In the book 'Faults in our Stars' the grenade metaphor that is used is not good.

My opponent states that grenades is a better literal metaphor because it has an epicenter. Well, Volcanoes have an epicenter too.Things closer to the volcano will be damaged more than things further away from it obviously. So on this point, my alternate metaphor and the grenade metaphor is equal. But this is the only point Con could bring up to counter my metaphor. Now that this is disproven, it is fair to say that my alternative metaphor is a better 'literal metaphor'However, my opponent states that Metaphors need not be accurate 100%. So long as it is 'adequate', it is good.I do not believe that the grenade metaphor is 'adequate' enough because:a) I and many others do not believe in a superior being like god so we cannot think that someone intentionally pulled the grenade pin AND gave it a specific timer, which my opponent suggests . And nature does not intentionally pull this grenade pin and give it a specific timer to go off. In other words Hazel is chosen by nature to get cancer to kill her at a SPECIFIC TIME, ridiculous right?(Yes, genetics are involved however it is still a fair gamble whether Hazel will get terminal cancer or not, besides her parents do not have cancer).b) The doctors do infact, buy her some time. Without the treatment, Hazel's lungs would have failed completely. My opponent says that "The pin was pulled at birth. She will die when she is destined to die." I am sorry, I refuse to take that argument seriously as long as rational thinking exists. c) It really depends upon the person whether they understand this metaphor in the way my opponent has instead of thinking of it more deeply like I have. However, the alternative metaphor(s) are adequate for people who think of the metaphor less or deeply. The whole point of a metaphor is to make a comparison between 2 objects so that people can make connections to understand the author's point better. The readers need to understand that connection to make the metaphor worthwhile. As proved above, the people who do not believe in a higher being and the deep thinking readers may not understand the metaphor as my opponent (and many of the people reading this) has understood it.And I guess my opponent will say that most readers will not think of this metaphor too much like I did. This is a major metaphor in the story, infact this is the primary source of conflict in the entire story since Hazel does not want to go out make friends, fall in love with Augustus Waters because of her being terminal. So it is obvious that people will think about this more deeply unlike a normal metaphor.And when the people think of the metaphor deeply, the faults will be found. Which are revealed in my previous round argument. These faults directly results in the metaphor losing its effect, thus making it inadequate which as per my oppenent's defenition is NOT GOOD.To conclude,Almost all of the faults are not present in the alternative metaphors. Hence the alternative metaphors are adequate or as close to adequate as it gets but the grenade metaphor is inadequate to a significant percentage of the readers and hence not good in my opponent's view.