[ SECRET POST #2624 ]

[case]

⌈ 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.

Comments

[cbrachyrhynchos]

The first problem is that you build the theory of the text from the text. You don't go cherrypicking the text to support your claims. Discussion of the text that does the latter and not the former is usually obvious to spot. Note that Death of the Author doesn't exclude context, but the relevance of that context needs to be weighed against the text itself. It's reasonable to say that Tolkien applied the same ideas to Lord of the Rings that he expressed in "Beowulf: The Monster and the Critics." It's less reasonable to say that because Tolkien was a WWI veteran that Lord of the Rings is about WWI.

The second problem is that secondary sources about a text are often biased. Take a look at the role of German nationalism in the creation of Mozart and Salieri or Schindler's romantic views of Beethoven ("fate knocking at the door") as examples. News media comes with its own set of biases. So does blogging. If we're going to use those sources to dissect the novel, we should be able to use the novel to discuss the accuracy and relevance of those sources.

Which we do when we're talking about why we accept Rowling's claims about Dumbledore (they're plausible given ambiguities in the text) but not Card's claims about early gay-positive novels (the character is tormented by his sexuality).

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with this post but my monomania requires me to point out that there is very good textual evidence for saying that there are strong connections between LotR and WWI; it's not just founded on the biographical fact that he was a veteran.