Common joke regarding text interpretation. Like, English teacher says "These curtains are blue to symbolize depression." Author says, "The curtains were fucking blue."
It's said by people who only want literal interpretations of text and nothing else.
I don't want only literal interpretation of text but like sometimes the curtains really do be blue. Not everything in writing has to have some hidden meaning.
Ah, but the sort of people who like to read literature want there to be a hidden meaning in everything. To them, reading is like a child's Easter egg hunt: there is a colorful treasure everywhere, and all you have to do is dance about and collect them. Suggesting that the curtains are fucking blue is hurtful. It's like taking one of those beautifully colored Easter eggs and throwing it against a fence and saying, "SEE, it's just a chicken's egg, it's not really the coming of Christ!" From their point of view it's needlessly going out of your way to do something malicious to their delicate psyche.
Ah, but the sort of people who like to read literature want there to be a hidden meaning in everything. To them, reading is like a child’s Easter egg hunt: there is a colorful treasure everywhere, and all you have to do is dance about and collect them. Suggesting that the curtains are fucking blue is hurtful. It’s like taking one of those beautifully colored Easter eggs and throwing it against a fence and saying, “SEE, it’s just a chicken’s egg, it’s not really the coming of Christ!” From their point of view it’s needlessly going out of your way to do something malicious to their delicate psyche.
Ah, but the sort of people who like to consume products want there to be no hidden meaning to anything. To them, reading is words about things: there are things in the book, and they do things with no deeper meaning. Suggesting that those things can have deeper implied meanings sometimes is hurtful. It's like saying those things aren't just objects to pick up and wave around while making zooming and whooshing sounds, saying "SEE, the 80s GI Joe cartoon is actually military propaganda that sanitizes the idea of American imperialism and global hegemony!" From their point of view it's needlessly going out of your way to do something malicious to their delicate psyche.
There was no point to address except hostility to the idea of literary analysis. I addressed that by presenting matching hostility to that hostility in turn.
If I simply said "I hate Rick and Morty" with some additional words repeating myself about how I hate it, and then demanded that people "address my point" about hating Rick and Morty instead of just taking or leaving my declaration of hostility to that show, that'd be a :reddit-logo: move on my part.
All you said was "I hate literary analysis, I believe that people that talk about it are childish, delicate, and deluded people imagining things" with a lot of extra words, so I gave that "point" all the addressing it deserved.
Ah, but the sort of people who like to read literature want there to be a hidden meaning in everything. To them, reading is like a child’s Easter egg hunt: there is a colorful treasure everywhere, and all you have to do is dance about and collect them. Suggesting that the curtains are fucking blue is hurtful. It’s like taking one of those beautifully colored Easter eggs and throwing it against a fence and saying, “SEE, it’s just a chicken’s egg, it’s not really the coming of Christ!” From their point of view it’s needlessly going out of your way to do something malicious to their delicate psyche.
No words need to put in your mouth. You didn't say that anywhere in that paragraph of yours. It was presented, as written, as your own opinion of "the sort of people who like to read literature want there to be a hidden meaning in everything." At this point you just sound dishonest.
You had a hostile insulting take, complained that its "point" wasn't "addressed" and now you're apparently fabricating different intentions long after the fact. A day after the fact, in fact.
If you really wanted to claim otherwise before, you would have said that well before the "you didn't address my point" since your point was dubious to begin with besides presenting people that do literary analysis as (ironically) a strawman of childishness and delusion.
That may happen, but leaving the option open and allowing for literary analysis, even with some whoppers of subjectivity happening sometimes, is preferable to thought-terminating cliches that express contempt for the idea of the possibility of deeper meanings to things.
what?
Common joke regarding text interpretation. Like, English teacher says "These curtains are blue to symbolize depression." Author says, "The curtains were fucking blue."
It's said by people who only want literal interpretations of text and nothing else.
I don't want only literal interpretation of text but like sometimes the curtains really do be blue. Not everything in writing has to have some hidden meaning.
Ah, but the sort of people who like to read literature want there to be a hidden meaning in everything. To them, reading is like a child's Easter egg hunt: there is a colorful treasure everywhere, and all you have to do is dance about and collect them. Suggesting that the curtains are fucking blue is hurtful. It's like taking one of those beautifully colored Easter eggs and throwing it against a fence and saying, "SEE, it's just a chicken's egg, it's not really the coming of Christ!" From their point of view it's needlessly going out of your way to do something malicious to their delicate psyche.
Ah, but the sort of people who like to consume products want there to be no hidden meaning to anything. To them, reading is words about things: there are things in the book, and they do things with no deeper meaning. Suggesting that those things can have deeper implied meanings sometimes is hurtful. It's like saying those things aren't just objects to pick up and wave around while making zooming and whooshing sounds, saying "SEE, the 80s GI Joe cartoon is actually military propaganda that sanitizes the idea of American imperialism and global hegemony!" From their point of view it's needlessly going out of your way to do something malicious to their delicate psyche.
Two can play at that game. :gigachad-hd:
Huh? You didn't actually address the point or refute it. That came out of the blue.
There was no point to address except hostility to the idea of literary analysis. I addressed that by presenting matching hostility to that hostility in turn.
If I simply said "I hate Rick and Morty" with some additional words repeating myself about how I hate it, and then demanded that people "address my point" about hating Rick and Morty instead of just taking or leaving my declaration of hostility to that show, that'd be a :reddit-logo: move on my part.
All you said was "I hate literary analysis, I believe that people that talk about it are childish, delicate, and deluded people imagining things" with a lot of extra words, so I gave that "point" all the addressing it deserved.
Nah, I said that people have that reaction. But thanks for putting words in my mouth and incorrectly restating my idea. You're beating up a strawman.
No words need to put in your mouth. You didn't say that anywhere in that paragraph of yours. It was presented, as written, as your own opinion of "the sort of people who like to read literature want there to be a hidden meaning in everything." At this point you just sound dishonest.
You had a hostile insulting take, complained that its "point" wasn't "addressed" and now you're apparently fabricating different intentions long after the fact. A day after the fact, in fact.
If you really wanted to claim otherwise before, you would have said that well before the "you didn't address my point" since your point was dubious to begin with besides presenting people that do literary analysis as (ironically) a strawman of childishness and delusion.
That may happen, but leaving the option open and allowing for literary analysis, even with some whoppers of subjectivity happening sometimes, is preferable to thought-terminating cliches that express contempt for the idea of the possibility of deeper meanings to things.