[ SECRET POST #5038 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5038 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 18 secrets from Secret Submission Post #721.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

The meaning of death of the author has been stretched significantly from what it was originally intended to suggest.

The author can be “dead” for your purposes while you interrogate a text. That doesn’t mean the author is dead for everyone’s purposes, always.

“I think the green light in The Great Gatsby symbolizes aliens, and the author is dead, so I’m right,” is not Death Of The Author. Death Of The Author is more along the lines of: “I think the green light in The Great Gatsby symbolizes aliens. Using quotations and observations from the book I have constructed an argument for why this is the case. For the purposes of this essay, the author is dead--therefore my argument is not to be summarily dismissed, but to be evaluated based on how well it creates a feasible, defensible argument from the material of the text.”

People in fandom often like to use death of the other as a way of saying that every interpretation of canon, no matter how wild or unsupportable, is just as legitimate as any other. To which my response is, well, that depends on how you define ‘legitimate.’

[(Anonymous)]

+1

[(Anonymous)]

+2

This is exactly it.

[(Anonymous)]

Perfectly said. Death of the Author isn't meant to be used to summarily dismiss or disregard parts of the canon you don't like, but rather as a way to come to an alternate interpretation of a work based on textual evidence. The point is to make an argument that, even though it may not have been the author's intention, the other interpretation is also a valid one that is supported by the text itself.

[(Anonymous)]

+3

I am so tired of "death of the author" just being used as a shorthand for "any wild-ass interpretation of canon is valid, even if there is zero textual support for it". Critical theory is a thing beyond "me no likey".