My man, I need you to recognize — your remix of the comic in and of itself is reductionist. You choose non sequential comments to portray some kind of meta commentary on something you don’t even seem to fully understand.
Let me be clear. You are allowed to attribute whatever meaning you want to whatever story or art medium you want. That is, ultimately, the goal of any artist — to evoke something in you.
When the artist themselves attributes a word like ‘good’ or ‘bad’ to the description of their character, to the very essence behind their creation — you are not allowed to simply say that they are wrong.
You are free to create your own art where the rules are different from theirs. Where there is no truly good or bad individual, just varying shades of gray. However you look like a DBZ power scaler when you attribute complexity to a character where there is none. I’m serious, no one looks dumber than the people spending way more time than they should arguing about things that the creator is likely to just fucking forget (rip Toriyama, ILY).
Rorschach is meant to be a bad example. You are not meant to want to be like him. Alan Moore thinks you’re a sweaty nerd and that you should stay away from him if you admire Rorschach (I’m paraphrasing but that is more or less his statement on the matter). Media literacy should lead you to answer the question of ‘Is Rorschach good or bad?’ with neither (thus explaining a more nuanced perspective that is just headcanon) or no.
Bruh you are just like, a getting whooshed machine?
your remix of the comic in and of itself is reductionist.
Yes, that is what I told you, because you needed it explained. I made a comic mocking you for doing the thing. Then I had to make an entire comment explaining it to you. Thank you for FINALLY catching up. It took you several hours to finally get that you were being whooshed, but at least you’ve finally landed.
And the point of making the remix is to highlight the point that the comic, and yourself are being reductionist in the same way: The edit is making fun of the fact that you are doing the exact thing I’m being critical of… But instead of pushing back on the critique of the comic (which I maintain as reductionist), you actually engaged in the act of being reductionist, which again, thanks, because this has been hilarious.
When the artist themselves attributes a word like ‘good’ or ‘bad’ to the description of their character, to the very essence behind their creation — you are not allowed to simply say that they are wrong.
Finally something substantive.
No. The artist (or creator of any kind really) has no say in how someone else wants to interpret their work. They can ask you to interpret it this way, or that way, but its truly not up to them. How people choose to consume something is up to them. The act of artistic expression is always a joint exercise between both the creator and the interpreter of that creation. You, as an artist, don’t get to choose how your work is interpreted or received. You can advocate or hope its received and taken to mean something, but that does mean it actually does.
I think a better way to criticize media is instead of thinking characters as good or evil, ask, “are they effective?”, and in this sense, I consider Rorschach to be an effective character. They aren’t there to be good or evil, they’re there to be a reflective surface for the world they find themselves in, and in this way they are an effective character.
And if an artist misses what they are doing with their own work, and they do ALL the time, I don’t need to agree with them.
My man, I need you to recognize — your remix of the comic in and of itself is reductionist. You choose non sequential comments to portray some kind of meta commentary on something you don’t even seem to fully understand.
Let me be clear. You are allowed to attribute whatever meaning you want to whatever story or art medium you want. That is, ultimately, the goal of any artist — to evoke something in you.
When the artist themselves attributes a word like ‘good’ or ‘bad’ to the description of their character, to the very essence behind their creation — you are not allowed to simply say that they are wrong.
You are free to create your own art where the rules are different from theirs. Where there is no truly good or bad individual, just varying shades of gray. However you look like a DBZ power scaler when you attribute complexity to a character where there is none. I’m serious, no one looks dumber than the people spending way more time than they should arguing about things that the creator is likely to just fucking forget (rip Toriyama, ILY).
Rorschach is meant to be a bad example. You are not meant to want to be like him. Alan Moore thinks you’re a sweaty nerd and that you should stay away from him if you admire Rorschach (I’m paraphrasing but that is more or less his statement on the matter). Media literacy should lead you to answer the question of ‘Is Rorschach good or bad?’ with neither (thus explaining a more nuanced perspective that is just headcanon) or no.
Bruh you are just like, a getting whooshed machine?
Yes, that is what I told you, because you needed it explained. I made a comic mocking you for doing the thing. Then I had to make an entire comment explaining it to you. Thank you for FINALLY catching up. It took you several hours to finally get that you were being whooshed, but at least you’ve finally landed.
And the point of making the remix is to highlight the point that the comic, and yourself are being reductionist in the same way: The edit is making fun of the fact that you are doing the exact thing I’m being critical of… But instead of pushing back on the critique of the comic (which I maintain as reductionist), you actually engaged in the act of being reductionist, which again, thanks, because this has been hilarious.
Finally something substantive.
No. The artist (or creator of any kind really) has no say in how someone else wants to interpret their work. They can ask you to interpret it this way, or that way, but its truly not up to them. How people choose to consume something is up to them. The act of artistic expression is always a joint exercise between both the creator and the interpreter of that creation. You, as an artist, don’t get to choose how your work is interpreted or received. You can advocate or hope its received and taken to mean something, but that does mean it actually does.
I think a better way to criticize media is instead of thinking characters as good or evil, ask, “are they effective?”, and in this sense, I consider Rorschach to be an effective character. They aren’t there to be good or evil, they’re there to be a reflective surface for the world they find themselves in, and in this way they are an effective character.
And if an artist misses what they are doing with their own work, and they do ALL the time, I don’t need to agree with them.