Sfdebris.net

Thebestoftherest wrote: ↑Sun Aug 21, 2022 12:44 pm If wikipedia is to be believe he have one job on a reality show as himself as his only job in almost ten years

After one conquers all their enemies will they be betrayed by the lulling sound of the soft night.

What?

Another reason for me to share this video.


youtu.be/PVe-cmH9AHk

Let's try to remember to separate the person from the art.

I do not entirely subscribe to the idea of the "Death of the Auhor" and especially Seagal is consistantly playing only his self-image or rather, an image of himself he wants to present. You can not divorce this person from his art.

I think death of the author really mean, you can interrupt what the works means, even if the creator says differently.

Thebestoftherest wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 1:55 pm I think death of the author really mean, you can interrupt what the works means, even if the creator says differently.

I agree. I don't think it means what Madner was getting at.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 3:27 pm

Thebestoftherest wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 1:55 pm I think death of the author really mean, you can interrupt what the works means, even if the creator says differently.

I agree. I don't think it means what Madner was getting at.

You were argueing that we should look at the person and the art as two seperate instances. I said, that I don't think you can do this, at least in this case. He's specifically playing himself as he envisions himself or wants other people to percieve him. His entire spiel is counter to the idea of Death of the Author.

I think that there a bigger problem than death of the author. The same problem a lot of people have with JK Rowling. The fact that if you give money to their work, your giving them money to hurt people.

Madner Kami wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 3:44 pm He's specifically playing himself as he envisions himself or wants other people to percieve him. His entire spiel is counter to the idea of Death of the Author.

That's a pretty good point that neither I nor anybody should ever forget. What he's doing is in real life and has consequences. Under Siege is still a good movie, but his actions in the present are hurting people. Also we can't just interpret his movie in lieu of what the original writers and directors intent was.