Second Green

Only when there is a difference between a human and a demon in the heart can there be a debate between human and demon. Without distinction, there is no distinction at all. Regardless of whether you are a human or a monster, the killer will be killed, the good will get a good ending, and the evil will get bad consequences. There is nothing wrong with that. The key is that you don't always use long psychological narrations, narrations, and discussion-style texts to illustrate your points. It's enough to express them with the words and deeds of the protagonist. Otherwise, there will always be too much private stuff and a preaching feeling. Today's young people hate preaching. For novels, just tell a good story. As for what the story tells? Let them go where they want to.

Sometimes I wonder why there are such settings in novels. Demons are a collection of desires. As long as people have desires, they will be immortal. Since human desires can become demons, why can't good thoughts become Taoism? Given a setting, as long as people's good intentions continue, they will also be immortal. This is a sufficient balance.

It's a very good book. There were so many good reviews at the beginning, but now they are all bad reviews. The author must have offended people, and he has been hacked like this Many comments are just nitpicking. The setting of being reincarnated as a snake is very eye-catching in a cookie-cutter time-travel novel. There is nothing wrong with it. The protagonist is indeed a demon clan and is quite friendly with humans. If this can be said to be unfirm, then is it good to lead the demon clan to fight against humanity? A thousand people have a thousand Hamlets, seeking common ground while reserving differences. This book was indeed well received at first

Why I hate this book is because at the beginning of the book, I had a lot of love for Baymax, but in the later stage, Baymax became a "sensible woman" and started to accept the other female characters in the book. If this book started with a harem like the son-in-law, I guarantee that I would be happy reading it. But in the early stage, I only like you, but after I catch you in the later stage, I can't let down the others. Isn't it disgusting?

In the early stage of this book, Erqing taught the mountain spirits and sought enlightenment everywhere. It was really exciting. If it had been maintained at this level, it would have been a masterpiece. Unfortunately, it fell apart after meeting Dabai. It started high and then went low. It's a pity, it's a pity.

It was still bearable to watch at the beginning, but towards the end it became a bit confusing. And it's not a single female protagonist. I couldn't bear to see the back. Yang Chan was put to sleep again. I also liked the plot. The protagonist is becoming more and more arrogant and brainless. I don't want to see it anymore, come on!

I think the first and middle stages of the book are well written. The setting of the book is originally a classical fairy tale, plus some semi-classical Chinese and a lot of Dao concepts. I think it suits my taste. Coupled with Er Qing's dedication to his senior sister, it can be said that Dabai is everything to Er Qing. Erqing has chased Dabai for hundreds of years. He was able to practice the Nine Transformations Mysterious Skill for Dabai and finally persisted. He was able to refuse the opportunity to become an immortal for the sake of his senior sister, which shows his focus; but from the plot of Erqing and Dabai's marriage, Xiaoqing and Little Fox began to force the palace, and Dabai finally gave in. I think this part is a poisonous point. If this plot was caused by them taking advantage of Dabai's kindness, then I can understand it, but the male protagonist's attitude of not being perfunctory and unclear is completely contrary to the settings in the early and middle stages. Tell me, the male protagonist's dedicated character that has been laid out for so long is ruined here, so all the early preparations are in vain? ? . The good single heroine turned into a multiple heroine, shit. . . But the plot behind it is still good, despite the many female protagonists 😅. . . .

The protagonist kills demons when he sees them killing people. He kills demons when he sees people. Whether they are evil or good, why don't the protagonist kill that person? When he sees beasts eating people, he saves the people. Why not save the people when he sees people eating beasts? He also snatches the herbs from the two monsters. When they meet again, the protagonist says, "It's true that we are enemies on a narrow road, but they are still murderous. Did they provoke you?" It was you who robbed their herbs, not them who robbed the protagonist. Please, the protagonist is a demon, not a human. In the eyes of the protagonist, which side should the demon or the human fall to? Don't you have any psychological clues? There would be nothing wrong if the protagonist was written as a temptress.

After practicing again and again, I finally cultivated multiple clones with split personalities, each with their own independent character. When the clones meet, they joke and talk to each other. Such a photo is really mindless.

After briefly flipping through it, I felt that I did not agree with the three views of this book, so I took my leave. If you want to write about people, write about people. If you want to write about a demon, you must write about a demon, but you have to deal with the entanglements and contradictions caused by the uncertainty of identity. It is like the war between Germany and France. You can either write about Germans or French people, but you want to write about a French-German or a German-French. Just write. Your personal position in the war is nothing more than winning, legal, or neutral. But you don't insist on doing what Our Lady does. You think both sides are right and wrong. This is of course not impossible. If you were the president of the United States, you could also decide the rules, but it's a pity that you are not.