The curtains were fucking blue

YO LISTEN UP

>seeing things that aren't there
literal delusion

Because black curtains make the inside of the house look dismal and depressing. Majorly fucks with the lighting and makes the room feel crammed.

Using "death of the author" is a red flag that someone has been poisoned by post-modernism.

>they fell for the 'author as the formal source of truth' meme
>they fell for the Barthesian meme
Your critical theory is stuck in the 1950s

Attached: 1391332134069.png (974x1000, 373K)

English teachers are mediocre people

Explain why post modernism is bad without screeching about women or minorities

post-modernism is a spook

Attached: 1200px-MaxStirner1.svg.png (1200x1555, 84K)

otherwise they'd be doing actual work

>black curtains majorly fuck white lighting
based blacked poster

RED

THE COLOR OF DESIRE

You're free to invite the author into the text

film school professers have to be far worse id imagine

This is strange because this meme only relates to underage children still in school but I'm sure you're not one of them OP.

there is no worse hell than critiquing a film you've seen

im noticing this shit more and more due to progressive leftist insanity.
The most obnoxious thing they do is try to claim the author/directors own comments are invalid,

Because reality is awesome, and we shouldn't deny it.

Deus Ex Human Revolution had a gold hue to represent Icarus flying too close to the sun

Attached: B5CAE80B-7593-466C-96CC-7501BD10CBD1.jpg (1280x540, 115K)

based

t. a retard

t.jewbabble

Fuck you my mom is an English teacher and she’s based. Get a job and have sex you dirty neet.

Attached: 87CC1B68-0873-4F64-9AA8-D49EC00F690C.jpg (598x415, 60K)

WE WUZ KURTAINZ N SHIET

>i reject your reality and substitute my own

Schizoid solipsistic shit.

and here you are on Yea Forums so clearly she fucked something up

Yep. It's an instant excuse myself from the conversation red flag at every social function.

Easy. It's a negative philosophy, and ultimately self-terminating. Yes, you can establish that nothing matters, but it absolutely refuses to answer the most dangerous question of all, "Now What?" It utter inhibits spiritual growth, and ushers in a new worship of the material. It feels less like any sort of movement, and more like a bunch of intellectuals that are just mad at life.

it inevitably molds into the politics of the moment

>clearly the author was making a statement about the oppressiveness of gender stereotypes

It's a one way ticket to psychosis.

Yeah I should be on reddit and twitter like you, right?

RREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

child or midwit detected

my high school english teacher was pretty much here's my opinion about this

later in college i met a girl who knew all about how to take apart a work of literature according to theme, tropes, possible symbolism, historical reference, metaphorical trends

she was a slut but knew much more about literature, the mechanics anyway

Just because you're a senior now doesn't mean you're old enough to post on Yea Forums. Come back in 1 year after feeling bitter from no prom date.

>english class
fuck muh symbols desu

Attached: 1536535625151.jpg (300x345, 49K)

Imagine being this far up your own ass.

I made that image back in 2011. I also am now an English teacher. I don't appreciate the combination of your post & image.

>art is subjective based on the observer’s interpretation
Fuck off you post-Derrida scum. Your kind has destroyed the beauty of art and reduced it to an absurdist ‘race to the bottom’ of ego and shock effect. People like you are one of the main factors that caused the rise of Hitler.

>Suggesting that only an elite group of 'properly trained' critics are capable of producing correct interpretations.
Forming a new religion with lit profs as the high priests is a pretty bad idea user

No its a good idea because then I am a genius just by associating myself with the elite says

>ywn experience a time when "death of the author" simply means Author Existence Failure.
At least I learned to hate these people fairly early in life

>Validly assignable meanings by disciplinary critique
Pure sophistry using nonsense 'academic sounding' jargon. Glorious bullshit to behold. Imagine having to pretend that this babble is legitimate, though? Imagine your career depending on acknowledging it...

Attached: 5b1b2d73d41a555cc86fe459517920f25c6c7d91209c180887291ca1c253b5f6.jpg (3000x3672, 2.11M)

don't believe you desu

Color Psychology is a completely different thing, user. And there is some legitimacy to it.

Fucking burrrrn
>what did I mean by this

It doesn't matter what the intent of the author is, if you can find more meaning than the author intended does that change the legitimacy of the meaning you found? Of course not. Experience is subjective, so you can't tell me what to experience when I read something.

>Genius
More like safe,
>Yes, just ascribe 100% to all our thoughts and beliefs, then you'll be safe.
>Until one of Mao's children dig up one of your old social media post or MSNBC needs a headline for the day, or someone just got bored and decide to attack you for not being one of them.

Also, Alex's deeply repressed piss fetish, and his desire to see the entire world flooded with his own urine.

But how does Death of the Author relate to that? DotA doesn't mean nothing has meaning, it means it has near infinite meaning. It's like the saying, "a picture is worth a thousand words." Maybe the photographer just wanted to take a picture of a bench, but people can still look at that photograph and be moved by it in different ways than the photographer intended. I don't see how that applies to nihilism or post-modernism.

>It doesn't matter what the intent of the author is

you can make up whatever stories you like - but they are only true in your own head. you assume what you're inventing is true, even if it's not really there. but that's the great thing about assumptions - you can assume anything you want, no matter how unrelated, stupid, artificial, or pointless it is.

I'm hesitant to fully kill the artist but projection is essential to a fulfilling artistic experience. derrida was post war.

Just like society

What people don't realize is that authors are schmucks who put in shit like this unless they're writing academically

an artist can never fully realize a narrative, assumptions are always at play. it's just that some artists will imply more than others.

Gay

Literally the same arguments shippers use to justify their pairings.

This thread is a scene from back to school
youtube.com/watch?v=pDLzLUmtU3w

I remember Spike Lee saying that film school used to be worth it because it was one of the only places where an 18 year old could get to use high-tech gear, but now it's pointless because cameras on phones are definitely good enough for a student film

Citing "death of the author" to prove the author's interpretation of his work doesn't matter is a red flag that someone is a brainlet who's either never read the essay or didn't understand it. Barthes said nothing of the sort. He said that the author's biography shouldn't be taken into account as a means of literary criticsm. Which is bullshit too by the way

I like yellow what does it mean

>The teachers force their pleb interpretations of other people's work into their students.

I haven't realized how awful that was until now.

>you can make up whatever stories you like - but they are only true in your own head.
Like reality at all times?

How ironic that you are arguing that Death of the Author was not what the author intended.

Authors are just sometimes flat out wrong about their own works. See JK Rowlings as an example. It's dumb to assign any kind of universal truism about all authors and all works.

solipsism? huh. are you still in highschool? either actually or still mentally.

What if it’s where the pc or tv is?
I can’t have natural light fucking up my experience

She's not wrong, she's lying. Hermione was never supposed to be black. Her "vision" doesn't matter at all to her. She'll change anything about it on a whim for more attention.

That is literally wrong

jk rowling is a crack addict that stole her lifes work

except postmodernist literary critique doesnt assert that author meant x or y

the text exhibits certain themes, which interveawe it to the larger cultural fabric of which it is a product of

valid interpretations are supported by evidence found in the work presented in the critique/reading

Post modernism is self refuting because the absence of definable meaning cannot be considered self evident or true. No post modernist has any reason to believe their understanding of reality in a post modernist lens is representative of truth or absence of truth.

Theres this interesting phenomenon i've observed from leftists where anything that triggers them they label as pro-fascism then to cope with the success of the media they call it satire.
So satire of fascism. The issue being often the piece will have nothing to do with facsism or be satirical.
Then any discussion you try to have with these people is impossible because they simply can't nit comprehend the subject matter. Especially outside the framework they have been taught.
Frequently their arguments are also couple with absolute lies and reinvisinism of the subject material.
So yeah it is nothing short of mental illness.

t: would rather study authors daily walking routines than the work

in a cohesive/high level narrative, every word, every sentence, is intentional and serves to move the plot forward. there is meaning in everything.

>i don’t understand what he said
>dajooz must be behind this!
Real high IQ user

If something has infinite meaning then it has no meaning. Reality can only be described using categorizations thus limiting the number of meanings something can have.

can you give an example?

simply cannot*

So you agree with rowlings extra info on Harry Potter?

So post modernists only accidentally include everything in their books including themes and cultural metanarratives?

Starship troopers is the perfect example. When discussing it, it becomes increasingly obvious the people critcising it never read the book or even understood the movie.
Unsurprisingly the director is quoted as saying he never finished the book.

But if a character is written as literally white then the author cant change that without a new edition or something. Me understanding this fact doesnt mean that I have to also believe the retards in the audience who make shit up.

Verhoeven himself didn't understand the movie.

>author's intent doesn't matter but my feelings do
So therefore your interpretation of the author's work doesn't matter, but my interpretation of your interpretation does, so on so forth ad ifinitum. All this ends up doing is creating a circular logic loop. Death of the author has no logic behind it, only emotional appeals.

I made this image back in 2013 and I'm gay. Thoughts?

Attached: Endless hell.png (300x344, 142K)

Author's intent doesn't automatically matter. If they're pushing for a particular argument they need to back up that argument with evidence in the text. If they can't articulate it in their own scenario then it's fucked.

The irony is that what you say means that you(and everyone else itt saying something similar) are yourself either underage or uneducated. The farther you go in education the worse this gets. It’s especially bad with old works like Shakespeare. People will write a 10 page paper on why he he chose to word a sentence a certain way, assigning some deep meaning to it that could fill a book in itself. When in reality, 99.9999 percent chance he didn’t give a second thought to it. This is done with all kinds of art, literature, film, pasinging, etc. I’m not sure what the worst is, maybe paintings, because there’s no actual language used “scholars” assign meaning straight out of their ass. What’s annoying is that instead of treating it like a theory they pulled right out of their ass they act like it’s “most likely true” since they are an expert. Like i said the older the art the worse it is because if someone is long dead the artist or someone they knew can’t call them a retard for making shit up and treating it as fact.