A Response to a Response to a Response to a Post
I read your recent post, A Catholic response to May your God protect you, detailing a response to another one of your posts. In the response, the other writer pointed out that instead of providing a robust character description, your character was a one dimensional depiction of hatred.
I haven’t read the referred to post, so I can’t comment on this reader’s review, but he has pointed out a flaw with your writing that I also noticed. You speak in broad strokes without consideration of both the nuances and impact of your words.
In my experience, there are many types of coffee, both good and bad. Some are dark, others light; do you think it’s fair to lump the two into the same category? Perhaps you weren’t aware, but light roasts traditionally have a higher caffeine content, if I were to drink “coffee” as you described, I could end up with a serious case of the jitters, fifty percent of the time.
But if jitters were the worst result of your post, I wouldn’t have said anything.
Coffee, as you may have heard, is a crop produced by many countries around the world. You may have seen descriptors such as: Colombian, Ethiopian, or Kenya Blend. These aren’t simply fun names, like those given to nail polishes; these names refer to the countries that produce the beans that make our coffee. Many of these counties depend on the money from these exports to feed their poor and deliver their mail.
By acting as if all coffee is the same, you’re ignoring the differences between these countries. Did you know that the national sport of Colombia is speed-snorting cocaine? Or that Ethiopians are naturally anorexic? I couldn’t find anything on Wikipedia about the nation Kenya Blend, but I’m sure they have a rich and interesting culture as well.
I will petition the U.N. on your behalf, with the hope that they can forgive this post and not issue sanctions against you.