#The Author is Dead

[staranon95]

getting really pissy at all the Star Wars cancellations lately

at least we'll have Andor season 2 and i'll watch that Mandalorian movie in some way or another but i'm honestly so tired of all the execs at Disney basically abandoning all their Star Wars shows lately

it's like after the first ep of every new show they release, they immediately give up on it due to right wing bigots on twitter. the worst crowd ever

Book of Boba Fett had so much going for it and there was potential there to make it a well rounded show with teasing out parts of Boba's past while also giving him a future

the Kenobi series was a good interlude and i loved that they brought Ewan and Hayden back to continue their characters. i liked that the focus was on Leia and her relationship with Obi-Wan. sucks that they cut Cody out of it though. we deserved old bickering husbands in the desert

while i didn't watch Ashoka, i know so many people had fun with it who had watched the original Rebels series and enjoyed it as the continuation and adaptation of their series. they should have been given a chance to continue them

Acolyte was a breath of fresh air because it was actually the writers trying something new beyond characters we're already well familiar with

even Mandalorian season 3 had some good moments but you can feel the meddling of execs all over these properties

from bringing Grogu back too soon because they need their cash cow back front and centre and taking time away from Boba's story shows how little faith the Star Wars team has in their own ability to tell fulfilling stories

that and they abandon the people of colour, women, and children in their casts when they're being attacked by trolls online

this is an inherently unsustainable way to manage this franchise and they desperately need to figure their shit out if they want to survive

[0w0tsuki]

I think it's important to note Death of the Author and Authorial Intent when discussing the transness of Chihiro from daganronpa. I've talked about it in reblogs but I wanted my own post. A lot of people confuse the two and in the case of old school Chihiro transmisoginists purposely create a new definition.

People seem to be under the impression that death of the impression a lot of the time that Death of The Author means "If I don't like what the author has to say I can just ignore it and say it didn't happen or Miku wrote it or something" which is a true statement but it's not the definition. And people who still comment "him*" on any fan post that uses she/her for Chihiro in 2024 define Authorial Intent as "The creator of every work writes with a specific intent and if you disagree with anything the author says you are WRONG and NOT a TRUE fan!" which not only isn't true but doesn't account for if the author's vision is even worth defending.

This is why there was such a nuclear meltdown over Bridget's trans confirmation and why it took them so long to get out of the translation conspiracy retcon bad ending phase before they moved on to trying to co-opt leftist language to make it about "femboy representation". Because it was the first time the author of one of their darling femboys didn't agree with them and they couldn't use "facts don't care about your feelings" to harass trans positive people.

But actually Authorial Intent is just a term to refer to "what did the author mean when they wrote this?" and is actually a part of Death of the Author which means "No matter what the Author says they approach every work with their own biases and that affects the work. So in order to understand the work you must understand the author so you can understand how their worldview bleeds into the work."

When people talk about Death of the Author in reference to H.P. Lovecrafts racism they don't mean "Well HP was a racist so you can just ignore him and write Cuthulu however you want." they mean "HP's racism is very prevalent in his works and viewing how he describes the monsters in his world gives insight to the times prejudices.". HP's works are actually a very effective tool in learning how bigotry affects horror.

Now to see where I'm going here is that Kodaka is a massive transmisogynist. Not only is there everything that is going on in DR1 chapter 2, but there's also his newest work which depicts a male character who dresses up as a girl for the explicit purpose of tricking girls to and sexually take advantage of them, there's Sakura who's in the same game as Chihiro whose character design the Spikechunsoft team initially didn't approve of but Kodaka got through under the guise of "body positivity" only to turn around and make her the butt of "woman who is ugly because she looks like a man" jokes for the entirety of her screentime, hell the only character who ever displays any positivity for trans women (which is transmed at best) is Tenko Cabashira who herself is a standin for Kodaka's misogynistic/lesbiphobic idea of "Man Hating feminazi Dyke".

Chihiro is a trans woman not because the work literally says she is which is what the criteria is for transmisogynists. She's a trans woman because she represents what trans women are to Kodaka. To Kodaka they are at best confused boys who just don't know that they are "allowed to be feminine", at neutral they are good jokes to get a quick laugh, at worst they are predators who prey on young girls, and anyone who supports them is a raging feminazi who probably grew up in a cave.

It's why after we had the incredible uncomfortable corpse investigation every student automatically switched to he/him without so much as a discussion to how Chihiro would want to be referred is because to the author there is no discussion. To the author your genitals are your gender (See also the "transmed at best" Tenko final FTE where will be cool with Suichi as long as he becomes a girl which of course involves getting The Surgery™) and Chihiro's genital reveal is instead this harsh truth of reality that the characters are supposed to feel exposed and lied to about, even the character who is the target of Kodaka's transmisogynistic humor.

This is why it requires a real stretch of the imagination to pull Transmasc Chihiro out of this story because Chihiro is not barred from masculinity in any way, shape, or form. Masculinity is actually expected of her and she is punished with bullying for not performing it. Chihiro does not feel pressure to present feminine, Chihiro is pressured to perform masculinity and her feminine presentation is written as an easy escape from that expectation. Because to Kodaka, Chihiro represents the trans women he views as failed men whose motivation for transitioning is a convenient escape from having to meet the rigorous standards of toxic masculinity. When the secrets are threatened to be revealed, Chihiro does not pursue masculine presentation out of some desire to finally be seen as a man, but out of desperation to not be seen as weak and exploitable when her secret is exposed.

I don't know how to segway from that into this so I'm just going to say. The next time some femboy fascist tries to butt their heads in to "Um Akctually" about a trans woman's existence do not attempt to argue "well actually she IS a trans woman in canon" because unless the character in question is specifically Bridget Guilty Gear, chances are the author is going to be on their side. And even in the case of Bridget, the ones that are still arguing for "canon femboy" Bridget are the ones who never moved on from the mistranslation conspiracy stage of denialism. No amount of pointed official interviews, dialogue, or official wikis is going to convince them because in their mind Daiuske is a turbocuck who is either capitulating or has been brainwashed by the woke West and has forcefully taken the reins to retcon the true author's authentic vision.

If you're going to engage with them which by the way I don't recommend you doing. But let's just pretend you have to. Let's just pretend you're a popular YouTuber which never presented that you have progressive views who unknowingly drew in these people into your fanbase who had a very vocal transmisogynistic reaction to a transfem headcannon. So in this completely imaginary scenario you need to challenge them on their transmisogyny. Ask them why the "correct" interpretation of the work is worth defending and harassing people over.

As the Bridget denialism has shown, these people are VERY dependent on the work agreeing with them because it allows for them to argue correctness without having to deal with such silly little complications as "morals" or "values". They are completely unequipped to defend their transmisogyny because they are so used to using their idea of "Authorial Intent" as a rhetorical crutch and most of the time DO NOT WANT their transmisogyny to be called out as such. It's why when left with no convincing way to deny Bridget's trams existence the ones that DID pivot decided to pivot to taking leftist arguments and swapping some of the words out to make their arguments SOUND progressive. Because they felt that if they couched themselves in leftist sounding language then that would be enough to convince people that they weren't violent reactionaries but were instead GNC men who were expressing loss over valuable representation. Which is just bullshit considering it's just the transfem version of "we're losing our tomboys!" transphobic arguments that people are pretty quick to pick up on but since targets of these arguments were trans women we had genuine queers who were sympathizers and parroting talking points of "While you can't be mad over new Transfem representation you can't fault them for expressing sadness over losing a positive role model for GNC cis men"

Just don't play the "well actually" game with fascists if you can avoid it

[whereserpentswalk]

If you think something I wrote is an allegory for something that matters to you you're right. Doesn't matter what it is, if something you see me write speaks to you by relating to something in the real world you are engaging with fiction properly.

Think it's an allegory for mental health: correct! Think it's an allegory for capitalism: correct! Think it's an allegory for being trans: correct!

It doesn't matter what my original intention is. What matters is that it's meaningful to you.

[lightning-neko]

#4 memories

[issacharmastersdp18]

I read one of the most wonderful books. I did not want it to end.

There’s a movie based on it, which I had already seen.

Donald Sutherland was largely responsible for that.

He read the book twice in two days, and gives it high praise.

Well deserved high praise.

But since he loved it so much, and I liked the movie, I purchased a copy.

I will begin reading it a second time very soon.

At least half the pages had something to make me smile.

My favorite part, though, was where Captain Johnson engages in what I call “weaponized infodumping.”

The movie hits all the most important points.

There is, however, so much more to the book.

Things that can’t, or cannot satisfactorily, be translated to screen.

And some things which are ratings based limitations.

It’s a children’s book, but there are some dark things within.

I quite literally put off finishing this book simply because I could not bear the thought of it ending.

The ending is good. Wraps up actual loose ends.

Just left me wanting the adventure to continue.

And now I am just kinda sad.

Which is one reason I’ll be restarting it.

But I think I also need a hug.

And the person who would be best suited to help would be the person whose fault it is

And he doesn’t even know I exist.

So…

[arrogantsoap]

i don't CARE that dear boy was "written for linda's ex husband". I DON'T CARE. it's john. it's for john, simple as that.

[greenerteacups]

Anón here who submitted the Draco sympathy “Ask”

That was well put, and honestly I know this logically, because well Pureblood Supremacy can also be compared to White Supremacy and Death Eaters to the KKK. So yes, also putting myself in Hermione’s shoes, as a woman of color, I can see everything that you laid out for me. It’s probably just me loving Draco so much and knowing that a lot of people are circumstances of the environment they were raised in. There’s still a lot of story left, a lot of growth to be made for multiple people so I will just still cry inside thinking about Draco walking back to the castle alone in the rain….

Also, again, I’m so pleased that you’re not discouraged by engaging in “Death of the Author”. That never bothers me, but sometimes creators’ thoughts and such can be too surface level whereas we can tell that you care and have REALLY familiarized yourself with your creation. Love that.

Yeah! The fact that Draco has never been treated poorly because of his blood status is the reason it doesn't occur to him that certain things feel badly — it's like poking a bruise. Most people expect that poking someone in the arm won't hurt them; but if someone else has already walloped that person, hard enough to leave a bruise, then poking can trigger an echo of the same pain as the original injury. And at the same time, he is scared and sad and alone in the rain, he is totally worthy of pity and empathy for his problems, too — or at least that's the balance I was looking for.

One of the things that interests me the most — as the fic probably reveals, tbh — is how people need to teach each other how to treat them; love doesn't mean you can't or won't hurt someone, but it means you never stop trying not to. And while Draco still frames his inner turmoil as a two-sided conflict, the fact that he's bothering to worry about this at all suggests that he already knows, deep down, what's really more important to him — in Chapter 49, he's not worried about losing Hermione's respect or friendship. He's mourning the loss of his father's approval, not hers. And what I find personally so compelling about that, the idea of Draco's suffering in this way— even if it temporarily drives him off by himself out of anger/frustration — is that he's doing it voluntarily, without anyone there to judge him or force his hand. He's not in danger; no one is asking him to make a final choice; he just saw Hermione was unhappy, and he realized that it was partially his fault. So he's going through this misery and loneliness as a gesture of profound and tremendous love for Hermione and his friends, because it essentially means, I care for you enough that I am going to uproot everything I believe and shatter the foundations of my identity just to avoid hurting you.

[helianthus21]

what's that phenomenon when you don't introduce a plot hole but somehow accidently imply sth that makes sense just bc you wanted to add more descriptive text askjlk

[ishipdeanwithhappiness]

i just realized why my sterek edits might have made a comeback after so many years and its bc of the new tw movie isnt it ughh f u jeff sterek still lives on and is greater than you and your stupid show and your stupid mc

[zwoelffarben]

You do know that the author of hunter x hunter is very much still alive? Like togashi is not dead you could ask him about interpretations if you had the chance

Ah. I understand the confusion. See, "The author is dead" doesn't literally mean, "The author's metabolic processes have ceased." I understand that the mangaka of hunter x hunter, Togashi, is very much alive.

It's a type of literary analysis, in which the only thing considered is the text as it presents itself. Authorial intention is ignored in favor of evidence presented in the text, and it gets a bit wibbly with regard to ongoing serial works, because the author is still able to produce and indeed semi-regularly does depending on the author) new text despite being 'killeded' by the critical analyst.

I'll regularly joke whenever a living author presents for the fandom's consideration their personal pet headcanon or textual interpretation, that even if all the author are dead, that doesn't mean we can't seance with the cool ones.

But despite joking like that, I tend toward interpreting from an even more extreme variation on the typical death of the author lens of analysis, which I arrived and called, "The author is dead and wrong," in which I don't ignore the authorial intent, but I only ever care about it in so far as I can use the text as evidence to 'contradict,' 'disprove,' or otherwise argue count to that authorial intentional as being coherently present in the text.

The author is not some unfalliable god crafting a coherent world: they're just some human with a pen and paper: same as you: same as me. And they, same as us, can and probably will get something wrong.

So yes, I could ask Togashi for his interpretations of the characters (or I could if I spoke a lick enough of japaneseto say anything of substance). But that'd defeat the point of me interpretated the text because it wouldn't be me doing any interpretation.

The author is dead and the text must speak for itself.

[fujobrainrot]

In canon, absolutely true. In people's hearts and minds, why not?

South Park Characters Aren't Gay and they Don't Love Eachother.

[morganbritton132]

No one tells you when you get a Big Serious Job™ how many fucking abbreviations you’ll be forced to learn.

[mswyrr]

"your ship isn't canon!"

the author is dead

"literature is that neuter, that composite, that oblique into which every subject escapes, the trap where all identity is lost, beginning with the very identity of the body that writes... Though the Author's empire is still very powerful (recent criticism has often merely consolidated it), it is evident that for a long time now certain writers have attempted to topple it... it is language which speaks, not the author: to write is to reach, through a preexisting impersonality ... that point where language alone acts, "performs," and not "oneself"" (roland barthes, "the death of the author")

the text itself (its language and visuals) is the thing that matters. it's what performs and speaks and i interpret (and can choose parts of the text to interpret and leave off: e.g. "this fic is based on season 1-3 but not s4 which sucks").

the author might be invited into this twosome with me and the text to make it a threesome if i find that pleasurable OR NOT

[waitineedaname]

I simply don't think that's true eBooks.com but thank you anyway

[sagetsukimura]

Please please please, interact with art in every form! Write a two line poem about the art you just saw, draw a doodle about the fic you just read, sing a song even when you can't sing! Experience art!

Art isn't just too look at. DaVinci didn't just paint, he created! art is meant to thought of, talked about, SHARED. Repaint the Mona Lisa with shitty Crayola water colors, what can you find in that experience? Talk about her smile, talk about wondering why so many people talk about her style, ask questions, give things your own spin, the author is dead, their stories are the treasures they left behind, so go treasure hunting and brag about it!!!!! Share the wealth! That did it say to you? Dont just look and say 'pretty', this k about why it looks pretty, even if it's just because of the colors!

Art is meant to make us feel, to think, to experience for one brief moment, how something looks/feels for someone else, it's intimate, and it's given freely

Artists WANT you to engage with their art. A smile face isn't just a few lines, someone was happy, or someone wanted to be happy, maybe they wanted YOU to be happy

Art is meant not just for the artist, but for you, with the beating heart and willingness to look at someone else's inside and see the world the way they see it

[goformoony]

i did NOT need to see this thanks.