Status Update: 08/18/2026

---

In Defense of Campo Largo

or, When Shallow Criticism Goes Too Far.

Read the Artists Visual Novel for yourself: Campo Largo VN (@campolargo.bsky.social) — Bluesky

I need to counter some recent critiques made against the Visual Novel Campo Largo and its creator Toledo. 

This is in response to a thread by Zangusuu. Who I am naming as a peer in discussion, not as someone readers should harass.

Anti-harassment is actually my central point. Because what I see from this thread and its response is not a material critique of a visual novel, but a call out post directed at an artist for punitive reasons. And that is not how criticism should function.

Just because you do not understand the intent of the author does not mean the work itself owes you an explanation. To then go on social media demanding the artist themself publicly clarify their religious beliefs and values is weird and extremely inappropriate.

I do not say this from a “death of the author” standpoint. I highly disagree with that practice and see it as a failure of criticism, which is to contextualize the work in relation to its creator, time, and space. But if the creator wishes to remain private about their personal life, that choice is a contextual piece of the puzzle. It is not inherently an act of manipulation or proselytizing, as is being levied. It’s just a person wanting privacy.

It is important for the audience to remember this. You do not know these people. You do not know the artist. You are not their friend. You are only seeing a sliver of what they decide to present.

It is obvious this thread is not an act of good faith critique since the faith in question is repeatedly called a cult. Whether you disagree with a religion or not, to frame it as such delegitimizes your subject as either a mark or a villain.

To say that “Mormonism deserves only to be critiqued, not given an “unbiased perspective,” is a proudly ignorant way to view the world. Religion is complicated. To say it should only be critiqued is completely antithetical to art. Faith is as diverse as the people who practice it. There are plenty of Queer people who still identify as Mormon, or Christian more broadly, and hold complicated understandings about what those two identities mean in relation.

I say this as someone who grew up LDS myself. I live in this community, I know people, Queer and straight, who identify as Mormon. Some are good, some bad, most complicated, because faith is complicated beast with no single ideology. And I want to hear what these people have to say.

I want art from Queer perspectives that are messy and honest, because some of us grew up like this. Some of us didn’t grow up with a clear understanding of what Queerness means and had to wrestle with bigger ideologies and theologies within us. And maybe we’ve internalized some broken stuff. And maybe art can be a way to process that.

To compare being Mormon to being ex-Proud Boy further crosses the line, both rhetorically and in villainizing your subject. Every faith has its bigoted ideologies, but that does not mean practicing it means you are a bad person. It feels strange to have to say that still. If you were to make this claim about DezNats or Christian Nationalists, then sure. But Mormonism as a whole is dishonest. Criticize the fundamental texts, prophets, patriarchy, the actual systemic foundations. To demand accountability from individual’s is failed politics and needlessly punitive, especially for the spectacle of online audience.

I don’t really want to get into the material criticism, because it’s just shallow and not worth the time to dissect. I feel the need to point out that this is in reaction to a story that is only at Branch 2 and very early in its build. The story is not nearly complete, trying to gauge out its meaning rather than processing it as a building story is once again predetermining your opinion onto something you do not know.

Also, obviously the story set in a 2008 Mormon Missionary program is going to feature theological arguments and dated opinions about Queerness, that’s the setting. That does not inherently mean the author agrees with the statements of their characters, no matter how many decontextualized screenshots you use as evidence.

I especially find the line, “I love stories written from the POV of someone who believes in terrible shit. Whether it ends in tragedy or with a character arc, I love it. But the narrative has to handle that properly,” to be pretty revealing, permitting flawed characters to exist so long as they suffer or change. Demanding narrative clarity on the politics of your characters is once again antithetical to art and ironically an act of proselytizing. A narrative that punishes its characters for their failures against clear morality is not art, it’s a morality play that is needlessly punitive. A seeming pattern from this discourse.

To wrap this up, I’d like to respond to the quote, “Should the author come out as ex-mormon, that does not mean his novel is exempt from critique. There is far too much unchallenged Mormon preaching all throughout, as well as direct links to a bunch of pro-Mormon texts + the book itself given in the VN.”

I’ll flip this. Let’s say the final visual novel is actually bigoted and homophobic. That still would not justify a call out post at Build 2, when there was not enough material evidence to claim this. Nor would it justify demands for the personal details of someone’s life that they do not wish to share. Let the final work speak for itself, then we can talk.

And for the artists reading this, make what you want to make and fuck the critics, including me. Do not feel the need to clarify your intent, to sanitize your characters, to bend your narrative arcs towards the perceived morality of society. Be honest, vulnerable, and messy. Say the things inside you that feel dangerous to speak aloud. Tell the truth, tell lies. In the meantime, I’ll continue working on my own messy Queer Mormon book that funnily enough also features werewolves, and I hope you keep working on your book too.

---