3 ms·
Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. Plain and simple. It draws intrigue, sometimes undue. This is one of th
by byteknight 2y ago
Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. Plain and simple. It draws intrigue, sometimes undue. This is one of them. That doesn't make it bad or wrong to do. As a side note, generally, its not a good idea to take make stances defending someone acting in self-interest with the guise of "art".
- pinkmuffinere 2y ago> Making these types of choices are done in the interest of the writer and not the reader. I strongly disagree with this. There is a long tradition of leaving obvious questions unanswered, to force a reader to really think. A short list of some that have affected my life: - “Mending Wall” by Robert Frost (it’s unclear whether “good fences make good neighbors” is supposed to be the true belief of the author, or the inaccurate belief of a character) - the book of Job in the Old Testament (it’s ambiguous whether Job ever sins and turns his back on God, despite that very question initiating the conflict) - “Jesus Christ Superstar” (doesn’t actually take a stance on whether the character of Jesus in the musical was good or not, leaving the viewer to think about it for themselves) I know there are many others, because we explicitly studied this technique in class. It’s like the Socratic method for writing. > “art” My understanding of art as a field is that it largely attempts to remove any restrictions over what can or can’t be art. I think the scare quotes is contrary to that. Idk, I tend to believe most experts in their fields, including artists.
- byteknight 2y agothis is not one of those scenarios. The answer is clearly not obvious.