Star Wars: 4000 posts later we are no closer to consensus

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Star Wars: 4000 posts later we are no closer to consensus

«‹›861 »

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

I'm glad the author is dead and a text must stand on its own because, speaking as a racist, it was very inconvenient to have to consider Langston Hughes' blackness when reading his poetry.

I thank you, most educated and well-read schollards, for this un-looked-for privilege.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 14:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 08:43

BravestOfTheLamps: Oct 12, 2012; by FactsAreUseless; Lipstick Apathy

We judge authors not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their work.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 15:10

Captain Jesus: Feb 26, 2009; What's wrong with you? You don't even have your beer goggles on!!

One day a poster from this thread will rise to an elected office and his stance on droid personhood will come to haunt him.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 15:35

MonsieurChoc: Oct 12, 2013; Every species can smell its own extinction.

Cnut the Great posted:

I think you're lashing out because I have the superior argument, backed up by reams of evidence completely independent of any authorial statements. I do think the quotes from Lucas make you angry, frustrated, and embarrassed even though you claim not to care about them. But I can't prove that.

Your argument is based on ignoring what actually happens on all the scenes involving Droids because you think Artifical Intelligence with sentience is impossible in the real world.

Star Wars isn't the real world. It's a fictional universe. Much like Elves aren't real but within the confines of Lord of the Rings they are people, so are Droids in Star Wars.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 15:39

KVeezy3: Aug 18, 2005; Airport Music for Black Folk

Cnut the Great posted:

George Lucas is a fascist, white supremacist pedophile. This is now canon.

They're clearly not, though, for all the reasons that I've repeatedly stated and shown, and backed up by the creator's consistently stated intent. Doesn't it bother you that you so enjoy a work created by a white supremacist? I mean, obviously a lot of people enjoy Wagner's music, but that's comparatively a lot more abstracted from the man himself. In comparison, George Lucas's hateful droidist ideology is inherent throughout every bit of his work. How can you just ignore that? It's pretty hosed up. At least I'm pointing it out and shining a light on it. You're just sticking your head in the sand and denying that it's there because you don't want to give up your pew pew space laser movies. It would be like someone denying that The Birth of a Nation is racist. This poo poo matters, man. It hurts people.

One reason the absolutist reading of the death of the author argument is so flawed is because it abrogates the responsibility of an artist for the content of his work. I think George Lucas should have to take responsibility for his beliefs, which he has chosen to express through film. Do you?

Have you read "The Death of the Author" recently? The "Death" has nothing to do with responsibility, but where truth is found in a piece of writing.

It holds the author responsible for what they produce by engaging the work directly, through the act of reading. What you're advocating for actually holds the author less responsible, by imposing a limit on the text that makes ideological critique so severely limited as to be useless.

Cnut the Great posted:

Of course interpretation is still necessary. You can't rely on the author's intent for everything, because eventually the well of quotes runs dry, or you run up against conflicting or unclear statements. Sometimes the textual evidence is unclear or ambiguous. Sometimes an alternative interpretation makes more sense.

I'm talking about interpreting the quotes themselves. People have been trying to write that your interpretations of these quotes do not line up with the text of the films, that the films do not sufficiently depict a "hateful droidist ideology."

Bonaventure posted:

I'm glad the author is dead and a text must stand on its own because, speaking as a racist, it was very inconvenient to have to consider Langston Hughes' blackness when reading his poetry.

I thank you, most educated and well-read schollards, for this un-looked-for privilege.

Are you saying that Hughes' poetry does not stand on its own? Do you realize that he references American blackness in the poetry itself?

# ? Feb 3, 2019 15:55

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

quote:

Harlem

What happens to a dream deferred?
Does it dry up
like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore�
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over�
like a syrupy sweet?

Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

What? The word Harlem is meaningless to me on its own; shall I seek outside context to this poem to discover its blackness? Sola scriptura lectorque solus.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 16:02

KVeezy3: Aug 18, 2005; Airport Music for Black Folk

"The Death of the Author" is not the "The Death of Context". It makes the exact opposite of a positivist view of literature. The essay is very short, you should consider reading it.

KVeezy3 fucked around with this message at 16:11 on Feb 3, 2019

# ? Feb 3, 2019 16:08

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

KVeezy3 posted:

"The Death of the Author" is not the "The Death of Context". The essay is very short, you should read it.

I read it in grad school. It did not impress me then (its historicity is abominable-- the author is a shaman?? and Barthes' claim that authorship is a recent innovation seems totally ignorant of the classical tradition and its treatment of authors outside of possibly reading part of the Republic) nor did the professor fully believe in it. "A necessary corrective at the time but it went too far." Nothing anyone's said in these interminable threads has convinced me to re-evaluate my position on the essay.

I find it disappointing that no-one responded to this post in another thread, which is relevant: https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3879338#post491554212

This thread reminds me of something else from grad school -- I moderated a session at an undergraduate conference on Shakespeare, where someone wrote a paper claiming that Desdemona commits suicide in Othello. Desdemona is famously strangled to death on stage. The writer argued that she took poison between scenes which coincidentally kicked in while her husband was throttling her. "Why would the playwright have hidden from the audience an element of the plot so essential to the drama?" I asked. The writer of the paper simply shrugged. Reading 75% of the posts in this thread gives me the same feeling I had while listening to that paper.

Bonaventure fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Feb 3, 2019

# ? Feb 3, 2019 16:15

BravestOfTheLamps: Oct 12, 2012; by FactsAreUseless; Lipstick Apathy

Bonaventure posted:

This thread reminds me of something else from grad school -- I moderated a session at an undergraduate conference on Shakespeare, where someone wrote a paper claiming that Desdemona commits suicide in Othello. Desdemona is famously strangled to death on stage. The writer argued that she took poison between scenes which coincidentally kicked in while her husband was throttling her. "Why would the playwright have hidden from the audience an element of the plot so essential to the drama?" I asked. The writer of the paper simply shrugged. Reading 75% of the posts in this thread gives me the same feeling I had while listening to that paper.

The personhood of droids is never hidden from the audience. It's explicit in their actions and their dialogue.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 17:10

SuperMechagodzilla: Jun 9, 2007; NEWT REBORN

Bonaventure posted:

I read it in grad school. It did not impress me then (its historicity is abominable-- the author is a shaman??

The essay does not say the author is a shaman.

It says the opposite of that.

You should probably actually read it (or read it again), because you�re making basic errors like the above. It seems you�re going largely off of other people�s summaries (�my professor said that it goes too far(?)�), and the result is that you literally do not know the basic thesis of the essay - which, it bears repeating, is only like five pages long.

SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Feb 3, 2019

# ? Feb 3, 2019 17:50

Ferrinus: Jun 19, 2003; i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Bonaventure posted:

I'm glad the author is dead and a text must stand on its own because, speaking as a racist, it was very inconvenient to have to consider Langston Hughes' blackness when reading his poetry.

I thank you, most educated and well-read schollards, for this un-looked-for privilege.

Breaking � discovery of lost D. W. Griffith memoir renders Birth of a Nation (1915) no longer racist!

Ferrinus fucked around with this message at 18:06 on Feb 3, 2019

# ? Feb 3, 2019 17:55

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

The essay does not say the author is a shaman.

It says the opposite of that.

I interpret Barthes advocating for a regression to this purported previous status of the deliverer of narrative with the author no longer / once again not a 'person' but with the mediator/shaman role supplanted or taken over by the reader. It is the same language.

Nothing you say will convince me that the essay's ideas are valid. But why am I responding to you? I at least respect BotL's critical acumen.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:15

Schwarzwald: Jul 27, 2004; Don't Blink

Cnut the Great posted:

Droid are machines. They are programs.

"Machine," in the context Kasdan is using the term, means "tool." A hover car is a machine. A targeting computer is a machine. Life-support systems are machines. By this definition, Droids are not machines.

Droids are also not programs, although they can be programmed. AotC shows that even human beings can be programmed, however, so it isn't helpful as a manner to distinguishing the two.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:21

Question Friend: Aug 3, 2018; by FactsAreUseless

Do you guys think there's going to an episode IX trailer at the superbowl

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:23

Question Friend: Aug 3, 2018; by FactsAreUseless

Cnut the Great posted:

I think you're lashing out because I have the superior argument, backed up by reams of evidence completely independent of any authorial statements. I do think the quotes from Lucas make you angry, frustrated, and embarrassed even though you claim not to care about them. But I can't prove that.

Goddamn you guys need to get laid

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:24

Ingmar terdman: Jul 24, 2006

I hope IX ends with Rey just going back to her atat in disgust after she's helped the Skywalker family finally kill itself off. Basically like Sam gamgee in return of the king, except she'll have a lightsaber with a bottle opener on one end to help crush some cold cans

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:26

Question Friend: Aug 3, 2018; by FactsAreUseless

Ingmar terdman posted:

I hope IX ends with Rey just going back to her atat in disgust after she's helped the Skywalker family finally kill itself off. Basically like Sam gamgee in return of the king, except she'll have a lightsaber with a bottle opener on one end to help crush some cold cans

The leak says it ends with Kylo dead, Lando in possession of the Falcon, Rey training a new generation of jedis and a few mysteries set up to be solved in a later trilogy

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:31

RBA Starblade: Apr 28, 2008; Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

Is there anyone here who didnt fail English lit

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:34

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

i got a grad degree in it which is the worst kind of failure life offers

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:36

Question Friend: Aug 3, 2018; by FactsAreUseless

All you have to do to pass English lit is say that the Lord of the Flies is the devil within the heart of man

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:38

SuperMechagodzilla: Jun 9, 2007; NEWT REBORN

Bonaventure posted:

I interpret Barthes advocating for a regression to this purported previous status of the deliverer of narrative with the author no longer / once again not a 'person' but with the mediator/shaman role supplanted or taken over by the reader. It is the same language.

And that is a very clear misinterpretation. Barthes uses the term �scriptor� to refer to a new type of author that is not a shaman, and calls for the birth of the reader - not the birth of the shaman.

There is nothing in the essay about a �regression� to shamanic practices.

There is nothing in the essay that says authors aren�t people.

You are making big, obvious mistakes. Your grad school has done you wrong.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:39

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

There is nothing in the essay that says authors aren�t people.

lol you're the one who needs to re-read it.

also, from earlier here is where Barthes indeed advocates for the death of context (emphasis mine)

quote:

To give
an Author to a text is to impose upon that text a stop clause, to furnish it with a final
signification, to close the writing. This conception perfectly suits criticism, which
can then take as its major task the discovery of the Author (or his hypostases: society,
history, the psyche, freedom) beneath the work: once the Author is discovered, the
text is �explained:� the critic has conquered; hence it is scarcely surprising not only
that, historically, the reign of the Author should also have been that of the Critic, but
that criticism (even �new criticism�) should be overthrown along with the Author.

utter trash.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 18:52

sponges: Sep 15, 2011

MonsieurChoc posted:

Your argument is based on ignoring what actually happens on all the scenes involving Droids because you think Artifical Intelligence with sentience is impossible in the real world.

Star Wars isn't the real world. It's a fictional universe. Much like Elves aren't real but within the confines of Lord of the Rings they are people, so are Droids in Star Wars.

Droids are hardware and software

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:03

BravestOfTheLamps: Oct 12, 2012; by FactsAreUseless; Lipstick Apathy

Bonaventure posted:

lol you're the one who needs to re-read it.

also, from earlier here is where Barthes indeed advocates for the death of context (emphasis mine)

utter trash.

He isn't calling for the death of context. What he's criticizing is trying to treat art as historical artefacts rather than something that its audience will always interpret and reinterpret.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:11

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

i am largely an historicist, so

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:18

MonsieurChoc: Oct 12, 2013; Every species can smell its own extinction.

sponges posted:

Droids are hardware and software

So? In the world of the fantasy movie of Star Wars, that doesn't matter at all.

They show emotions, free will, pain, fear, everything. To think that somehow all of this is meaningless is to willfully ignore the movies themselves.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:21

Schwarzwald: Jul 27, 2004; Don't Blink

sponges posted:

Droids are hardware and software

So are human beings. Obiwan tours their manufacturing plant.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:29

No Mods No Masters: Oct 3, 2004

A human on tatooine and a droid on jakku walk into a bar. But I repeat myself

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:31

Grendels Dad: Mar 5, 2011; Popular culture has passed you by.

No Mods No Masters posted:

A human on tatooine and a droid on jakku walk into a bar. But I repeat myself

"Why the long face?" asked the barman.

"gently caress you, Jim!" answered Horse Pilot.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:41

RBA Starblade: Apr 28, 2008; Going Home.

Games Idiot Court Jester

No Mods No Masters posted:

A human on tatooine and a droid on jakku walk into a bar. But I repeat myself

Oh hoh hoh

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:49

Calibanibal: Aug 25, 2015

Bonaventure posted:

Nothing you say will convince me that the essay's ideas are valid. But why am I responding to you? I at least respect BotL's critical acumen.

This thread rules

# ? Feb 3, 2019 19:51

SuperMechagodzilla: Jun 9, 2007; NEWT REBORN

Bonaventure posted:

lol you're the one who needs to re-read it.

also, from earlier here is where Barthes indeed advocates for the death of context (emphasis mine)

utter trash.

Ok, so we�ve isolated one source of your mistakes: you don�t know what the word �hypostasis� means.

In the Christian trinity, the one God exists as three hypostases: father, son, and holy spirit. Three �persons� with the same one essence. Barthes is using that theological metaphor to describe the �Big Other�, listing it�s various names.

Barthes is writing simply that you should not let the society that produced the book (for example) tell you what a book means. You have to read it for yourself. The goal of criticism is not to identify the society and say �ok, this is a medieval Scottish text. The end.�

There is absolutely nothing in that quote about the death of context. You are making bad mistakes.

SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Feb 3, 2019

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:16

Slutitution: Jun 26, 2018; by Nyc_Tattoo

No Mods No Masters posted:

The thread is about family. And that's what's so powerful about it

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:20

banned from Starbucks: Jul 18, 2004

Question Friend posted:

The leak says it ends with Kylo dead, Lando in possession of the Falcon, Rey training a new generation of jedis and a few mysteries set up to be solved in a later trilogy

What leaks? Post them please.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:22

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Ok, so we�ve isolated one source of your mistakes: you don�t know what the word �hypostasis� means.

In the Christian trinity, the one God exists as three hypostases: father, son, and holy spirit. Three �persons� with the same one essence. Barthes is using that theological metaphor to describe the �Big Other�.

Barthes is writing simply that you should not let society (for example) tell you what a book means. You have to read it for yourself.

There is absolutely nothing in that quote about the death of context. You are making bad mistakes.

hi SuperMechaGodzilla, I know what hypostases are but thanks. You're wrong in your reading of what Barthes is saying there. I am correct. You are making bad mistakes.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:25

Waffles Inc.: Jan 20, 2005

Bonaventure posted:

hi SuperMechaGodzilla, I know what hypostases are but thanks. You're wrong in your reading of what Barthes is saying there. I am correct. You are making bad mistakes.

What uh

What's the angle here?

I mean, for a laugh, sure, but still. What's the...point?

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:27

Slutitution: Jun 26, 2018; by Nyc_Tattoo

Cnut the Great posted:

Vader can barely breathe. Breath is life, which is the Force. Vader has been cut off from the breath of life, forced to draw breath from a machine. Because of this, he is incapable of overthrowing his master, even though he was once destined to become more powerful than the Emperor. This is why he must turn to Luke for help. It is also why the Emperor wishes to replace Vader with Luke.

No one ever said it had anything to do with biomass. Force power is based on life energy flowing through the body. But the energy channels of Vader's body have been compromised. His body is not a properly functioning body. It is on perpetual life support. It should be a dead body. The only reason it isn't is because of the machinery keeping him alive artificially. His body has lost its vitality.

This isn't some completely made-up concept. Within Traditional Chinese Medicine, it is accepted that a physical injury can lead to a blockage of chi. Of course this has no real medical meaning, but that's to be expected, because neither chi nor the energy field called the Force are scientifically real. Chi, like the Force, is just a word for something that you feel. It's not hard to imagine that you feel a flow of energy through your body. You feel it when you exercise: You're energized. There's an electric feeling throughout your body. You feel good, healthy, whole. You feel at one with everything. But when you're sick, or injured, or stressed out, you don't feel this way. You feel a tension in your body, a tightening, a knotting. Everything feels wrong. Your body is screaming at you, drowning out the world around you. This is how Darth Vader feels, 24/7, 365 days out of the year. It is impossible for him to be in full harmony with nature, because his body is in such an extreme state of disharmony with itself.

We may be luminous beings, but we are currently confined to the crude matter which constitutes our bodies. The luminous energy resides within our bodies while we are alive, animating it. When our bodies are in a state of health, the channels are open and the luminous energy inside us is free to connect and mingle with the cosmic energy of the universe. When our bodies are in a state of sickness or disrepair, the channels are closed or blocked, and that same luminous energy can no longer express itself.

It may be possible to bypass these physical limitations, but this is only possible by transcending the limitations of the body. Stephen Hawking and Christopher Reeve certainly seemed to have managed this to remarkable degrees through sheer force of will. But I don't think I would be too presumptuous in imagining that both of them still felt trapped within their bodies to a certain extent, which is of course perfectly understandable. No one fully transcends their body until they leave their body behind. That's what makes us mortal, as opposed to all-powerful gods.

Is calling Mace Windu the n-word racist?

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:28

Bonaventure: Jun 23, 2005; by sebmojo

Waffles Inc. posted:

What uh

What's the angle here?

I mean, for a laugh, sure, but still. What's the...point?

exactly

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:32

Ferrinus: Jun 19, 2003; i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Bonaventure posted:

hi SuperMechaGodzilla, I know what hypostases are but thanks. You're wrong in your reading of what Barthes is saying there. I am correct. You are making bad mistakes.

In that quote, Barthes says that attempting to �discover� the author or originating culture in a work is a mistake or waste of time. He is not calling for the death of context, but saying that discovering or confirming a work�s context (�Ah hah... the prequel films are saying that G. W. Bush is bad! We�ve cracked it, boys!�) should not be the goal of the reader.

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 5, 2024 08:43

piratepilates: Mar 28, 2004; So I will learn to live with it. Because I can live with it. I can live with it.

were the prequels born out of a context of the GWB presidency? only the third one was developed while he was in office. I was like 9 at this time so I can't remember politics first-hand, was GWB's rise to power while he was a governor an influential enough event to have inspired george lucas?

piratepilates fucked around with this message at 20:57 on Feb 3, 2019

# ? Feb 3, 2019 20:53

The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Star Wars: 4000 posts later we are no closer to consensus

«‹›861 »