhaps you didn't mean to do it, but you made a comparison first by bringing up baby reindeer like you did. you brought it up as an example of a story that depicts sexual trauma and suffering done in a way that you appreciated more and held in higher regard. there's an implicit comparison there.
so perhaps you were just giving a recommendation, but in the context of what was previously said, i don't think it's farfetched or inappropriate to infer that you thought that there are things that baby reindeer did or didn't do in depicting its story that new world order and/or songhyel's other works don't or do, which led to your conclusion that the latter fetishizes and romanticizes things where baby reindeer doesn't.
i wanted to know what specific moments, scenes, and what aspects about songhyel's stories (visuals, dialog, etc.) were leading to the conclusions *you* made. instead, i got a deflection towards another story in a different medium and towards other people's interpretations/takeaways, which aside from not being reliable things to base the claims you're making on for many reasons (especially on here because people like to troll and be contrary) 1) doesn't answer what i asked and 2) what you say doesn't actually seem to be the case - i looked through the comments for ouroboros, too.

since i apparently misunderstood what you were going for, i'd appreciate clarifications.

I’m saying Songhyel’s intentions are weird at the very least. Their message fetishises pain and self destruction and is explicit in a pornographic way. It does not seem sincere. Add on to the fact that they are a woman makes her choosing to explore this topic that begins in a really weird and fucked up contrived way, this really makes it even more weird and suspicious. Her intentions are not to purely and sincerely explore how devastating sexual assault can be. In fact you can even write this story with gratuitous and explicit pornographic material. You were previously saying that there is almost no way to talk about this subject without depicting self degradation of a sexual nature to inflict pain on yourself not for pleasure but to punish, and to show it again and again, and again

“there's not any more fetishizing pain and suffering in songhyel's works than what you'll find in just about any other story featuring characters overcoming problems, obstacles, and conflicts both internal and external. the pain and self-destructive behaviors are shown so that the pleasures, comforts, and eventual turn towards self-preservation and choosing life have a stronger impact through contrast. seeing the depth of the hole intensifies the satisfaction of seeing a character climb out of it. or seeing the height of a mountain intensifies the satisfaction of reaching its peak.”

I’m saying there is. And it’s better. And it’s more honest. And it’s based on their own real experience. And it is not widely taken as material to get off to like Ouroboros was. And that’s Baby Reindeer, made by a man who truly experienced sexual assault and wrote about he managed after and how fucked up things get and how it fucks with your perception of yourself. Just because she didn’t say “hey, I’m going to draw this man choosing to degrade himself in graphic detail through sex he doesn’t want for all of you to get off to,” doesn’t mean that can’t be her intention when that’s literally how it’s received. There was no need for it. You can’t have like 20 chapters of him choosing to sexually degrade himself to feel pain and not for pleasure and still want to be seen as presenting a sincere, honest, and serious exploration of trauma. Every explicit scene in baby reindeer had clear purpose, it was never too much, it was always either creepy and unsettling, downright stomach twisting, or humorous self reflection. It wasn’t ever like 60% of the show. There was a clear reason every time. You just don’t need those many graphic scenes or chapters of using sex as self harm. And you can’t have those many scenes and still want to be considered serious and honest. And you saying Ouroboros was handled with the same care and honesty as Baby Reindeer is seriously absurd, that they are even comparable is absurd, that they are on a level playing field is absurd. You said there couldn’t be a better and more honest version of exploring this trauma, well there is.

*In fact you can even write this story without gratuitous and explicit pornographic material.

what???

exactly what words did i actually say that you're "paraphrasing" and interpreting like this? i never said "there couldn’t be a better and more honest version of exploring this trauma" (!?). i also didn't say "there is almost no way to talk about this subject without depicting self degradation of a sexual nature to inflict pain on yourself not for pleasure but to punish, and to show it again and again, and again". (????)
you're also completely misunderstanding the bit you're quoting from me from my first reply in this thread.
my phrasing wasn't the best there, but that's still a very baffling misread! T_T

i'll try to make what i meant more clear.

songhyel isn't beyond criticism (i welcome solid criticism that engages with the work as it i!), but i think the creative choices they have made in their stories make sense for the stories they're trying to tell and make them quite unique in bl, especially with what's trendy these days.

in my view, songhyel isn't doing anything particularly new or special when it comes to their focus on the pain and suffering of their protagonists, it's just that they depict things in detail that other stories largely ignore, minimize, or exploit when they are shown. my perspective is influenced by the fact that i read and watch a lot of action thrillers, SF/F, and generally stories where protagonists face challenges that involve physical and emotional pain and suffering. within the bl category, songhyel is noteworthy for detail and impact with which they show pain, mental and emotional anguish, that the pain *hurts* and isn't easily resolved. it's fine to dislike and criticize how they show that! i just don't think that warrants the terms you've been applying to it and the implied negative judgement. it also doesn't seem like you have a solid understanding of what is meant by fetishizing and romanticizing things or why they're considered problems.

since your focus across these exchanges keeps returning to the rape scenes in songhyel's stories and the portrayal of woo hyung's hypersexuality in ouroboros, wouldn't it be more accurate to talk about sexualization and eroticization with those scenes? or the appropriateness of exploring the sex lives and sexual experiences of people who have been assaulted? because even though i've been asking what you're basing your conclusions about this fetishization and romanticization on, i haven't received answers based on the stories themselves. how people react to things can be an indicator, but it varies and is unreliable compared to just rooting your interpretation and conclusions in the text/visuals of the story itself. and even looking at responses to songhyel's stories in comments on here, i wouldn't characterize the audience response to those scenes of rape and abuse in the way that you have.

i was disputing the way you were using the terms "fetishization" and "romanticization" in your original post because fetishizing people involves a level of simplification and objectification that i don't see applying to the characters in these stories. romanticization also doesn't apply because the victimized characters in these stories don't end up with the people who assaulted them, the experiences of those assaults are not shown as enjoyable or hot for the characters, and their negative impacts on the character's behavior, mental, and emotional states aren't minimized or omitted. pointing to people who take those as "hot, sexy" scenes (who i haven't seen in comments here, or ouroboros, or lovesick dog in notable numbers, and definitely not the majority) doesn't say much about the scenes themselves, just that there are people who approach things that way.

trying to see it your way, *if* the pain, suffering, and self-destruction depicted in songhyel's works can be considered fetishized and romanticized, the extent of that fetishization and romanticization is similar to most other stories that feature characters confronting and overcoming obstacles. consider the popularity of underdog narratives. the more humble the beginnings, the more impressed people are with the height of the rise.

songhyel's stories follow the very well-worn, common narrative arc where characters face obstacles in their lives, so they struggle with themselves and the world around them in the form of internal and external conflicts. the forms those conflicts take and their intensity will differ from story to story, but you find the same general arc in many, many, many stories. (i think you already know this, but i'm trying to be very clear on what i'm talking about now, so bear with me please.)
idk if you've ever seen/heard people talking about the antagonists of stories and squabbling over which protagonist faced the most powerful/smart/overwhelming antagonist, and who has the most feats, and so on (i'm thinking of the so-called shounen bros and powerscalers). think of any story advertised with a strange premise that goes "how will the protagonist get themself out of *this* mess?". the intensity, scope, and nature of those conflicts or struggles in stories drives the interest of the audience, so conflicts and struggles will be made special or daunting in a way that builds the audience's curiosity and engagement in seeing the protagonist of the story deal with them. as a result, there's a lot of time and space in stories given to building up the antagonist or whatever the protagonist struggles against to the point that you could say that there's a strong fixation or obsession with those antagonists, conflicts and struggles in stories. pain, suffering, and self-destruction appear in songhyel's works as obstacles and conflicts for the characters to struggle with, and so i don't find their presence or the focus and significance given to them in songhyel's stories to be particularly noteworthy. it's normal and expected for stories!

so like i conceded in my second reply in this thread, you could possibly make the argument that fetishization applies to them in the barest sense because "fetish" can be used to refer to a strong fixation or obsession, and it isn't necessarily sexual. but then you'd also have to recognize that many things are fetishized in fiction and life in general, like strength in shounen manga, or money in society. (if you go to jstor.org and search "fetishism" or "fetishization" you'll see a wide range of fields/subjects that apply fetishism and fetishization in some way beyond popular media criticism and beyond just sexual fetishism). if the pain, suffering, and self-destruction that comes with confronting and overcoming obstacles are fetishized and romanticized in songhyel's stories, that's because they're commonly fetishized and romanticized in stories in general, and that's a bigger target than any one creator.

all of the above is to explain why i said that i disagree that pain, suffering, and self-destruction are fetishized or romanticized in songhyel's works in the way that you seem to be using those terms.

i agree that baby reindeer does well in depicting its story and has the advantage of realism and reflecting a real experience compared to bl webtoons. it still shares some points with ouroboros when it comes to showing men responding to sexual assault and trauma inflicted by other men, and their struggles with sexuality and their social identities as men in the wake of their assaults. there's a montage showing donny's experience of hypersexuality as a trauma response as well, but it's not as prominent in baby reindeer as the experience of hypersexuality is to woo hyung in ouroboros. that's because they're telling different stories with different scopes and aims regarding their explorations of sex and sexuality. i don't think recognizing that similarity reflects badly on either story, or diminishes baby reindeer.

i don't think there's (almost) only one way to depict sexual assault and the trauma that results from it, that it needs to be explicit, or that songhyel is beyond criticism when it comes to that. i just don't think the particular points you're using are solid arguments, so i'd appreciate if you didn't make up weird and incorrect takes to put in my mouth.

songhyel does well/better compared to others in bl with these topics in a way that i hope other creators emulate. i could get into more detail about why i see things that way, but this is already long as hell and it would require some explanation of literary and media criticism terms and approaches because i'm not sure how familiar you are with much of that (and i'm suspecting unfamiliarity or significant gaps in what you know). it generally sums up to: before launching into what you think a creator should do in their work, you should engage with their existing work, identify what they're aiming for, and analyze/criticize the execution of those aims. why criticize X on the basis that it's not Y when it's not trying to be Y? besides, i already said some things about it that you can refer to in the exchange we had in another thread on here.

i also thought it was a weird choice to bring up harada if you're taking issue with songhyel for the ambiguity of the intentions behind their stories. yeah, harada's stories show a more straightforward interest in sexualized and romanticized rape, abuse, and taboo relationships, showing them explicitly and yes, pornographically. but if you're inclined to see that interest in a negative light, i think songhyel comes off better in comparison despite the lack of explicitly stated intentions. they feature abuse in their stories, but consistently explore the internal and external difficulties that victims face, don't soften or show the traumatic experiences as romantic in some way, and don't pair them with their abusers in the end. if you think songhyel is hiding or isn't being upfront about an interest in fetishized/romanticized/sexualized/pornographic depictions of abuse and rape, so be it. there's still a marked difference in what those creators are doing when you look at the specifics of the content, presentation, and conclusions/messages of their works, which is what i've been asking you to do. as someone who wants to see fewer rape-filled stories doing rape/abuse apologism, while getting more active, willing participants in sex in these stories, and well-defined characters, songhyel's approach to stories is of more interest to me for promoting even if harada is more transparent.

this isn't to say that songhyel could never disappoint in the future because ultimately we don't know what they're thinking and i have yet to see any of their own explanations or commentary on their work. but so far, i think it's reading their work in bad faith to conclude that they're fetishizing or romanticizing suffering, abuse, rape, and the turmoil that surrounds those things, or that they have mere pornographic interest in those topics.

Pls bro, edit this, I ain’t reading all that. “but i think the creative choices they have made in their stories make sense for the stories they're trying to tell and make them quite unique in bl, especially with what's trendy these days.”

It doesn’t make sense. That’s what I’m saying. You don’t need all that, at some point you’re focusing more on his degradation sexually in a pornographic way than the interiority of his mind and journey. Somehow you don’t accept this as enough evidence of fetishizing the pain the protagonist experiences. I brought in Nemui and Harada because they too depict sex in a gratuitous way while sometimes exploring trauma but they don’t force an air of legitimacy towards their explicit scenes, their intentions are clear that it is smut but they also do explore topics such as institutional and cultural misogyny, suicidal ideation, mental health, etc. I gave you a piece of media that is actually sincere and honest and beat for beat explores the exact trauma Songyel is depicting, even including the hypersexuality and base questioning of self that can happen afterwards and you can see the clear difference in the way explicit scenes are handled. There is way to do this where you don’t have to have like 40 to 60 % of the chapters being explicitly assaulting yourself using sex.

you can take your time and read through it slowly. i've been taking my sweet time reading and replying, so it's fine for you to do the same. there's no rush.

My reply has never been near 1775 words, the length of an undergrad research essay

Which is the length of your reply, 1775 words