Piranesi has been described as a book that's best experienced blind, why? Why did they lie to me? Do they hate me?

Maybe a question too specific, it's just that with this book specifically this is a common recommendation, one that i followed. i don't understand what could possibly be lost if one is told every beat of plot development, it seems to me that this is the diametrically opposite approach that one should be taking. thinking of atmosphere as foreshadowing leads nowhere, as nothing explicit is revealed, the point seems to be interpretation, and some of us are too dumb and would have never been close on our own anyway. I don't like to think of stories as allegorical, i think its dumb, but to me the obvious implication of the story is as a reference to nostalgia, a feeling of solemnity that is easy to find in which one can delve in enlessly, as one is never going to be limited to one's settled past, but it can (and has to) always be interwoven with it. it's also really dumb to have a ritual for it. submitted by /u/Osbre [link] [comments]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/1rhpkh9/piranesi_has_been_described_as_a_book_thats_best/