Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 24
Date Signed Up:11/16/2010
Last Login:9/27/2016
Content Thumbs: 1942 total,  2337 ,  395
Comment Thumbs: 2859 total,  3659 ,  800
Content Level Progress: 39% (39/100)
Level 119 Content: Funny Junkie → Level 120 Content: Respected Member Of Famiry
Comment Level Progress: 54% (54/100)
Level 228 Comments: Mind Blower → Level 229 Comments: Mind Blower
Content Views:85726
Times Content Favorited:68 times
Total Comments Made:3925
FJ Points:5102
Favorite Tags: the (3) | are (2) | meme (2) | tags (2) | These (2) | trains (2)

latest user's comments

#88 - Maybe I can give you a little insight on this: The author does…  [+] (17 replies) 07/05/2015 on Fact Off +7
User avatar
#141 - angelious (07/05/2015) [-]
death of an author is just something idiots say when they completely miss the point of the story and spout stupid bullshit about it in a pathetic attempt to sound smart.

User avatar
#91 - lordogames (07/05/2015) [-]
The author, the person who created the writing, is not the one to decide the theme? How on earth is that even true? Even with the readers thinking one thing, if the author, the person that created the story, characters, AND theme, is stating that the book is about one thing, then it's about that one thing. You can't just say it isn't because it wasn't directly stated in the beginning of the book.
User avatar
#131 - teseus (07/05/2015) [-]
T. S. Elliot described two instances of the author: the man who suffers and the mind which creates. He stated that the man who suffers is the everyday average man which pays his taxes, goes shopping and ultimately lives while the mind which creates is the way we perceive the author from his books. Elliot thinks the greater the author is, the greater the rift between these two instances.

The mind which creates is way more important and the man who suffers shouldn't get involved with it. In the end, the real man who wrote a story will die, but the story will live on and it's going to be seen and understood differently by generations of readers to come. The only surviving author is going to be the one readers perceive.

What if Shakespeare, the man, actually wanted Romeo and Juliet to show how stupid teenagers are? It still wouldn't matter since his works allowed for all kinds of different interpretations and this is what makes him great.

Bradbury had the right to say that he never meant Fahrenheit 451 to be about censorship, but censorship can be seen as one of it's themes. He wrote the novel 60 years ago. The society changed and so did it's world views. There are enough clues to guide an analysis either way. He stated what was his intention while writing, but he has to accept that others may see different meanings.
User avatar
#130 - Triskiller (07/05/2015) [-]
You don't have to accept it, I just said I might be able to give some insight. Roland Barthes' theories have been very influential and most all academics in the literary field accept that authors do not have any authority when it comes to the meaning of a text. That is, there is not one, there are multiple. The student was also wrong in saying that it was about censorship, because it is ALSO about censorship. The idea of a text is that there are multiple interpretations and none of them are wrong, not even if the author tells you it's wrong.

But there is way too much of this to explain in a comment section, especially on FunnyJunk, a place that hates literary academics.
User avatar
#93 - thesecretbear (07/05/2015) [-]
Everyone decides the theme for themselves. If someone decides it's about censorship, then for them, it is about just that. The reality of intangable things such as ideas comes from the perception of them.
User avatar
#121 - psykobear (07/05/2015) [-]
The students weren't saying that, for them, it was about censorship. They were saying that it was about censorship period, not how they viewed it.
User avatar
#123 - thesecretbear (07/05/2015) [-]
Because to them that is the fucking facts. Most people do not work on the basis of "This is what it means for me because it's my interpretation, but everyone can have their own" it would be good if they did but unfortunately they don't.
They view it a specific way, and because of that they refuse to even consider that the author might be right, to them it doesn't make sense. That is the danger of interpreting books, and that is why English lit majors are annoying to discuss with.
User avatar
#124 - psykobear (07/05/2015) [-]
Then we're in agreement that they are wrong, technically.
User avatar
#125 - thesecretbear (07/05/2015) [-]
idk man just see my comment #101, I think that puts it into words a bit better.
User avatar
#94 - lordogames (07/05/2015) [-]
Sure, there is personal view on things, but when an author tells you his/her writing is about something, you can't tell other people and even insist to the author themselves that any other meaning is wrong. Personal =/= Actual
User avatar
#97 - thesecretbear (07/05/2015) [-]
But to the person who is unconvinced by that, it is still their reality. Whether we think they are right or not it will likely not change their view.
I read the book, and personally even though the author said what it's about, i find it hard to swallow just because of the content. But as ipostcheesepizza said, it's got a lot of themes to it, as do most good books. So to limit it to one overlying theme is a bit of a stretch.
User avatar
#100 - Dincorta (07/05/2015) [-]
For me, when the person who created the work speaks about something I previously had a personal opinion on, I am literally being corrected.
The author is telling me his intentions, his meaning, and that becomes fact from that point on. My previous opinion is nullified by the truth.
You cannot have an opinion on something that is no longer open to interpretation.
That's my opinion anyway. I'll wait until the gods speak out until I change my mind on that
User avatar
#99 - lordogames (07/05/2015) [-]
You may be unconvinced by it, but in actuality the main theme is what the author has said. Sure, you might take a different view on it, and sure, you might want to make a case for it. But if you literally make the author so frustrated he will leave your college in such a manner, clearly your case isn't being presented well, or you're denying the opposing case. In this instance, the authors.
User avatar
#102 - Dincorta (07/05/2015) [-]
I completely agree with you.
User avatar
#107 - lordogames (07/05/2015) [-]
Thanks fam.
User avatar
#101 - thesecretbear (07/05/2015) [-]
Well his first mistake was to start an argument with English Lit. majors, that in itself is going to be a frusturating experience.
I will admit I sort of see what he was going for, but that's the problem with books. The author may mean for a message, but it could be conveyed poorly and instead translate to a different message.

In short, I see what he was going for, and that was indeed the intended message of the book, but it translated poorly to the audience of it enough to have a different meaning.

User avatar
#103 - lordogames (07/05/2015) [-]
Fair enough.
#28 - Comment deleted 05/21/2014 on imagine 0
#47 - What a pathetic virgin nerd playing league of faggots lol  [+] (2 replies) 04/16/2014 on Good guy anon -18
#248 - anon (04/17/2014) [-]
why not log out and say that like a real fag?
User avatar
#262 - Triskiller (04/17/2014) [-]
It wasn't really me who said it, just wanted to see what would happen.