This is why I became a deconstructionist: deconstructionism teaches that authors create texts both consciously and unconsciously, and what they put into them is not necessarily what they intend to. Similarly, this information can't be retrieved without a reader for the text -- and readers inevitably interpret the text differently based on their own experiences and perspectives. The upshot? There is no right answer for meaning, and whatever you get out of a text is just as legitimately what is there as what anyone else gets.Arigatomina wrote:Guess you've never taken a college literature course.Szwagier wrote:I also never saw a poem with list of contexts that occur in this poem...
<snip>
Excessive explanation of videos is a vain attempt to fight back against deconstructionism and postmodernism, the whole basis of which is taking things out of context and laying them into new ones. On the internet, it's going to fail; random people will wander in and make what they want of what they see. The video information shouldn't tell you how to watch a video, but a couple short notes about what's in it and where it came from are always appreciated.
This view is, of course, biased by my own experiences: a lot of my videos are straight treatments of the music and don't require extensive notes, and those which have meaning were built from a deconstructionist perspective, so inherently they're going to mean different things to different people, and it's a waste of time trying to define a canonical point of view.
Hail Entropy.
--K
