Back to Reviews

Reviews Comments: The Death of Haruhi Suzumiya The Death Of Haruhi Suzumiya fanfic review by D Carrier

If you're a transhumanist, if you believe we could do far, far better than the world we have, do not read this fanfic. Spoilers now.

I didn't finish reading this. When I saw where the ending was going, I stopped. Haruhi remade the world into one where people had nothing to worry about. The lack of hardships was enough to make people wish they were capable of suicide. Rather strange considering how little hardship they'd have had in that period of time, and the fact that Shamishen, Kyon's cat, had this problem despite never facing hardships before.

I know very will that life without challenges will be boring, but the way things are now isn't the answer. The fact is, you don't have to be God to make a world. Blizzard managed it. They have some idea of what it takes. It involves a threat of dying, and having go all the way back to your body. Some games punish you more, but you can still keep playing the game. A few are worse still, but you can just play a different game. Nobody wants to die. Also, the rewards and punishments in real life don't match up with what people are built for. If you mess up, it should hurt you immediately, not possibly effect your performance review in a few months.


I just want to add: I don't think the fanfic is bad. I just had a feeling of revulsion due to being ideologically opposed. I think it's the sort of thing that could make me a hater if I didn't realize the problem was largely on my end. If you're not a transhumanist and you don't have to worry about the revulsion, go ahead and read it.


  • Grahf
  • 15th Sep 11
This rebuttal is equally spoiler-laden

I find this review to be faulty due to the fact that you have seemingly admitted to have stopped reading at some point in Chapter 15. The fact is that while Haruhi uses her newfound awareness of her powers to make the world "perfect", free of grief, suffering, and ultimately free of humanity.

If you'd have kept reading however, you would have known that due to various reasons the world does not remain in this state for long. The author is not endorsing complacency and an end to immediate suffering at the cost of that which makes the struggle worth it, and I believe that if you would read on that this would become clear to you.

As such, you've given your opinion based upon an incomplete picture, and have caused people who might have otherwise read this story to be mislead. I cannot agree with your conclusions, and that is why I've posted this.
  • eveil
  • 16th Sep 11
^Are you being ridiculously hypocritical and ironic on purpose, or did you seriously just respond with an entire paragraph without reading the review?
  • Durandall
  • 16th Sep 11
Edit: Mistook the responder for the original reviewer. Mea culpa.

I don't think it looks like that's happening, here?

For what it's worth, while the review is negative and the reviewer was dissatisfied with the story ... I also feel that response is entirely valid to a reviewer that admits they didn't finish the story.
  • Grahf
  • 16th Sep 11
@ eveil: I fail to see how my response was hypocritical, considering that the original reviewer has seemingly taken issue with the fact that in a certain chapter it appears as though all human progress will come to nothing as the result of a God-like entity preventing the pain and suffering of all people forever.

However, that is not the ending, or the ultimate point of the story. I believe — although you and others may not — that the original reviewer leapt to a conclusion without all of the necessary facts.

Perhaps I've misunderstood the last paragraph they posted, because it's not really related to the story, instead talking about world building and the of risk vs. reward. If I didn't fully grasp the meaning of that paragraph, then that's my fault. However, I don't believe I was being horribly biased or purposely misleading with my response.

If you still think that's the case, then you're free to believe that it is so. However, unless I get a clearer explanation than just an accusation of hypocrisy, then I fail to see what I've done wrong here, because I read the entire review, found it faulty, and responded with a rebuttal I thought was appropriate given the circumstances.
  • eveil
  • 16th Sep 11
I'm going with simplicity.

"When I saw where the ending was going, I stopped. Haruhi remade the world into one where people had nothing to worry about. "

Interpret this sentence as "The reviewer could see the Aesop about eliminating hardships as a bad thing coming from a mile away and is annoyed by it". Now read the rest of the review and see how well it flows.
  • Grahf
  • 16th Sep 11
Okay I can see your point, but I still disagree with the premise of it. I wouldn't take nearly as much issue with the review — even if it had said the exact same thing — if the reviewer had read it to the end, but if they had then I'm not sure that the crux of their criticism would have still be valid.

I know the segment of the story that this review takes issue with, and while it may seem like it's going to be the end of the story, it isn't. That means the point that the original reviewer is making about it being an bad and predictable Aesop isn't really true, because the story is still ongoing after that point.

This might just be a personal reasoning, but once I'm that deeply into a story, if something happens that doesn't sit well with me, I still see it through to the end. It appears to me at least that D Carrier did not, and his recommendation or rather lack there of is based on what he had read to that point. If he'd have read to the end and was still of the same mind that it was a poor story based on that part of the narrative, then that's his assertion.

As it stands though, I felt I needed to say something because it looks to me like a review telling an entire category of people not to bother reading the story, based upon an incomplete picture of what said story is.

I'm not saying that D Carrier is wrong because they don't like the story, that's their choice. I just wanted to let people who might be considering reading this story based on his review that it might not be as he said.

I hope this clarifies the position that I've taken, because I didn't write the initial comment to be mean, trollish or condescending, I wrote it because I felt it needed to be said.
  • eveil
  • 16th Sep 11
Fair enough.

Out of curiosity, did the story end up having a predictable "Getting rid of hardships is bad" aesop at the end?.
  • Grahf
  • 16th Sep 11
Well, it did sort of have one after the event in question. The ending though, was just kind of strange. I personally thought it was fitting, but it was kind of out of nowhere in a lot of ways. Durandall's recent review probably sums it up better than I can.

I still found the story pretty enjoyable, even with the wonkyness of the final chapters. I'll readily admit it's not for all comers though.

In order to post comments, you need to

Get Known