Results 1 to 15 of 32

Thread: Yoshinori Kitase shuts down "Squall is Dead", other fan theories

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fynn View Post
    Death of the Author is not about canonicity

    Tell that to the fans that do use it do artificially declare canonicity. And yes, the constant misusage of it is indeed fan-made. As a matter of fact you can hardly argue that "Death of the Author" is fan-made just because fans are humans and who actually finds a liking in some facette or another of a piece of work at one point is considered a fan or at least one that invests interest - but that's semantics right here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fynn View Post
    But every story has elements of ambiguity, and what the author thinks about those points of ambiguity is completely irrelevant, since everyone's interpretation is as valid as theirs at this point. When the work is out there, the author's perspective is but one of many. Even if he claims he has the right (like the creator of the .gif extension regarding its pronounciation), he has no right, really, to change people's perspective on it.
    As said, communication psychology outright disproves you and chewing on the Death of the Author will not actually do you a favour with this one so you really did not do yourself a favor with your reply. As a matter of fact you can hardly seperate canonicity and what you claim to actual understand of the original Death of the Author concept exactly because the very essence of canonicity makes every other interpretation an absolute waste of time. There are people who know that "fanon" and "head-canon" holds no weight in actual canonicity, that is true. But there are tons of people who overall think that they as part of a fan community have the power to decide over canonicity (e.g. the Detective Conan fans very often) and when it comes to DotA (lol, not Defense of blabla) most people also just use it as another excuse for canonicity debates, so no, not everyone uses it with the original meaning, which is exactly what I dislike. It is true, nobody can force you to think what the author says - to now get back to the original meaning. But it will still be the message - to get back to communication psychology; and yes, fiction IS communication as well because communication is the exchange of information. Just as you can misunderstand me as much as you want but you will never be able to decide what I mean over me. That you really seem to think I am discussing with just this forum and have never heard the stuff you guys say is beyond me. Its just that the aspects are either wrong, misused or other things. No one here is denying that people can "understand otherwise". That is not the point though and I do not appreciate how you are once more making use of my obvious instinct of answering to such things. I was hoping this would be over.

    The true problem is that people cannot actually seperate "like/dislike" from "counting". People really have the nerves to think that when they do not like something it has the same power as the original writer just retconning stuff instead of accepting "okay, I did dislike that but its a thing nonetheless and it is not in my realm of power to actually make it void for that story". I hate tons of things. But I would never be so insane to actually act like that has any effect on these things.

    EDITed the last part because your reply was nothing bad. But to show good will I will not continue this any further because that is what I wanted anyway.
    Last edited by Sephiroth; 10-17-2017 at 07:17 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •