I beg to disagree. When it is related to literature, bad images are those that a reader has a hard time imagining. In this case, I can vividly imagine the dog becoming a kebab meat. It could be a disturbing image, but, under the circumstances, "disturbing" is not a synonym of "bad". )))
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Sorry, but I really do not understand what you are disagreeing about. is it
I didn't use the term bad images at all, just not a good image, seeing a person get hit by a bus, then his dog snatched and cut up for a kebab - - I am a vivid image reader - - - I have no problem seeing that bus run over the tramp, and the kebab seller running over and grabbing and skinning and processing the dog into a kebab. "It was not a good image. LoL." When I read I see the story. I doubt I see it as the writer sees it but I literally see the story.
Yes. About that. It's funny how a word can have multiple connotations depending on the intended usage.
Your "not good image" is related to a life situation - unpleasant scenery, a disturbing thought. From the writer's point of view, this was the good image because it was able to ignite the feeling in a reader, regardless of the nature of this feeling: pleasant or unpleasant. The "not good" image would have been the one that wouldn't ignite any feelings, leave a reader indifferent.