UD raises some important points that I must address.
First off, you are right. I do not have a website of my own. I am not a working woman, you see; I am a full-time student at university, a position I always wanted but never dreamed I would be in. I don't have much money at all, save what I earned at my summer job, and that's food and book money. In favor of staying at university, I have had to sacrifice some of the things I wanted but did not need. Given that MoTK effectively gives me a free hosting space, I do not see why I, as a mere student, should not use it with thanks. Perhaps you can afford to do what you like, but those of us who are limited in our financial means should not be mocked for them. As Tevye said in Fiddler on the Roof, "it is no shame to be poor-- but it is no great honour, either." But you probably don't watch plays, comedic or dramatic, stuck up there in your ivory tower.
You talk of sacrifices you had to make, and all I can see is how far you have deluded yourself. Have you been to the library recently? Oh, of course not, you can afford to buy the books at a bookstore. In any case, I have noticed a strange phenomenon when it comes to picking out books I may like, and that is this: Good books have good covers. It's odd to say that one can indeed judge a book by its cover, but that seems to be the case these days. Graphic designers pull out all the stops when they make covers, bringing all their talents to the forefront so that the writer can benefit. Not that you would know this, as you practice no other artistic disciplines.
My point is that you must be proud of what you write, UD. Proud to the point that yes, you are willing to spend time to make it look good. No, it doesn't increase the quality of the fiction, and no, it does not make you a better writer to have a good website interface. But it does show that you care about your fiction, UD, and are willing to put in hard work and effort into making it look appealing to the eye.
Speaking of, commenting? I remember Trilkk, the programmer/reader genius, once putting you through a one-hour lecture of simple coding you could do to get rid of frames and make your site look good. That was a year ago. Whether or not you implemented his ideas should go without saying. You didn't listen to the most basic of comments, so why would you listen to extended feedback? I do acknowledge that you listen to your peers, but the fact that newcomers will arrive at your site and reasonably assume that no one ever had anything contrary to say to your writing remains. Off-site criticism is a cop-out at best.
I also laugh at your mockery of comedy-- you too, Mima. You reek of ivory towerhood in that sense. You are right on one thing: comedy has never been as prized as drama or tragedy, and to be fair I prefer the latter two as well. But you must respect humour, UD. Do you read newspapers, by chance? I've been doing it since I was eleven years old; I would grab a newspaper at my local bus stop on my way to school and read it, and what I have found is that cartoonists possess a gift that mere writers like you cannot begin to comprehend; in one to four panels, they can get their message across far more easily than if they had written comprehensive essays on the subject.
Philistines like you assume that comedy is equal to shallowness, which is dangerous. Not for the comedian, for you. I have here a volume of Mafalda, a Spanish-language "comic" from 1960s and 70s Argentina. At the time, the totalitarian regime there was brutally cracking down on civil freedoms, among them freedom of speech and press. Newspapers were a prime target. But not comics. You see, the regime didn't think comics were a very big threat, passing them off as a child's amusement. So the writer of Mafalda used their pompous arrogance to get his message through to his readers, while making them laugh just enough that no one in the government figured out what was going on. Mafalda is a prime example of comedy used to slip under the radar and show its readers the truth, all without arousing a single suspicion, because the regime underestimated its power.
You disrespect and underestimate comedy, saying that it's shallow and empty, but I can assure you that through well-crafted comedy you can reach an audience, conveying messages every bit as deep and important as those in a drama. The fact that you claim otherwise merely exposes you for the fraud you are; go back and learn to appreciate all literary genres before you come back here to try and preach about the human condition. Learn to laugh at yourself, UD; no one likes a writer who can't take a joke every now and again. Remember, as the Doctor said, "There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes."
This argument applies to the both of you, my fellow writers keyboard typists. And moreover, I do not see why fanon and canon cannot coexist. Is it really so hard to believe that Yuyuko, who is canonically a master of making people think that she's ditzier than she really is, wouldn't enjoy eating? We all have our quirks. I don't see how this is against the spirit of Touhou more than it is enhancing the overall universe, how it somehow makes Yuyuko, or any other character, less realistic than she is in canon only.
When you both understand comedy, only then will you appreciate drama, and only then will you be able to understand my overwhelming literary genius.
Peace, bros. I'm outie.
