Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Melissia wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Doesn't the text speak for itself?

Lol, no. Name me a 100% objective human being capable of reading a book without inherent biases, and I'll call you a liar, because not only does no such person exist, no such person CAN exist.

Ah, the ol' "The curtains were blue" argument.

 Melissia wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Doesn't the text speak for itself?

Lol, no. Name me a 100% objective human being capable of reading a book without inherent biases, and I'll call you a liar, because not only does no such person exist, no such person CAN exist.

That doesn't invalidate the text speaking for itself, independent of the views of the author. You just described how the reader's views and ideologies affect their interpretation of a work. That is a completely different thing.

As for naming a human who can read a book without inherent biases? That is not what is required when you talk about death of the author. What is required is an interpretation of the work which does not reference the views of the author which are not present in the book.

An example of such a reader would be anyone unaware of the political views of the author. Do you think most people who read Ender's Game are aware of the fact that Orson Scott Card is a homophobe, for example?

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Doesn't the text speak for itself?

Lol, no. Name me a 100% objective human being capable of reading a book without inherent biases, and I'll call you a liar, because not only does no such person exist, no such person CAN exist.

That doesn't invalidate the text speaking for itself, independent of the views of the author. You just described how the reader's views and ideologies affect their interpretation of a work. That is a completely different thing.

As for naming a human who can read a book without inherent biases? That is not what is required when you talk about death of the author. What is required is an interpretation of the work which does not reference the views of the author which are not present in the book.

An example of such a reader would be anyone unaware of the political views of the author. Do you think most people who read Ender's Game are aware of the fact that Orson Scott Card is a homophobe, for example?

Hell, do people even realize that he is a Mormon? Surely that's colored the books a bit?

All this talk of Death of the Author reminds me of a story I once read.

There was a lecture being given about Fahrenheit 451 by a guest lecturer. The lecturer began to explain the theme of the book, that being the dangers of television.

A student shouted out of turn, screeching "No, it's about censorship!". The lecturer gently tried to, once again, explain that it wasn't, but the student wasn't having any of it.

The lecturers name? Ray Bradbury, the guy who wrote the damn book in the first place!

http://www.factfiend.com/ray-bradbury-told-interpretation-book-wrong/
http://www.laweekly.com/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/

 BaconCatBug wrote:
All this talk of Death of the Author reminds me of a story I once read.

There was a lecture being given about Fahrenheit 451 by a guest lecturer. The lecturer began to explain the theme of the book, that being the dangers of television.

A student shouted out of turn, screeching "No, it's about censorship!". The lecturer gently tried to, once again, explain that it wasn't, but the student wasn't having any of it.

The lecturers name? Ray Bradbury, the guy who wrote the damn book in the first place!

http://www.factfiend.com/ray-bradbury-told-interpretation-book-wrong/
http://www.laweekly.com/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/

Wellp, horses mouth and all that....

but goes to exemplify that as soon as the author decides to comment , death off author goes out of the window.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
All this talk of Death of the Author reminds me of a story I once read.

There was a lecture being given about Fahrenheit 451 by a guest lecturer. The lecturer began to explain the theme of the book, that being the dangers of television.

A student shouted out of turn, screeching "No, it's about censorship!". The lecturer gently tried to, once again, explain that it wasn't, but the student wasn't having any of it.

The lecturers name? Ray Bradbury, the guy who wrote the damn book in the first place!

http://www.factfiend.com/ray-bradbury-told-interpretation-book-wrong/
http://www.laweekly.com/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/

Wellp, horses mouth and all that....

but goes to exemplify that as soon as the author decides to comment , death off author goes out of the window.

Not really. If that student is able to point out themes and passages within the text to justify their interpretation then theirs is equally as valid as that of the authors.

Bradbury may have intended the book to be a critique of the dangers of television but that does not mean it didn't also end up being a critique of censorship.

Also I cannot help but notice that you changed "loudly exclaiming" to "screeching", where the latter has a definite negative connotation associated with it. Also, it wasn't just one student who had that interpretation and Bradbury stormed out of the lecture.

True, however , take lovecraft, understaning him as author also makes understaning some of the Thema alot more easy, it's the mindset that counts and for that we should not Discount what we know about an author.

I baffled by the desire to treat the concept of death of the author as an absolute here, in either direction.

The idea behind death of the author in modern literary criticism is that a creator's interpretation of a work is not the only valid one, not that their interpretation doesn't matter (and frankly, even Roland Barthes didn't go that far in his original conception of the idea).

An audience will define the meaning of a work for themselves and that meaning can, and often will, include elements the author did not intend and might even disagree with. Art is dialogue with extra steps. Neither the author, nor the audience, is the sole dictator of meaning.

 Melissia wrote:
Lol, no. Name me a 100% objective human being capable of reading a book without inherent biases, and I'll call you a liar, because not only does no such person exist, no such person CAN exist.

I can. =)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Can I just say I am so glad that this game not only sold better than candy in a kindergarten, but that so many of the first game's fanbase seem to hate it so much.

Because the first game was mediocrity touted as the apex of video games, and now that the sequel is just as mediocre but in a way they don't like they're losing their minds, while most of the masses don't give a gak.

I love it.

Did it really sell well?

The first one Sold Double that in a smaller (at the time) Market within the first Month...

Wasn't that mostly due to marketing (there was that trailer that had Joel talking with Ellie. Didn't happen in the game, Joel's lines went to some other guy) and love for the first game?

Didn't sales quickly fall off and Sony had to stop returns because there were just so many refunds coming in? I don't think its that much of a success story.

So glad this game has happened and then died.

I'm not really much into gaming anymore outside of a few titles that peak my interest but listening to all the nonsense and hyperbole was annoying as hell.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Did it really sell well?

The first one Sold Double that in a smaller (at the time) Market within the first Month...

In three weeks TLOU sold over 3.4 million units.

In one weekend TLOU2 sold over four million units. =)

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Did it really sell well?

The first one Sold Double that in a smaller (at the time) Market within the first Month...

In three weeks TLOU sold over 3.4 million units.

In one weekend TLOU2 sold over four million units. =)

Erm the first Month saw 8 Million sales for tlou, this one Sees 4.
So where did you get those numbers?!

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Did it really sell well?

The first one Sold Double that in a smaller (at the time) Market within the first Month...

In three weeks TLOU sold over 3.4 million units.

In one weekend TLOU2 sold over four million units. =)

Really? I read TLOU2 sold 2.8 million in its first month, which apparently is still a record, mind you.
Well, at least until Ghost of Tsushima got released. The record then went to it.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Did it really sell well?

The first one Sold Double that in a smaller (at the time) Market within the first Month...

In three weeks TLOU sold over 3.4 million units.

In one weekend TLOU2 sold over four million units. =)

Really? I read TLOU2 sold 2.8 million in its first month, which apparently is still a record, mind you.
Well, at least until Ghost of Tsushima got released. The record then went to it.

went by simple google search:

Sony stated that the last of us 2 sold until june 21 4 million.

screwed up a bit, TLOU sold within the first week 1.3 million copies.

tsushima did in 3 days 2.4 million copies.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Did it really sell well?

The first one Sold Double that in a smaller (at the time) Market within the first Month...

In three weeks TLOU sold over 3.4 million units.

In one weekend TLOU2 sold over four million units. =)

Really? I read TLOU2 sold 2.8 million in its first month, which apparently is still a record, mind you.
Well, at least until Ghost of Tsushima got released. The record then went to it.

went by simple google search:

Sony stated that the last of us 2 sold until june 21 4 million.

screwed up a bit, TLOU sold within the first week 1.3 million copies.

tsushima did in 3 days 2.4 million copies.

Yeah, I found the problem - they sold 2.8 million digital copies in June, but 4 million total, as in 1.2 physical copies.
Ghost of Tsushima sold less, but for a new IP it did exceptionally well, that's what it broke the record for, it would seem.

I would hazard that as TLOU was a well received game, it would stand to reason that its sequel would have a good first month.
It would seem that 2/3 of those digital sales were pre-orders, as in, before people actually played the game and gave feedback.

 LunarSol wrote:
[
That's really what's upsetting to me. There's just no discussion to be had. Yer either widdus or aggainus discussions only.

It's uncomfortable reading, all right. I really don't get why it matters how well the game did or didn't objectively sell (or what "most gamers" think, or whatever). Because it will prove someone right in their opinion (which, appeals to popularity or snobbery aside, is as subjective and unprovable as mine is) that it was good or bad? I don't see what I can really gain from this over telling someone their opinion is baseless. A statement which they'll either ignore or at "best", will persuade someone that they didn't actually have fun when they thought they were.

There just seems (and not just here or on this topic) to be not just disagreement, but utter incomprehension about how someone could have a different opinion on even such a relatively trivial subject.

That was my observation from this discussion as well. I presented my positive impressions and was attacked by others who apparently wanted to invalidate it (with "objective" statements like "this game is bad" or "you have low expectations from games"). But you can't really invalidate someone's impression or emotions felt during the game (or whatever else) Just like opinions "vanilla ice cream tastes better" and "chocolate ice cream tastes better" do not invalidate each other despite being contrary to each other.

My guess is, bo by doing that they in fact wanted to validate their opinions. It's a pretty common cognitive problem - our brains don't deal well with the feeling of being wrong or existance of people who think differently.

Also don't forget that many of those strong opinions come from people who didn't beat the game or even didn't play it at all.