Actually the author I had in mind specifically was J.R.R. Tolkien, who was rather annoyed with people assuming The Lord of the Rings was an allegory for his experiences in World War I when in actuality he had merely created the fictional realm so he had an excuse to make up his own languages

Well, I mean, ascribing a motivation to the author is a bit different from examining the effects a certain word can have in-context. There's a lot of psychological evidence for word-choice being incredibly important to how a person perceives a certain situation--that's why leading questions are a thing and why Loftus and Palmer's study into how they can affect eyewitness testimony is so important--so why would that be any different from authors whose entire purpose in crafting a story is to make the reader get a certain impression?

This "the curtains were fucking blue" argument is more or less the same; people assume the color of the curtains is important or meaningful or allegorical, when in actuality the author just felt that, for one reason or another, the room in question needed to be described to the reader and when they got to the curtains, they went with blue. Maybe blue was the author's favourite color or maybe they chose it randomly, maybe they had blue curtains themselves or maybe they were aware of the "the curtains were fucking blue" meme and decided to throw in some blue curtains to fuck with us; we will likely never know, unless you feel like pestering the author over they're choice in interior decorating.

But "the curtains were fucking blue" ignores the fact that the author did make that choice to describe the room, and there was a reason for it, even if that reason isn't something monumental.

I said this already in my original post. "Whether that reason is that it fits the character who was decorating, or whether it fits the atmosphere they're trying to create."

Point is, don't over think this stuff. The simplest answer is usually the correct one and its a bad idea to make wild guesses like "the blue curtains represent the protagonists immense depression" when there is no evidence to support that idea beyond the fact that people sometimes associate the color blue with sadness.

That people think of blue as a sad colour is reason enough for a writer to choose to use it to give something an impression of sadness. Plenty of words have colloquial associations, and plenty of visual stimuli have the same.

Take the movie Inside Out. Why do you think Joy is a bright orange, and Sadness is a deep blue, whilst Anger is a strong red? Because those emotions are visually linked with those colours. The animators deliberately chose those colours for the characters because they know audiences would think it made sense. It would be wrong to ignore the colours because the colours are a fundamental part of the design.

A well-crafted description is one that doesn't waste words on describing something superfluous for pointless reasons. What a writer chooses to include and what they choose to omit does say something about what they wanted to emphasise. It doesn't have to be transcendental, but the writer took the choice for a reason.

Besides, what's wrong with looking for symbolism? I, personally, get a lot of pleasure out of seeing how certain metaphors fit within a narrative, or respecting how well a certain turn of phrase fits with the emotions evoked by the overall prose.

tl;dr You don't know that they're trying to be simplistic anymore than we know they're trying to be layered. Plenty of writers do think about this stuff, and do pay attention to what they're writing.

"The curtains were fucking blue" is a very useful argument. It's allowed one writer to get people to stop closely analyzing their work, and generations of students to avoid analyzing other people's work.

last edited at Aug 8, 2015 3:56PM

tl;dr You don't know that they're trying to be simplistic anymore than we know they're trying to be layered. Plenty of writers do think about this stuff, and do pay attention to what they're writing.

I'm not implying that there are't writers who do think about this sort of stuff, just saying I don't like making assumptions without fact. I'm not a fan of assumptions I guess would be my whole point here.
And I'm pretty sure any decent writer pays attention what they're writing. Don't imply that having hidden layers of symbolism and meaning somehow makes a story better.

I'm not implying that there are't writers who do think about this sort of stuff, just saying I don't like making assumptions without fact. I'm not a fan of assumptions I guess would be my whole point here.
And I'm pretty sure any decent writer pays attention what they're writing. Don't imply that having hidden layers of symbolism and meaning somehow makes a story better.

It's not about claiming your assumptions are fact, it's about appreciating the quality of a narrative, or having fun guessing about what might happen next. It's cool that you don't like to do that--it's not for everyone--but I also don't see the point in joining a conversation about it specifically to say "I don't like this!!!". Can't you just not reply to those posts, or skim over them?

I do think having hidden layers of depth does make your writing better, though, simply because you can say more with less words, and in better ways. It doesn't have to be elaborate symbolism, but creating vivid imagery and emotions in your writing is always going to be better than writing something one-note and bland.

Poetry especially benefits from this kind of symbolism, especially when the poets are trying for both brevity and complexity.

As an aside, the Beatles were famous for putting stuff in their songs and album covers in order to mislead and generally mess with people doing minute analysis of their work. The whole "Paul is dead" thing being a great example.

I Am the Walrus is literally 100% meant to screw with people overanalyzing their works.

Holy shit I made a half-joke about me possibly overanalyzing something and a few days later this is what happens.

people are forgetting that communication is a 2 player game, aka the reader has as much of an say into the story they are perceiving as the writer

Maus Gets a lot if it. Ultimately writing is a conversation, and whether or not the writer had original meaning in what he/she said, the reader gets to define what they think of it. Granted there are such things as wrong interpretations, but if the reader sees something special or different in an entity the writer totally didn't intend for/anticipate, it still is all the more valid.

It makes writing fun! You make your content, pick your meanings (kind of), and throw it out there and let the audience run with it.

tl;dr You don't know that they're trying to be simplistic anymore than we know they're trying to be layered. Plenty of writers do think about this stuff, and do pay attention to what they're writing.

I can see eye-to-eye with you as a writer myself, but I will say that there are often times that I don't put deeper meaning in some things I have written. You don't see anyone dissecting the color of the bedsheets in Madoka or the color of the wallpaper in Toradora, and those two shows are so overflowing with symbols and greater meaning you could write a 50-page thesis on the first 6 episodes alone, each.

In this case, Shou explicitly called to attention the words Keiko had written rather than having her say it herself, or just briefly showing them in passing. There was an allotted upper third given a hefty amount of space in a panel where nothing much else was going on. Enough reason to believe he did want us to notice some meaning in the descriptions.

What colour was the dress again?

White and gold.

I'm pretty sure it was black and blue.

...bees?

Black and yellow.

(Better version) Black and yellow

...

Aren't we already at the point of subtext with this?

I was alluding to this:

But thank you all for making it all the better

last edited at Aug 8, 2015 8:34PM

As an aside, the Beatles were famous for putting stuff in their songs and album covers in order to mislead and generally mess with people doing minute analysis of their work. The whole "Paul is dead" thing being a great example.

I Am the Walrus is literally 100% meant to screw with people overanalyzing their works.

And by I Am the Walrus you of course mean Glass Onion. I'm on to your little games.

people are forgetting that communication is a 2 player game, aka the reader has as much of an say into the story they are perceiving as the writer

Maus Gets a lot if it. Ultimately writing is a conversation, and whether or not the writer had original meaning in what he/she said, the reader gets to define what they think of it. Granted there are such things as wrong interpretations, but if the reader sees something special or different in an entity the writer totally didn't intend for/anticipate, it still is all the more valid.

This is Death Of the Author, is it not? With a dash of Intent Is Not Magic for flavour.

As an aside, the Beatles were famous for putting stuff in their songs and album covers in order to mislead and generally mess with people doing minute analysis of their work. The whole "Paul is dead" thing being a great example.

I Am the Walrus is literally 100% meant to screw with people overanalyzing their works.

And by I Am the Walrus you of course mean Glass Onion. I'm on to your little games.

winkyface.emoji

people are forgetting that communication is a 2 player game, aka the reader has as much of an say into the story they are perceiving as the writer

Maus Gets a lot if it. Ultimately writing is a conversation, and whether or not the writer had original meaning in what he/she said, the reader gets to define what they think of it. Granted there are such things as wrong interpretations, but if the reader sees something special or different in an entity the writer totally didn't intend for/anticipate, it still is all the more valid.

This is Death Of the Author, is it not? With a dash of Intent Is Not Magic for flavour.

It is very much like that. I've always thought that title as a bit of a misnomer...but for very complicated philosophical reasons it's also very accurate haha.

Seems like Ran is subconsciously waiting for Senpai to sweep her off feet like that. Too bad Keiko is no where near that smooth. The Yuri suffering continues.

last edited at Aug 9, 2015 7:04PM

I can see eye-to-eye with you as a writer myself, but I will say that there are often times that I don't put deeper meaning in some things I have written. You don't see anyone dissecting the color of the bedsheets in Madoka or the color of the wallpaper in Toradora, and those two shows are so overflowing with symbols and greater meaning you could write a 50-page thesis on the first 6 episodes alone, each.

Oh, yeah, definitely. A user already said (might've been you, but my intertubes is being wonky and not loading some posts properly) that there's a bit more leeway with interpreting literature than animation, considering animation does need to fill empty space, whereas a writer can simply choose to not describe something they feel is unimportant or doesn't contribute to the scene.

I do think you might be able to say, "I like that the chosen decor for the backdrops is tonally consistent with the scene", though. It is important that the setting of a scene is designed with a certain impression or feel in mind, even if it's not "symbolic" per se. That's why camera angles/costuming/etc. are so important for the perceptions of certain things in cinema and television shows.

Part of that is why I liked Madoka's visuals so much, even if I thought the actual narrative was sub-par. The contrast between the often colourful/simplistic artistic design and the attempted gravity of what was happening made what was happening that much more jarring, because of how dissonant the events were with the surroundings.

In this case, Shou explicitly called to attention the words Keiko had written rather than having her say it herself, or just briefly showing them in passing. There was an allotted upper third given a hefty amount of space in a panel where nothing much else was going on. Enough reason to believe he did want us to notice some meaning in the descriptions.

I agree! We can debate about what it was, but Shou definitely tried to communicate something to us with it, especially with how flustered Keiko was over it.

In this case, Shou explicitly called to attention the words Keiko had written rather than having her say it herself, or just briefly showing them in passing. There was an allotted upper third given a hefty amount of space in a panel where nothing much else was going on. Enough reason to believe he did want us to notice some meaning in the descriptions.

I agree! We can debate about what it was, but Shou definitely tried to communicate something to us with it, especially with how flustered Keiko was over it.

Interesting ideas, but...

It might simply be that the intent of the last page is to show how Ran enjoyed the nice gift she received from Keiko. The card she reads might be a standard note of instructions from the producer, included with every such display of dried flowers, to inform the receiver about how to properly take care of the content.

In this case, Shou explicitly called to attention the words Keiko had written rather than having her say it herself, or just briefly showing them in passing. There was an allotted upper third given a hefty amount of space in a panel where nothing much else was going on. Enough reason to believe he did want us to notice some meaning in the descriptions.

I agree! We can debate about what it was, but Shou definitely tried to communicate something to us with it, especially with how flustered Keiko was over it.

Interesting ideas, but...

It might simply be that the intent of the last page is to show how Ran enjoyed the nice gift she received from Keiko. The card she reads might be a standard note of instructions from the producer, included with every such display of dried flowers, to inform the receiver about how to properly take care of the content.

Yeah, the text at the end is clearly not a personal note, but manufacturer's instructions. What's more significant is that she's clearly put them somewhere that they'll be close to her every day. Now the whole long-lasting thing is likely meant to be significant in that it's one reason Keiko chose the gift. She wants the two of them to be long-lasting as well, and for Ran to cherish their (so far) friendship.

Exactly what I thought too. The few lines come from the instructions for the flowers. Not from Keiko.

But that the author wrote them also means something.

Anyway, it's obvious that Keiko has feelings for Ran. But just shy of romantic.

It really looks like other yuri works, where one of the characters thinks of someone as a really close friend until something happens that makes them realize that it's more than that. Like in Girl Friends , where Akko gets somewhat flustered that Mari gets a boyfriend

So if there should be progression, it needs something happening. And if somehow it finally happens, I think it'll be an end flag.

last edited at Aug 12, 2015 10:47AM

Interesting ideas, but...

It might simply be that the intent of the last page is to show how Ran enjoyed the nice gift she received from Keiko.

You're doing the exact same thing as the people you're "but"ing, though? You're viewing the work the way you think it was intended, extrapolating from what little we've been given in the same way others are. You think the page shows that Ran appreciated the gift, but you're still using your own subjective interpretation to decide that.

Shou doesn't explicitly tell you that Ran is pleased - you've deduced that on your own through contextual clues in the scene. Ran might hate the gift, and is staring at it wistfully in a kind of bemused "oh, Keiko" way.

The card she reads might be a standard note of instructions from the producer, included with every such display of dried flowers, to inform the receiver about how to properly take care of the content.

Yeah, but Keiko read them. She chose a gift that requires care to maintain and would last a long time with that maintenance. Getting Ran some dried flowers still says something, because she could've gotten Ran some chocolate, or gotten Ran some live flowers, but she didn't. Shou made the choice to have Keiko get her this specific type of flower.

last edited at Aug 12, 2015 1:18PM

Interesting ideas, but...

It might simply be that the intent of the last page is to show how Ran enjoyed the nice gift she received from Keiko.

You're doing the exact same thing as the people you're "but"ing, though? You're viewing the work the way you think it was intended, extrapolating from what little we've been given in the same way others are. You think the page shows that Ran appreciated the gift, but you're still using your own subjective interpretation to decide that.

Shou doesn't explicitly tell you that Ran is pleased - you've deduced that on your own through contextual clues in the scene. Ran might hate the gift, and is staring at it wistfully in a kind of bemused "oh, Keiko" way.

Guilty as charged.
I do consider it as a possible (and likely) interpretation that Ran is happy about the gift she received from Keiko, but if we put our heads together I guess we could create dozens of other possible interpretations too. And we might even then not be in the vicinity of what the author had in mind when that page was created.

The card she reads might be a standard note of instructions from the producer, included with every such display of dried flowers, to inform the receiver about how to properly take care of the content.

Yeah, but Keiko read them. She chose a gift that requires care to maintain and would last a long time with that maintenance. Getting Ran some dried flowers still says something, because she could've gotten Ran some chocolate, or gotten Ran some live flowers, but she didn't. Shou made the choice to have Keiko get her this specific type of flower.

If the note Ran is reading is the manufacturer's instructions, and those instructions were contained inside of the box - then it might also be an option that Keiko doesn't even know about them. Impossible to know, unless the author intervenes and reveal an explicit answer.

Well, regardless of how we chose to interpret such details, I guess we both are eagerly looking forward to the next chapter of Stretch.

Guilty as charged.
I do consider it as a possible (and likely) interpretation that Ran is happy about the gift she received from Keiko, but if we put our heads together I guess we could create dozens of other possible interpretations too. And we might even then not be in the vicinity of what the author had in mind when that page was created.

Absolutely. Part of what makes reading a piece of fiction so much fun is the subjective fan interaction that goes on with the work.

If the note Ran is reading is the manufacturer's instructions, and those instructions were contained inside of the box - then it might also be an option that Keiko doesn't even know about them. Impossible to know, unless the author intervenes and reveal an explicit answer.

But she still picked out that type of flower as opposed to any other. She was probably shopping for longevity.

Well, regardless of how we chose to interpret such details, I guess we both are eagerly looking forward to the next chapter of Stretch.

It's also 3:30am. So that's my excuse. :p

new chapter
http://yawaspi.com/stretch/comic/045_001.html
curse you moonspeak!

Anyone a clue what is happening? Except for the playing doctor.

last edited at Aug 26, 2015 11:59AM

are they moving out? I have a bad feeling about this one. I'm really hoping that they are just cleaning up

last edited at Aug 26, 2015 1:52PM

kao gao

Anyone a clue what is happening? Except for the playing doctor.

What I got is Ran's kinda depressed because things don't work out with senpai. Her friends/colleagues ask her if it's because of the guy? And she replies that that's how it kinda is. So they ask her to tell just a little bit, but doesn't look like she replied anything
I don't know what exactly Keiko's doing. Sorting out the old clothes? Trying to deal with the past? Not sure why so many boxes. There's a TV drama where a guy runs back after the girl and asks her to wait and that he loves her and wants to start from the beginning again. I didn't quite get Ran's comments about it. It seems fitting the Keiko's ex topic and she probably still hopes for his comeback? Or may be she's just worried that she'll be single forever.
There some important lines I didn't get but apparently at the end, just before Ran and Keiko are about to eat, Ran tells Keiko that all's gonna be fine and senpai will find her happiness. And again I didn't get it at all. Was it that Ran said something like, only if she lets Keiko find it. Keiko somehow gets red, and says you're inedible? Again not sure about this part. And ran replies with the hearts, you know, I'm delicious! Then Keiko says that if that's the case then she's gonna eat Ran. And Ran just goes Kyaaa <3<3 But Keiko stops... and they both Itadakimasu the gods for the food

I think Keiko is still in the state of "What is this feeling?"

It's been a while though.

Ran takes it really slow... but it would probably scare Keiko if she went too fast, so I guess it's better if Keiko comes to term with her own feelings first.

And I think it's really too late to add a guy to the mix and make a triangle.