Natural Disaster Strikes: I Stockpile a Trillion in Supplies and Slaughter My Way Through the Apocalypse

Hongguo watched this short play and followed this book.

I think the author should publish another novel with two female protagonists, Xue Yuan and Mu Jiuyue, and slightly change Xue Yuan's character design and slightly change the plot. These two are particularly enjoyable! ! !

Every one of the author's books is wonderful. I look forward to more and better works from the author.

I came from the AI ​​short drama and have read more than 50 chapters so far. Now I can't stand it anymore. In the early stage, I felt good about stocking up on goods and buying infrastructure for 0 yuan. Suddenly I started thinking about having children. This kind of apocalyptic theme is not my cup of tea.

I've read 200 chapters and can't stand it anymore. It's like a male channel with a female lead. Don't love men too much.

The number of words in the front is ridiculous. When stocking up, the names of vegetables and fruits are constantly mentioned, and a whole leaf is quoted. In the back, there are all kinds of robbing for supplies. The plot is hollow and disgusting.

The front is quite nice, but the back leads to the world of cultivation for no apparent reason, which is weird and weird. I also want to see the life on top of Noah's Ark, but it feels like it's unfinished.

What makes me most uncomfortable with this book is not the setting in which women are evaluated, assigned or even traded in an apocalyptic setting. Dystopian works can certainly depict cruel or even extremely misogynistic societies. The real question is whether the work examines this order, or whether it acquiesces or even rationalizes it. In the novel, women are repeatedly measured as a scarce "resource" because of their ability to have children, while the narrative strongly emphasizes and encourages childbirth. The female body and fertility are therefore no longer just a part of the characters themselves, but gradually become something that can be calculated, arranged and exchanged for the benefit of the group. At least in my reading experience, the work does not give enough reflection on this logic, but instead accepts it as a natural rule in the apocalyptic environment many times. Even more subtle is the shaping of the heroine. The author seems to want to create a heroine who does not conform to traditional female stereotypes, but when praising her, she frequently falls on the frame of reference of being like a man. Of course, sassy and handsome women are also women, and there is nothing wrong with this statement. The question is: Why does a woman's decisiveness, bravery, and strength need to be praised repeatedly through descriptions similar to those of men? If you say that women should not be defined, but also tacitly admit that bravery, rationality, and strength are more masculine qualities, and prove that the heroine is different from ordinary women by looking like men, then it does not really break gender stereotypes, but only changes the admirable women from the traditional female template to a template closer to men. What I especially cannot agree with is the double standard in this narrative: when women are a group, their value can be compressed to their fertility, evaluated, arranged, and resourced; but when a specific woman needs to be shaped into a protagonist worthy of appreciation, she needs to gain a sense of power and subjectivity by being like a man. So my discomfort is not that women cannot be valiant and handsome, on the contrary - women can certainly be strong, calm, and decisive. She does not need to be like a man first for these qualities to belong to her. Of course the author can say "Don't read it if you don't like it", and of course the reader can choose not to read it. But "You don't have to read it if you don't like it" responds to the reading choice and does not respond to the criticism of the text itself. The work does not need to accept the value judgment of the reader, and the reader also has the right to point out: If a story that claims that "women should not be defined" still uses men as the reference for outstanding women and instrumentalizes women's reproductive value, then at least in terms of gender narrative, it is not as open as it claims to be.

When you first started reading this novel, you will definitely see a lot of comments saying that the author's logic is wrong, the values ​​​​are wrong, etc. After reading the ending, I will give you a loyal suggestion: don't read it with your brain, or to be precise, don't read this article with conventional logic. Unpacking analysis (with spoilers): 1. If you haven't watched the finale, you will definitely complain about the author's inconsistent logic when reading the article. Even halfway through, you will feel that many things are inconsistent with common sense. However, (spoiler) when you watch the finale and find out that the last three people went to the world of cultivation and started to cultivate immortality, you will feel that all the previous ones are nothing! 2. Don't look at the author's data when reading the article. This is a must-have ability for reading interesting articles. You only need to know that the protagonist Goldfinger is very powerful, otherwise you will be surprised by those exaggerated data. Unfortunately, this situation also exists in this article, and there are quite a lot of them. Therefore, my personal suggestion is to ignore the data, just read it if it feels good. 3. The next two flaws: First, the author did something that made many people abandon the article, which is water characters. For those fruits, vegetables, supplies, etc., You can use a noun instead of the xxx category, but she just used a long paragraph of vegetable names and product names. To be honest, it did not add many words, but it was extremely disgusting. Put aside these, there will be no water characters later. Second, the heroine becomes more and more arrogant as she writes, especially in a plot where the base next door is turned into a sunken base. When you described the heroine, you said that the people at the base initially proposed it, but the heroine felt that she was awesome and not afraid, so she rejected it. What is the meaning of this paragraph? In an instant, the heroine is so awesome! I always feel that starting from 2/3, the heroine is very unpleasant, and there are many more sad moments, which are very unnecessary. Final summary: The overall rhythm and plot of the article are acceptable. If you are pursuing rigor and have an eye for details, I don't recommend reading it, because it is indeed a bit "rough". People who want to pass the time and read novels quickly can get it. The following plot is magical, just treat it as a fantasy novel~

It's so ugly. I don't know how it got such a high rating.