At what point media literacy became a tool to make sure certain interpretations are absolute?Consider the old style of interpretation. It was insistent, but respectful; it erected another meaning on top of the literal one. But the current style of interpretation excavates, and as it excavates, destroys; it digs “behind” the text, to find a sub-text which is the “true” one. For example, Harry Potter is now somehow an analogy for the trans experience (out of resentment, mostly). Or what about Project Hail Mary; it's apparently an analogy on climate change despite the author's constant claims that his works are apolitical. And the list goes on and on with works like Starship Troopers, Lord of the Ring, Dune, i.e. works that are part of the geek/pop culture and that tend to be subtle or shallow, but in most cases rarely deep or political.To me, those who reach for a political interpretation of a novel are only expressing their lack of response to what is there on the pages. And it's always the case that interpretation of this type indicates a dissatisfaction (conscious or unconscious) with the work, whether because the author had the wrong opinion or because the people with the wrong opinion like it a bit too much. And in turn, it becomes a wish to replace it by something else and make it agree with the right point of view.
>>25245368You can just say you thought the Starship Troopers movie was about how the military was heckin chad n based n sheit until someone told you differently and you got upset
>>25245368This is a buzzwor/meme word that seems to generate a lot of responses but it basically seems to encompass what having culture means to the uncultured?
>>25245375If Starship Troopers is meant to be a parody, it's a terrible one because it elevated fascism rather than make a joke out of it. But at the end of the day, it's a story about resistance against invaders
>>25245393>no ackshually it's the movie's fault I'm retardedLike I said, you thought the movie was about how the military was so heckin based!!!, got made fun of for it, and now you're tripling down on being retarded rather than admit you were wrong
>>25245375>>25245413Kek, nice job proving OP right. If anything is shitters like you who get pissy because people misinterpret a book or movie and start attacking those who enjoy it in their own way.
>>25245413>the movieI'm talking about the book and I don't care about what you and your fellow redditors think what it's about because interpretation based on the highly dubious theory that a work of art is composed of items of content, violates art. It makes art into an article for use, for arrangement into a mental scheme of categories.
>>25245470>here's my retarded interpretation>that's retarded>REEEEEE YOU CAN'T CALL ME RETARDED REEEEEEEEEEE REEEE REEEEWhy are you people like this?
>>25245475>I'm talking about the bookI'm not>you're like reddit n sheit!!!When you interpret works of art in any genre or any form, do you pre-endorse interpretations based on whether you think they sound "reddit" ie heckin cringe or "4chan" ie heckin based? lmfao what a cucked way to think>the highly dubious theory that a work of art is composed of items of content... it makes art into an article for use, for arrangement into a mental scheme of categoriesYou've stumbled on a coherent, interesting point here, but it was best articulated by writers who would make you seethe and rage + you're using it as a cudgel against "Reddit" instead of invoking it to find aesthetic truth, so you'll never actually learn why this point is interesting and coherent
>>25245516Why do you write like a man on strogen?
>>25245525>writers who would make you seethe and rageOf course she would make anyone rage, that jewess plagiarized her entire ouvre from White writers that weren't translated in English back tghen and she paid them back by accusing White people of being cancer.
>>25245527>oh yeah? oh yeah? well... well... you're a tranny!Tiresome
>>25245375>>25245413>>25245516>>25245525>>25245532it's so funny to me that this exact aggressiveness Sontag was warning people about eventually became the dogma of her leftist associates and descendants
>>25245531Stop parroting that bullshit.
>>25247295???It's the truth, pages 57–58https://web.archive.org/web/20180912075653/http://hgar-srv3.bu.edu/collections/partisan-review/search/detail?id=326075
>>25245368> old style of interpretationstylistic interpretation?If you really want to go down this route then the church systems foundation is built on this. The source of these analogies being shallow as they're probably drawing from a more entertaining abridgement of biblics.
>>25247323Here's a better source:https://bu.userservices.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/delivery/01BOSU_INST:AlmaGeneralView/121027668920001161Look for 1967 Vol. 34 No.1.
