History Live Broadcast: My Audience is the Ancestors
by Tu Ling
About This Novel
Su Yue is a college student and a history anchor. One day she was chatting with her fans. Unknown to her, due to the confusion of time and space, Su Yue's live broadcast room had been connected to various dynasties and generations through the sky screen. Liu Che: What? I have a nickname of She'er? Ying Zheng: What? Fusu committed suicide? The second Qin Dynasty died? Li Shimin: What? Gao Ming rebelled? Zhu Di: Big brother, help me!... Through Su Yue's live broadcast, different changes have taken place in each dynasty and each generation, and they are all developing in new directions.
What Readers Think
Rating
Community(0)
Official(5)Scraped 21d ago
Please let the author unify the standards. Since it is said that Li Shimin doted on Li Tai, why not say that Qin Shihuang also doted on Hu Hai and gave him the idea of seizing the throne? (Book friends said that the emperor doted on his younger son because he did not need to be a prince and did not need to learn this or that. He could completely love each other as father and son. That's right! Li Shimin thought the same way, obviously everyone is the same!) Since it is said that Li Shimin is suspected of changing history, why not say that Qin Shihuang burned books and Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty deleted history? Or do you think that deleting history does not mean changing history? And since you said Li Shimin killed his brothers, why didn't you write that Qin Shihuang also imprisoned his mother and killed his brothers. "As a historical figure, Qin Shihuang should be commented in two parts. Qin Shihuang's progressive role in the process of historical development must be affirmed, but after unifying the six countries, he lost his enterprising aspect, became complacent, indulged in idle pleasures, begged gods, built palaces, and brutally oppressed the people. It was very boring. Chen Sheng and Wu Guang's opposition to the violence of Qin, including their opposition to Qin Shihuang, was completely just." - A conversation between the great man and Wu Di in 1975
It's so good to watch. Please keep me updated. I feel like you can learn more about history by watching this. I guess you're studying history, right?
History and writing in general
Innovation is great, but writing history or treating it as a joke is a bit childish. The evaluation of citations from historical books is suspected of being wordy and academically low. And the logic of many historical stories is not good.
Oh, no one is there? I'm the first, hee hee😁
There is quite a lot of room for improvement.
First, some of the historical introductions are inappropriately detailed, such as Shuangbi of the Han Dynasty, Yu Shaobao, and the inheritance system of the Xuanwu Sect. These are all explained, but they are omitted. Second, the historical figures are too thin. It should be said that they have no flesh and blood and are just written as airs. Third, the comments from netizens are too ordinary, and the subdivision and allocation of netizens, historical figures, and protagonists is unreasonable. Generally speaking, there is still room for improvement. The author can take a look at the editing of the ten loyal ministers and the rise of the emperors; spoiler history begins with the Three Kingdoms and exposes the six-dimensional map of the emperor. These are both long and short.
Rating
Community(0)
Official(5)Scraped 21d ago
Please let the author unify the standards. Since it is said that Li Shimin doted on Li Tai, why not say that Qin Shihuang also doted on Hu Hai and gave him the idea of seizing the throne? (Book friends said that the emperor doted on his younger son because he did not need to be a prince and did not need to learn this or that. He could completely love each other as father and son. That's right! Li Shimin thought the same way, obviously everyone is the same!) Since it is said that Li Shimin is suspected of changing history, why not say that Qin Shihuang burned books and Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty deleted history? Or do you think that deleting history does not mean changing history? And since you said Li Shimin killed his brothers, why didn't you write that Qin Shihuang also imprisoned his mother and killed his brothers. "As a historical figure, Qin Shihuang should be commented in two parts. Qin Shihuang's progressive role in the process of historical development must be affirmed, but after unifying the six countries, he lost his enterprising aspect, became complacent, indulged in idle pleasures, begged gods, built palaces, and brutally oppressed the people. It was very boring. Chen Sheng and Wu Guang's opposition to the violence of Qin, including their opposition to Qin Shihuang, was completely just." - A conversation between the great man and Wu Di in 1975
It's so good to watch. Please keep me updated. I feel like you can learn more about history by watching this. I guess you're studying history, right?
History and writing in general
Innovation is great, but writing history or treating it as a joke is a bit childish. The evaluation of citations from historical books is suspected of being wordy and academically low. And the logic of many historical stories is not good.
Oh, no one is there? I'm the first, hee hee😁
There is quite a lot of room for improvement.
First, some of the historical introductions are inappropriately detailed, such as Shuangbi of the Han Dynasty, Yu Shaobao, and the inheritance system of the Xuanwu Sect. These are all explained, but they are omitted. Second, the historical figures are too thin. It should be said that they have no flesh and blood and are just written as airs. Third, the comments from netizens are too ordinary, and the subdivision and allocation of netizens, historical figures, and protagonists is unreasonable. Generally speaking, there is still room for improvement. The author can take a look at the editing of the ten loyal ministers and the rise of the emperors; spoiler history begins with the Three Kingdoms and exposes the six-dimensional map of the emperor. These are both long and short.
