This is not a cool article, nor is it a pet article. The male protagonist is not powerful, he is not perfect, he is just reckless and impulsive. The male supporting character did not give up everything just because he loved the heroine. He did not hesitate to use the heroine and ignore her wishes in order to get her. There is no male in the romance who can bring a sense of security, which is still rare. Generally, the male protagonist cannot do it, and it is mostly because he is unwilling (be standard). There is always a male supporting character or Bai Yueguang who can make up for it. There is no such thing in this article. No man can save you.
The first half of the heroine's point of view is completely in line with traditional aesthetics, and she is an ordinary Mary Sue novel. The second half changes to the perspective of the male protagonist, telling you what a man is. This is when a man really likes you.
Is the campus an ivory tower? The reliance on the strong and the weak, and the money and sex trade are by no means the small embellishments of many campus articles, but the entire black background. It is unbearable to see the truth clearly.
The male and female protagonists are both conventional, but what is unconventional is the world view: the deprived families in the countryside, how to operate the process of returning educated youths to the city, the hidden rules in the art troupe... Why do reviews say that the first world is the best, but the later ones are not? Because the world behind is not perfect
It seems like a pet novel, but the strange thing is that after writing about such real second generations, how could the author arrange for one of them to fall in love at first sight and have no regrets even after death? What about logic?