5 ms·
I think it's often the case that when a story is created, the creator(s) don't necessarily have this detailed philosophical/psychological overview of the charac
by karmakurtisaani 4y ago
I think it's often the case that when a story is created, the creator(s) don't necessarily have this detailed philosophical/psychological overview of the characters and the essence of the show. Rather, they have their own life experiences and ideals for the story and characters("there's always that idiot boss and that one guy who does nothing"). Analyses like this one then provide us with a point of view that puts the vision of the writers into a larger perspective.
So it's not necessarily like the writers aimed to create something along these lines, rather, what they created fits perfectly to this narrative. That's what makes reading good analyses so satisfying.
- vasco 4y agoI've tried to make this point before in conversation in relation to many forms of art and I just had to comment that your reply is very on the money and very concise. Gonna take some inspiration, as I've struggled many times to convey this. Most people just think that unless the artist "intended it", analysis is worthless.
- diordiderot 4y agoThere's a funny quote about Casanova along the lines of "in his literary work is deep philosophy, and in his philosophical work is incoherent rambling"
- maigret 4y agoTrue. You need to understand something to explain it. You don’t need to understand something to observe and describe it. Obvious example is how birds fly, which was mostly explained recently only.