Case (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
case) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
fandomsecrets2014-03-10 07:07 pm
case) wrote in fandomsecrets2014-03-10 07:07 pm
[ SECRET POST #2624 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2624 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.
__________________________________________________
02.
[Outlander]
__________________________________________________
03.
[The Walking Dead]
__________________________________________________
04.
[How I Met Your Mother]
__________________________________________________
05.
[Twitch Plays Pokemon]
__________________________________________________
06.
[Batman, Kill La Kill, Borderlands]
__________________________________________________
07.
[Overlord]
__________________________________________________
08.
[Red Dwarf]
__________________________________________________
09.
[Paranatural]
__________________________________________________
10.
[Pitch Perfect]
__________________________________________________
11.
[Insidious: Chapter 2]
__________________________________________________
Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 053 secrets from Secret Submission Post #375.
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.
no subject
Now, you can say it's a shit interpretation. You can say it was a bad decision, or that the book was bad. You can say Dumbledore was a weak and ambiguous character. I'll disagree on some of those points, but all of that isn't what we re talking about.
It's the person who disregards what she said WHEN TALKING ABOUT WHAT SHE WAS TRYING TO DO. We know what she was trying to do BECAUSE SHE TOLD US. It doesn't matter if she failed at it when we talk about her motivations and intent. And people have forgotten that when they talk about what she was trying to do. And in other situations, this one isn't even my pet peeve, that harkens back to a very idiotic conversation I once had were death of the author was cited for fucking Zutarra in Avatar.
no subject
The difference between a novel or screenplay and a diary (unless you're Anais Nin or Anne Frank)is that the novel and screenplay are EDITED. The author engages in the careful selection of exactly which ideas appear in the completed work, tries to take a step back and look at the work as a whole, and revises it again, usually cutting EVEN MORE STUFF that didn't quite work. In most cases, those edits make the final cuts better.
THOSE DECISIONS ARE PART OF AUTHORIAL INTENT. Saying that a napkin scribble is MORE authoritative than a final completed work is rather like saying we should only listen to rehearsals of performances, all mashed together, including all the tracks the producer recorded before he gave up in despair and called in Kenny Aronoff to fix the damn thing.
Why do I care what she was trying to do, or her motivations? I'm not her biographer. I'm her reader. I'm not a journalist writing "The Making of Harry Potter." I'm a reader. I'm not writing an article about Harry Potter as a cultural phenomenon. I'm a reader. As a reader, it's my job to understand, interpret, and appreciate the CAREFULLY EDITED craft on the printed page.
It's the language on the page that lives or dies. It's the structure of the narrative that's my home when I open the story. The story is the alpha and omega of my criticism. Most of the time, the story is all I have from the author, so even if I was to jump down the rabbit-hole of intent, those questions would need to be asked of the story.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2014-03-12 05:08 am (UTC)(link)no subject