But yeah, on that note, perhaps, why don't we maybe test out one or some of the particular characters you are thinking through at the moment? Maybe it would be great to have you read a further portion of what you've written so far, or we can crack open the spine of one of these books and look through something together, but yeah, maybe let's think through one of these together.

Well, I actually, I mean, in spite of all I've talked about kind of novels and whatnot, the thing that got me into writing this now was actually Wuthering Heights, the Emerald Fennell, Fennell, I think, isn't it? Kind of very white, upper-class British film director.

Here we go.

When criticized for the whitewashing of Heathcliff in her adaptation of Emily Bronte's 1847 novel, Wuthering Heights, director Emerald Fennell justified her decision to cast Jacob Elordi for the role on the basis of a solipsistic erotics, quote, "'It's very personal material for everyone.

"'It's very illicit.

"'The way we relate to characters is very private.'" Doesn't this sound like a millennial's justification of blasé racial exclusions on her dating app profile? No X, no Y, no Z.

Heathcliff is a character defined by Bronte through a number of traits, woven into a novel world that relies on those characteristics as a way of undergirding the machinations of its narrative.

So I guess we can turn to Andrea Long too and or we can also think about your own role as critic and the ways you think about these questions and critical voice and the question of likability or dislikability of criticism.