Attack on Titan
Available on Manga Store
New
Mar 22, 2021 9:02 AM
#51
| Are y'all really sure that Erwin would be cool with killing civilists? I mean I guess he would support him but that's the main doubt I have considering that Erwin is a very honorable character. I like to believe that Isayama killed him off so we'd never see a cruel Erwin Smith. |
Mar 22, 2021 11:45 AM
#52
| Nah, I don't see it. He conducted a bloodless revolution ffs, I doubt genocide would be his go to solution. If the two people closest to him couldn't see him taking that path then that's strong evidence to support that view. If nothing else it's a hell of a lot more plausible than "but my headcanon". Make no mistake though, he would have handled the situation much more pro-actively than Hange, Pyxis or shit machine-kun ever did. We wouldn't have gotten to the situation we did in the first place if he was there with his decisive leadership. He would probably be on board with a partial rumbling and directly confronting/negotiating with the enemy. What could the world do if they keep getting stomped every time they try to pull some shit? As far as military might goes, Paradis got the upper hand when the rumbling is on the table. Erwin is 100% the kind of person to capitalize on that. "But that's too risky, Erwin would never-" we talking about the Erwin motherfucking Smith here, right? The biggest gambler in the entire show? He was never afraid to put everything on the line in the search for the optimal solution. He would've gone to Marley with multiple contingency plans and put his big fucking dick on the goddamn table in the middle of that Eldian conference if that's what it took. |
Mar 22, 2021 12:53 PM
#53
TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. |
Mar 22, 2021 4:16 PM
#54
GreenKoala said: I don't really think Erwin would side with Eren on the rumbling and stuff. Actually, I don't believe he'd act much different from Hange on how to deal with the whole situation. I definitely agree |
Mar 22, 2021 7:15 PM
#55
| I would say that if Erwin have to choose between Alliance or Eren, he would most likely go with Eren. But Had Erwin lived through Shiganshina, Rumbling wouldn't have been an option in the first place. Anyway since the writing post-Paths has been a shambling mess to the point of making everything and everyone so fucking black and white, I don't see why this question is needed to be asked again. |
 |
Mar 22, 2021 9:58 PM
#56
| i think he would for truth but killing people he's too smart to burden himself with unnecessary guilt i mean from uprising arc he overtook the monarchy with almost no public tragedy other than the merchant's demise he took it incredibly well....... but yea like he said some blood needs to be spilled for any side to survive........ the conversation with zachry he said humans would fight each other to death until there's a single human left standing so it's still a hard way to be intellectual and survive, but his involvement with the outside world would be interesting and maybe he would take the genocide too for his people to survive or do some erwin smith gamble on something too win the survival game |
Mar 23, 2021 5:00 AM
#57
CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. |
Mar 23, 2021 6:43 AM
#58
TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. |
Mar 23, 2021 9:24 AM
#59
CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. The quid is isayama never stated that erwin would support and endorse the alliance as a fact: nor he assert so in an interview, nor the character had the chance to or act in that sense. We only got hange and levi convo and inner dialogues respectively, with a scene that could be the after life or could be a final cope moment for someone who is about to die, as many NDTH experiences humans have endured and visioned in such moments during history. So yeah, there is a margin of interpretation given the characterization. |
Mar 23, 2021 9:40 AM
#60
CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. And i'm not talking about facts in a history, i'm talking about interpretation, intentions and conclusions. That's what you are failling to understand. " Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the INTENTIONS and biographical context of an author in an INTERPRETATION of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated." this is exactly what i'm talking about, not about contradicting plot points. Yeah my comparison was not the best but serviceable if you have a little interpretation skill, a quality that you doesnt seem to possess. I, the writer, create a scientist and i keep writing about how smart he is and if someone asks me if he is smart i'll say "yes, absolutely" and yet i'm unable to write him as a smart character and he actually is dumb as fuck. Is everyone forced to accept that he is a smart character cause i said so? fuck no because the author can be wrong, your interpretation is that he is dumb and you are right despite anything the author says. Or you can accept any post-thoughts JK Rowling regurgitates on her works to appease fans and encourage "tell, don't show" writing, again, you do you, but in that case, yeah i can lecture you about critical thinking, lol. I also think that Erwin would not side with Eren, but because of my analysis on his character. |
Mar 23, 2021 10:07 AM
#61
TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. And i'm not talking about facts in a history, i'm talking about interpretation, intentions and conclusions. That's what you are failling to understand. " Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the INTENTIONS and biographical context of an author in an INTERPRETATION of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated." this is exactly what i'm talking about, not about contradicting plot points. Yeah my comparison was not the best but serviceable if you have a little interpretation skill, a quality that you doesnt seem to possess. I, the writer, create a scientist and i keep writing about how smart he is and if someone asks me if he is smart i'll say "yes, absolutely" and yet i'm unable to write him as a smart character and he actually is dumb as fuck. Is everyone forced to accept that he is a smart character cause i said so? fuck no because the author can be wrong, your interpretation is that he is dumb and you are right despite anything the author says. Or you can accept any post-thoughts JK Rowling regurgitates on her works to appease fans and encourage "tell, don't show" writing, again, you do you, but in that case, yeah i can lecture you about critical thinking, lol. I also think that Erwin would not side with Eren, but because of my analysis on his character. Your examples are not servicable, they are trash. Barthes would burn his book if he saw what you have just written. The only example you posted where "The death of the author" applies is the J.K.R. situation, where she added information about her characters later, outside of her books. And yes, whether your fragile personality can take it or not, Rowling has the final say in her characters and her story. Not you, nor any other arrogant keyboard warrior who believes that he/she knows the story better than the author. Word of God is canon. You can have your own interpretation but in a fictional story CANON=FACTS. So cut the crap. When the author gives answers then your interpretation goes out the window. Do i like what Rowling did? No. I would have preferred for her to have written it inside the goddamn book series, instead of adding crap years later just to appeal to a certain part of her audience. Do i get any say? No. You can keep denying this as much as you want and call it critical thinking. I call it coping. So keep coping if that makes you feel better. It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and that Rowling keeps making millions out of HER story. Write your own if you don't like it. This conversation is over. |
Mar 23, 2021 10:08 AM
#62
Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. The quid is isayama never stated that erwin would support and endorse the alliance as a fact: nor he assert so in an interview, nor the character had the chance to or act in that sense. We only got hange and levi convo and inner dialogues respectively, with a scene that could be the after life or could be a final cope moment for someone who is about to die, as many NDTH experiences humans have endured and visioned in such moments during history. So yeah, there is a margin of interpretation given the characterization. I don't see any margin of interpretation here. Levi's vision, if you don't like Hange's, is enough. |
Mar 23, 2021 5:43 PM
#63
CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. And i'm not talking about facts in a history, i'm talking about interpretation, intentions and conclusions. That's what you are failling to understand. " Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the INTENTIONS and biographical context of an author in an INTERPRETATION of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated." this is exactly what i'm talking about, not about contradicting plot points. Yeah my comparison was not the best but serviceable if you have a little interpretation skill, a quality that you doesnt seem to possess. I, the writer, create a scientist and i keep writing about how smart he is and if someone asks me if he is smart i'll say "yes, absolutely" and yet i'm unable to write him as a smart character and he actually is dumb as fuck. Is everyone forced to accept that he is a smart character cause i said so? fuck no because the author can be wrong, your interpretation is that he is dumb and you are right despite anything the author says. Or you can accept any post-thoughts JK Rowling regurgitates on her works to appease fans and encourage "tell, don't show" writing, again, you do you, but in that case, yeah i can lecture you about critical thinking, lol. I also think that Erwin would not side with Eren, but because of my analysis on his character. Your examples are not servicable, they are trash. Barthes would burn his book if he saw what you have just written. The only example you posted where "The death of the author" applies is the J.K.R. situation, where she added information about her characters later, outside of her books. And yes, whether your fragile personality can take it or not, Rowling has the final say in her characters and her story. Not you, nor any other arrogant keyboard warrior who believes that he/she knows the story better than the author. Word of God is canon. You can have your own interpretation but in a fictional story CANON=FACTS. So cut the crap. When the author gives answers then your interpretation goes out the window. Do i like what Rowling did? No. I would have preferred for her to have written it inside the goddamn book series, instead of adding crap years later just to appeal to a certain part of her audience. Do i get any say? No. You can keep denying this as much as you want and call it critical thinking. I call it coping. So keep coping if that makes you feel better. It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and that Rowling keeps making millions out of HER story. Write your own if you don't like it. This conversation is over. Yeah i'm coping so much that i have never even read any of her books, i just used a famous example, again you know nothing about the subject or the person you are arguing with, i have better things to do than being here explaining basic things to you. I do think that when you analyse his character deeply there's no room for interpretation, but thinking that people should accept "cAUsE gOD isaYAma SaID So" is lazy, dumb, and fits the essay perfectly. Dont be pissed about it, peace. |
Mar 23, 2021 8:58 PM
#64
TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. And i'm not talking about facts in a history, i'm talking about interpretation, intentions and conclusions. That's what you are failling to understand. " Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the INTENTIONS and biographical context of an author in an INTERPRETATION of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated." this is exactly what i'm talking about, not about contradicting plot points. Yeah my comparison was not the best but serviceable if you have a little interpretation skill, a quality that you doesnt seem to possess. I, the writer, create a scientist and i keep writing about how smart he is and if someone asks me if he is smart i'll say "yes, absolutely" and yet i'm unable to write him as a smart character and he actually is dumb as fuck. Is everyone forced to accept that he is a smart character cause i said so? fuck no because the author can be wrong, your interpretation is that he is dumb and you are right despite anything the author says. Or you can accept any post-thoughts JK Rowling regurgitates on her works to appease fans and encourage "tell, don't show" writing, again, you do you, but in that case, yeah i can lecture you about critical thinking, lol. I also think that Erwin would not side with Eren, but because of my analysis on his character. Your examples are not servicable, they are trash. Barthes would burn his book if he saw what you have just written. The only example you posted where "The death of the author" applies is the J.K.R. situation, where she added information about her characters later, outside of her books. And yes, whether your fragile personality can take it or not, Rowling has the final say in her characters and her story. Not you, nor any other arrogant keyboard warrior who believes that he/she knows the story better than the author. Word of God is canon. You can have your own interpretation but in a fictional story CANON=FACTS. So cut the crap. When the author gives answers then your interpretation goes out the window. Do i like what Rowling did? No. I would have preferred for her to have written it inside the goddamn book series, instead of adding crap years later just to appeal to a certain part of her audience. Do i get any say? No. You can keep denying this as much as you want and call it critical thinking. I call it coping. So keep coping if that makes you feel better. It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and that Rowling keeps making millions out of HER story. Write your own if you don't like it. This conversation is over. Yeah i'm coping so much that i have never even read any of her books, i just used a famous example, again you know nothing about the subject or the person you are arguing with, i have better things to do than being here explaining basic things to you. I do think that when you analyse his character deeply there's no room for interpretation, but thinking that people should accept "cAUsE gOD isaYAma SaID So" is lazy, dumb, and fits the essay perfectly. Dont be pissed about it, peace. Lol, i come from the other way around, i think once you analize his character deeply you found his will or spirit actually transmited to eren and floch. The only common point with armin and hange his curiosity for the rest of the world, but aside that everything else, his reasoning and demeanour falls along the other two. |
Mar 24, 2021 12:11 AM
#65
Vinicius234 said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: TheBerserker66 said: CrimsonGeek said: Vinicius234 said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. And i dont buy the parallel, they are completely different personality wise and their skills were also different... for every ocassion armim doubted, felt unworthy and smiled like the 10 year old kiddo he was, erwin was shown to be collected, focused and lost in his thoughs, completely impassive and determined into his goals which where judgmental and intuitive oriented, 0 feelings until his last charge were he opened to levi... its funny because levi himself refered to his eyes and every time i remember erwin his demeanor was closer to 20 year old eren than armins... even in chapter 136, when isayama tried blatantly to sell this nonsense, armins expressions were identical to hange instead LMFAO... in general, i feel he is trying too desperately to deepthroats us with this, while in the core the subtextual and the characters lore indicates something else. Whether you buy the parallel or not is irrelevant. Isayama created the characters=he knows better than you. If he says their eyes are the same, they are the same. If he says that the old guard of the SC would never support Eren, the old guard would never support Eren. Was the righting top notch? Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. The context though is indisputable. You are basically saying that what the author's intended is more important than the viewer's interpretation, which is absolutely wrong. From the moment art is thrown on the world, the artist has no saying in what the audience thinks of it and people are entitled to their own interpretation. For context i do think that Erwin would not agree with Eren, but not because some empty comparisons of him and armin. You are dead wrong. Word of God>anyone else's interpretation. From the moment the author explains something, his explanation overrides any and all headcanons that anyone might have. You can still keep to your headcanons, but in the end they are just that. Headcanons that hold no weight in the actual story. Now, if something is meant to be open to interpretation then so be it. But when the author explains it and you (or anyone else for that matter) deny it then you are automatically wrong. Here in my country we have a movie called elite squad, the director explicitly said that his objective was to make a criticism on police violence, however, most of the viewers agreed with the situations the movie was displaying and praised exactly what the author intented to be an accusation. This is how art works, people create it, share it with the world, and other people take it and interpret it with their own opinions and experiences. To say that the author intention of a work is more important than the viewers emotional response is simply not understanding how art works, and disregarding the viewers experiences. No, you simply don't understand what i am saying. I am not disregarding the viewers experience in any way. If one feels one way about the plot/character of a work of art then of course he/she is entitled to his/her opinion. However, the CANON is determined by the CREATOR. Not the viewer. He/She created the universe, the themes, the plot and the characters. He/She knows better. Whether or not the creator is skilled enough to convey these messages EXACTLY the way he meant to is another thing entirely. If your interpretation of a work does not much the original creator's intent there are only two reasons that this has happened. Either you were not able to understand something obvious or the author was just bad and unable to convey his messages correctly. I guess that's the case with that movie you spoke of. So, i came back here just to tell you to read about "The Death of the Author" to have a better understanding of what i'm talking about. I know about the death of the author. I just don't agree with it as a notion at all, unless the author openly says " interprete the story as you like. You are basically saying that the readers interpretation should always be discarted in favour of the author's intention, even if that's subject to change, unclear or nothing more than financial. You do you but that kills any debate in any fictional work and turns any argument in an attempt to find out what the author wanted us to think instead of thinking for ourselves, requires no critical thinking and is reductionist at best. ... You keep talking about critical thinking as if you are an authority on the subject yet you can't even understand what i'm saying. What i am saying is that facts in a story are solely determined by the author. There is no room for interpretation of clearly stated facts. If the author states something as fact, then there is no room for debate. Anything more is fanfiction and misinterpretation of the story and of it's plot points. On the other hand, if there are aspects of the story that are unclear then i do not discourage personal interpretation. The exact opposite. Debating about such topics is fun and can be productive as well. Well, this here is not such a case. The entire debate here is pointless, exactly because the author answered the question for us. Erwin would fight against Eren if he was presented with such a binary option. There is nothing to talk about here. As for the other examples you mentioned in previous posts, it is evident that you are confused about what "The Death of the Author" means. An author saying that his/her characters are deep/not swallow as a response to criticism means jack shit. It is not an author's job to evaluate the quality of his/her work. That's the reader's job. However, this has nothing to do with "The Death of the Author". Criticism concerning the quality does not fall under this category. "The Death of the Author" concerns discussuions about the perceived themes and other plot-related topics, so long as the author does not offer an answer. Get this through your head and then you can start lecturing anyone about critical thinking. And i'm not talking about facts in a history, i'm talking about interpretation, intentions and conclusions. That's what you are failling to understand. " Barthes's essay argues against traditional literary criticism's practice of incorporating the INTENTIONS and biographical context of an author in an INTERPRETATION of a text, and instead argues that writing and creator are unrelated." this is exactly what i'm talking about, not about contradicting plot points. Yeah my comparison was not the best but serviceable if you have a little interpretation skill, a quality that you doesnt seem to possess. I, the writer, create a scientist and i keep writing about how smart he is and if someone asks me if he is smart i'll say "yes, absolutely" and yet i'm unable to write him as a smart character and he actually is dumb as fuck. Is everyone forced to accept that he is a smart character cause i said so? fuck no because the author can be wrong, your interpretation is that he is dumb and you are right despite anything the author says. Or you can accept any post-thoughts JK Rowling regurgitates on her works to appease fans and encourage "tell, don't show" writing, again, you do you, but in that case, yeah i can lecture you about critical thinking, lol. I also think that Erwin would not side with Eren, but because of my analysis on his character. Your examples are not servicable, they are trash. Barthes would burn his book if he saw what you have just written. The only example you posted where "The death of the author" applies is the J.K.R. situation, where she added information about her characters later, outside of her books. And yes, whether your fragile personality can take it or not, Rowling has the final say in her characters and her story. Not you, nor any other arrogant keyboard warrior who believes that he/she knows the story better than the author. Word of God is canon. You can have your own interpretation but in a fictional story CANON=FACTS. So cut the crap. When the author gives answers then your interpretation goes out the window. Do i like what Rowling did? No. I would have preferred for her to have written it inside the goddamn book series, instead of adding crap years later just to appeal to a certain part of her audience. Do i get any say? No. You can keep denying this as much as you want and call it critical thinking. I call it coping. So keep coping if that makes you feel better. It doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and that Rowling keeps making millions out of HER story. Write your own if you don't like it. This conversation is over. Yeah i'm coping so much that i have never even read any of her books, i just used a famous example, again you know nothing about the subject or the person you are arguing with, i have better things to do than being here explaining basic things to you. I do think that when you analyse his character deeply there's no room for interpretation, but thinking that people should accept "cAUsE gOD isaYAma SaID So" is lazy, dumb, and fits the essay perfectly. Dont be pissed about it, peace. Lol, i come from the other way around, i think once you analize his character deeply you found his will or spirit actually transmited to eren and floch. The only common point with armin and hange his curiosity for the rest of the world, but aside that everything else, his reasoning and demeanour falls along the other two. Yeah i might be wrong on this one but i dont see Erwin as the type who would sacrifice the majority for the sake of the minority(without having the knowledge of the future that Eren has). He sacrificed a lot of people sure but he thought they were fighting for mankind, which he always theorized the existence outside the walls. But you never know, he was a pretty conflicted character. |
Mar 24, 2021 12:23 PM
#66
| Now I'm 100% sure erwin would have sided with eren. In Season 3 Part 1 I think it was the last episode where Levi asks Erwin what he would do after basement. Erwin says something along the lines of, It won't be over until they destroy all the enemies who are controlling the titan. When Erwin said that I got reminded of this thread. To be fair I wasn't sure whether he would have sided with Eren but now I'm pretty sure |
Mar 24, 2021 10:22 PM
#67
CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. I agree with you. Erwin sacrifice everything and becomes devil because he wanna make sure his father theory. I dont think Erwin wanna kills innocent people. Erwin just sacrifice SC soldier who already accept their soul for his plans but never sacrificed innocent people for his plans |
Izzati_HernandezMar 24, 2021 10:26 PM
Mar 24, 2021 11:16 PM
#68
Izzati_Hernandez said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. I agree with you. Erwin sacrifice everything and becomes devil because he wanna make sure his father theory. I dont think Erwin wanna kills innocent people. Erwin just sacrifice SC soldier who already accept their soul for his plans but never sacrificed innocent people for his plans He might not have ordered it personally, but Erwin purposely provoked Annie at Stohess, a place full of civilians while fully knowing that she could go on a desperate rampage and destroying buildings and homes around her. He wouldn't go out of his way to kill innocents, but he also wouldn't really care if his actions would take their lives either. |
|
Mar 25, 2021 8:07 AM
#69
loli_a_ravioli said: Izzati_Hernandez said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. I agree with you. Erwin sacrifice everything and becomes devil because he wanna make sure his father theory. I dont think Erwin wanna kills innocent people. Erwin just sacrifice SC soldier who already accept their soul for his plans but never sacrificed innocent people for his plans He might not have ordered it personally, but Erwin purposely provoked Annie at Stohess, a place full of civilians while fully knowing that she could go on a desperate rampage and destroying buildings and homes around her. He wouldn't go out of his way to kill innocents, but he also wouldn't really care if his actions would take their lives either. Because of situation. If Erwin didnt catch Female titan quickly, SC will be disperse and SC doesnt get allow to Use Eren's titan. His father theory didnt revealed at that time. Eren desert from Paradis Government, used Paradis soldier to be Titan mindless. Did Erwin agree makes Paradis soldier being titan mindless? Erwin always says what SC doing is for mankind, if he killed Innocent people outside the wall, i dont think so. But yeah, the main reason why Erwin didnt want Levi give him Titan serum because he didnt wanna be devil again. Maybe he will sacrifice his mankind, agree with Eren, being a devil again, or maybe makes other plans for wars with outside wall or makes other plans manipulates outsidewall. But Erwin agree with Hange in manga 🤔. I think the best proof is when Erwin said to Hange "Hange, you are doing your best" If Erwin agree with Eren why Erwin compliment Hange? The one who make Alliance is Hange because she is SC commander |
IzzatiHernandezMar 25, 2021 8:36 AM
Mar 25, 2021 8:53 AM
#70
loli_a_ravioli said: Izzati_Hernandez said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. I agree with you. Erwin sacrifice everything and becomes devil because he wanna make sure his father theory. I dont think Erwin wanna kills innocent people. Erwin just sacrifice SC soldier who already accept their soul for his plans but never sacrificed innocent people for his plans He might not have ordered it personally, but Erwin purposely provoked Annie at Stohess, a place full of civilians while fully knowing that she could go on a desperate rampage and destroying buildings and homes around her. He wouldn't go out of his way to kill innocents, but he also wouldn't really care if his actions would take their lives either. Second, Erwin never believe with Eren, he just used Eren for his dreams. I think this is already reveal when Levi wanna give his Titan Cerum. Levi choose Armin because Armin has potential Dreams and has the same view like Erwin. There are more facts proof Erwin wouldnt agree with Eren. Third, Eren and Erwin POV is very very very different. eren sees a problem can only be solved by scuffling and killing. killing people who he felt could be killed. different from Erwin, he will think more deeply about what problems Eren will create if he agrees. There are many complications from rumbling. Even before being active, rumbling had done a lot of damage to Paradis. I dont think Erwin would agree with Eren 🤔 |
Mar 27, 2021 6:47 AM
#71
IzzatiHernandez said: loli_a_ravioli said: Izzati_Hernandez said: CrimsonGeek said: Anyone who believes that Erwin would side with Eren should reread the series. Isayama has made it abundantly clear via Hange and now through Levi that the veteran members of the SC would all fight against Eren. The only people who support Eren are ultranationalists, biggots and imperialists. Lowlifes in general. Erwin does not belong in such a group. Isayama has clearly tried to draw parallels between Erwin and Armin, especially in regards to their idealism. Erwin and the rest of the now dead veterans would all be part of the Alliance. However, with Erwin's leadership, instead of Hange's and Armin's Eren would never even unleash a full-scale Rumbling. Hell, he might not even have to unleash a partial one. I agree with you. Erwin sacrifice everything and becomes devil because he wanna make sure his father theory. I dont think Erwin wanna kills innocent people. Erwin just sacrifice SC soldier who already accept their soul for his plans but never sacrificed innocent people for his plans He might not have ordered it personally, but Erwin purposely provoked Annie at Stohess, a place full of civilians while fully knowing that she could go on a desperate rampage and destroying buildings and homes around her. He wouldn't go out of his way to kill innocents, but he also wouldn't really care if his actions would take their lives either. Second, Erwin never believe with Eren, he just used Eren for his dreams. I think this is already reveal when Levi wanna give his Titan Cerum. Levi choose Armin because Armin has potential Dreams and has the same view like Erwin. There are more facts proof Erwin wouldnt agree with Eren. Third, Eren and Erwin POV is very very very different. eren sees a problem can only be solved by scuffling and killing. killing people who he felt could be killed. different from Erwin, he will think more deeply about what problems Eren will create if he agrees. There are many complications from rumbling. Even before being active, rumbling had done a lot of damage to Paradis. I dont think Erwin would agree with Eren 🤔 Marley and the Alliance would fucking butcher them all had Eren didn't awaken the colossals. Even without the attack on Liberio, there was still a high chance that world alliance would still be formed to annihilate Paradis judging by the reactions from the diplomats at Willy's stage event. Besides all theories regarding Erwin's reaction would be just headcanons, even Hange's. Not the first time in this series that characters have wrong preconceptions about other people around them, case in point Armin and Mikasa toward Eren. |
|
Apr 5, 2021 7:23 AM
#73
| Yeagerists would kill him anyways. But he'd give his life for the corps. |
Mar 9, 2023 12:00 PM
#75
| great great analyse you have convinced me they should make a spin off ' like a parallel world ' where erwin stay alive i think it have a great potential |
May 16, 2023 10:30 PM
#76
| In principle Erwin would definitely support Eren, but not to the extent of how he did everything. Eren basically did what he did, because Armin and the rest are a bunch of pussies. They never killed who they had to kill when they had the chance and that complicated stuff. The little fucks like Gabby should be long gone. If we go by how they acted along the series, I truly believe they made the wrong choice on letting Armin live. Erwin and Eren would have planned everything better, and they might have used the rumbling but not the extent Eren did, maybe just fuck off Marley as a lesson, kill the remaining Titans, and with that under control let the world know if they even try for a bit the same shit, they would rumble the rest of the world. Do note Marley would have keep coming, they only thing changed their mind is getting bent over. Just because Gabby & Falco saw the "devils" were not bad is not going to melt their hearts. |
VrikaMay 16, 2023 10:34 PM
May 17, 2023 6:54 AM
#77
| I can't be the only one to think Erwin would not support Eren. Erwin was determinate, brave, but not a fricking psycho genocidal. I honestly think that, with him on Paradis' side, eldians could have estabilished a good political compromise with the rest of the world. Eren would have probably still tried to act on his own will, but I don't see Erwin siding with him. He was willing to sacrifice his own life for the future of his nation, he would have known Eren plan was leaking all over and it would have not been useful to get closer to "freedom". |
| Location: Turin, Italy |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 138 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )deg - Mar 5, 2021 |
1128 |
by Berry-Vodka
»»
11 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 139 / Ending Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )NextUniverse - Apr 7, 2021 |
1875 |
by Berry-Vodka
»»
12 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 4 DiscussionMagEarwhig - Sep 11, 2011 |
25 |
by HenryDanger
»»
Apr 24, 6:34 AM |
|
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 141 Discussionventi_e - Sep 30, 2022 |
32 |
by Berry-Vodka
»»
Apr 20, 1:36 PM |
|
Poll: » Shingeki no Kyojin Chapter 77 Discussion ( 1 2 3 )Stark700 - Jan 7, 2016 |
137 |
by Berry-Vodka
»»
Mar 31, 12:03 AM |