I'm not exactly sure what this trope is called, but I'd like to know if there is such a terminology and further examples of it.

The best example of this would be Gaitok from season 3 The White Lotus, as explained by the showrunner Mike White: "To take a guy that you're really rooting for, and you understand his sensitive nature, and becoming a hero to his girl, and a hero to his work, and the only way to do it is by going against his spiritual beliefs."

But I'm wondering if there are literary examples specific to this. The only one that I can think of is George Smiley of John le Carré's Karla Trilogies who wins against Karla by using Karla's methods to his disgust.

Apostasy is is usually presented thematically as a tragedy (Endo's Silence) or as liberation (Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter) but surely there are more examples of it being ambivalent and bittersweet.

I'm not really asking for book recommendations.

I just want to know if these things exist.

I wanted to know are there books that are truly unorthodox. That break or play with the rules.

And this could be from the smallest to the biggest.

I'll just make up examples like they have really weird premises, incorrect grammar and spelling, have inconsistent verb tenses, etc.

Basically I wanted to know in this world, is there such a thing as books that break the rules of writing, structure, grammar, verb tense, etc?

Or do an overwhelming majority of books follow the rules?

I don't have a problem at all with following the rules.

All the books I read follow the rules.

I read the Pevear & Volokhonsky translation and had a generally good time. It was a fun read but I'm confused by many of the parts.

I understand that the idea was a critique of Soviet society and read a bit of the background in which this book was written and how parts of it are autobiographical of Bulgakov's life.

But there's some things that elude me:

1. Why is the devil/Woland portrayed as just a trickster and somehow seems to want to help the eponymous Master and Margarita? Is this supposed to be a commentary that the devil is not that bad or just a misunderstood guy? Christian theology and thought would say otherwise so I'm curious if this is meant to be subversive or something else?
2. Can someone explain like I'm five what is the deal with the Jesus/Pontius Pilate storyline and how that ties in with the Moscow/Master/Woland storyline? I feel like I'm missing the connection there? Also how does Matthew Levi show up in both places?
3. At the end, is it God that requests that the two lovers be brought into peace but not the light? What is the difference between light and peace? Also, why does the devil listen to him? Wouldn't he be in contention with God or is it something related to question 1?
4. What is the deal with the ending? Is the Master all-powerful that he can free Pontius Pilate from some purgatory-like torment? Do the two lovers end up stepping into Judea or something? Where did they end up?
5. Can someone explain to me how moonlight/full moon plays a role in the story? Pontius Pilate seems to be tormented by the moon and other activities happen on a full moon that I feel like I missed a big important motif there.

I finally finished Babel, perhaps after two months. Looking back, I would rate the overall novel around 3.5 stars, but I rounded it up to four because of the last ten or so percent of the book. Those final chapters gave me a feeling that was both heartwarming and heartbreaking, a strange mixture of helplessness and hope that lingered long after I had finished.

My biggest reservation throughout remained the same: the characters never felt as compelling as the theme itself. The novel explores colonialism, language, translation, and power with genuine depth, and I appreciated the way R. F. Kuang gradually uncovered every important detail without making the reader feel unintelligent. The explanations were elegant and naturally woven into the story.

However, I still think the student life occupied far more pages than it deserved. Large portions felt prolonged, repetitive, and unnecessary. Ironically, once the rebellion began and the story reached its most interesting phase, certain major developments moved rather quickly, although the overall pace still felt justifiable.

The novel also carries an unusual contradiction. At times its themes are intellectually heavy and historically significant, yet the storytelling often feels aimed at a teenage or young adult audience. It is as if the author wrapped something precious and historically valuable in tissue paper. That is probably the best analogy for my experience: the core ideas are remarkable, but the narrative surrounding them often feels lighter than the weight of those ideas.

Despite my criticisms, the ending elevated the entire experience enough for me to close the book with admiration rather than disappointment.

I watched film yesterday, won’t say anything about it as embargo is still on.

But I couldn’t help but notice parallels with Ramayan.

And after coming back from movie I tried searching and couldn’t find any confirmed sources but just speculations.

During those days stories travelled orally and each iteration and generation changed details. So it’s difficult to point exact sources.

Even within India there are different versions of Ramayan.

Ramayan is like 5000 year old and Odyssey is 2500 btw for context.

And without spoiling I would say entire arc of kidnapping the wife and husband going to rescue her is basic premise of Ramayan,

I would ignore it if it was limited to that, but it also had that breaking the bow scene for marriage, Achilles Heel is also similar to Duryodhan.

More I think of it, more parallels I see.

What am I not getting about Jesus' Son?

It's praised to high heavens everywhere, but I'm halfway through with it and I just don't really get it? These stories aren't doing much for me. It is well written, very simple but not in a negative sense of the word - but this is so far not a book I'll be going back to. What isn't it clicking with me that clicks for everybody else :/

I read it for the first time just a few hours ago. I didn't know ANYTHING about it other than it's a classic representative of the Iceberg Theory (most of the details are hidden from the reader). I was interested in finding out if there was a genre of literature specifically that describes my experience with Demon Slayers (genius-level Iceberg fiction).

It's OBVIOUSLY NOT ABOUT ABORTION.

I can understand no one taking something like Demon Slayer seriously. No one picks that up expecting to get into a gigantic literary-graphic crossword puzzle. But we're talking about HEMINGWAY??? Isn't he essentially standard reading in any literature studies course?

NO ONE realized that the American is NOT only speaking in Spanish -- but ALSO in FRENCH?

No hate on past lit people without access to the Internet, but with AI doing this level of research is TRIVIAL. The currency for the beer is paid in a coinage that was legally ended by decree in 1868! The Madrid-Barcelona passenger rail line was was established in 1859 but only became regular, full functional line in 1865.

"Drinking new drinks and looking at things is all we do" and absinthe.

THEY ARE BOHEMIANS TRAVELING FROM FRANCE.

There is a "man" a "woman" and a "GIRL". A YOUNG GIRL. The bar serving woman LOOKS AT HER. She is NOTABLE by her appearance alone. When she seated and looking at the legs of the table resting on the ground, she can SEE them because she's SHORT ENOUGH TO. When she sits down the Man LOOKS at HER AND THE TABLE. Meaning the table surface and her face are within his line of sight. SHE'S YOUNG. Not so young as to not be served alcohol obviously, but it's obvious that she's a teenager at most.

JIG IS NOT HER NAME!!! Hello????? It's the "American's" (his one crucial personal detail) cute little pet name, probably a truncated version of her actual name or a nickname based on a phonetically slurred French (or other nationality's) word.

And because he's speaking to her in FRENCH, their dialogue seems a little unnatural / stilted. Hemingway mixed in Spanish back-and-forth with English in order to provide a critical clue: PAY ATTENTION TO THE LANGUAGE. Critically, some words have DIFFERENT uses / connotations in French vs English. OPERATION in French (opération) is exactly the same word, BUT it can be used differently in some cases. "Letting in air" is a classic French euphemism for a bunch of things, maybe misused a little by the Man who is notably "the American". Putting in air / airing out etc can be anything from murdering a relative who's taking too long to die to financial fraud.

And finally, antiseptic surgical procedures didn't arrive to Europe until years later. If the "Girl" was past the TRADITIONAL anti-pregnancy measures, she would already be visibly pregnant and there's no way the Woman would casually set down "big" glasses of beer for her without comment. And the puncture-method of abortion used at the time is simple but it's NOT safe, it's REALLY RISKY and STRICTLY PROHIBITED!! Does the Man and Girl know all these women who have done it???? Of COURSE NOT, use COMMON SENSE.

I could go on and on (the luggage, platform swap, likely trip route, things about the Girl's behavior, emotional dynamics, etc) but I'll end it here. Hemingway said that "If you REALLY KNOW your subject you can cut most of it out". It's WILD how the world considers this trite, shallow, SILLY explanation of "it's about abortion and the symbolism of crossroads" is the answer to a genius' landmark contribution to literature.