▲ | AStonesThrow a day ago | |||||||
> No, but the author clearly intended that the readers should be. Damn straight, and as a demonstration of moral ethics for an audience of young children, Dahl exploits our instincts to be thrilled/pleased when someone who's really bad gets exactly what they deserve. Key factors in each character's demise is that they didn't die -- they weren't really maimed, injured, or in pain, per se, and we were always left with hope in their recovery. But they all "got their just desserts" in a literal way. Their character sketches were thoroughly drawn as corrupt, indecent, egged on by bad parents, destined for Hell essentially. So yeah, the audience is gleeful and cheers and we revel in this cartoon violence, and we experience it completely differently from Wonka's attitude [hopefully], and when we compare ourselves to the folks on the page, we get to know ourselves better. | ||||||||
▲ | rightbyte 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
The punnishment is not in any way proportional to their misdeeds though. I remember noting that as a kid. The other children seems like projections of type of people the author didn't like or something. They were given no chance of redemption but tempted by their weaknesses. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
[deleted] |