The author’s intended messages: “fascism bad because an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” and “only petulant manchildren would perpetuate genocide because at the end of the day they’re scared little children afraid of losing their mother figures”
The message chuds take away because the author is an idiot who spends far too long making genocide “epic and “cool”: “Genocide kinda based actually”
You’re right, of course. AoT ends up a fascist text.
The author’s intended messages: “fascism bad because an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” and “only petulant manchildren would perpetuate genocide because at the end of the day they’re scared little children afraid of losing their mother figures”
The message chuds take away because the author is an idiot who spends far too long making genocide “epic and “cool”: “Genocide kinda based actually”
The message people that consume the product that don’t want to feel bad when it gets criticized: “this product can’t be bad and can’t be primarily a fascist text, intentional or not, because I was entertained by it. Everything that entertains me must be good because I am good.”
Everything that entertains me must be good because I am good
The Author is dead. The Author remains dead. And we have killed him. […] Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become authors simply to appear worthy of it?
There’s a paradox among especially treatbrained people where they insist that things must happen how they happened in the fiction because of what the fiction says and it could not have happened any other way (the Thermian argument) but also insist in “death of the author” mantras to the dismiss author’s stated intent when it’s inconvenient to their treat gobbling.
Tho ppl who invoke the Thermian argument are usually more concerned with ‘lore’ and mystery boxes rather than any sort of critical reading, it’s all just content to them.
Some of them just want “historically accurate (in its own fiction)” excuses for why Zelda must always be the damsel in distress and Link must always rescue her from brown-coded recurring bad man.
The author’s intended messages: “fascism bad because an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind” and “only petulant manchildren would perpetuate genocide because at the end of the day they’re scared little children afraid of losing their mother figures”
The message chuds take away because the author is an idiot who spends far too long making genocide “epic and “cool”: “Genocide kinda based actually”
You’re right, of course. AoT ends up a fascist text.
The message people that consume the product that don’t want to feel bad when it gets criticized: “this product can’t be bad and can’t be primarily a fascist text, intentional or not, because I was entertained by it. Everything that entertains me must be good because I am good.”
The Author is dead. The Author remains dead. And we have killed him. […] Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become authors simply to appear worthy of it?
There’s a paradox among especially treatbrained people where they insist that things must happen how they happened in the fiction because of what the fiction says and it could not have happened any other way (the Thermian argument) but also insist in “death of the author” mantras to the dismiss author’s stated intent when it’s inconvenient to their treat gobbling.
Schrödinger’s Author.
Tho ppl who invoke the Thermian argument are usually more concerned with ‘lore’ and mystery boxes rather than any sort of critical reading, it’s all just content to them.
Some of them just want “historically accurate (in its own fiction)” excuses for why Zelda must always be the damsel in distress and Link must always rescue her from brown-coded recurring bad man.