Re: Fwd: Re: [Somewhat More OT] Closed source software Was [Re: Hmmm. A question. Was [Re: Debian is losing its users]]
On Sunday 06 April 2008, Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 10:56:10 -0500
> Dave Sherohman <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Hello Dave,
> > > younger. It was just weird.
> > Yes, it was. Wasn't that the point?
> To a degree, yes. In the end, if that's all it is, then it's
> unfulfilling. Patrick McGoohan always maintains there's more to it
> than that. He refuses, however, to be drawn on the subject. Which,
> in itself is just as weird. :-)
No, it's not. As Joe Straczynski, the creator of Babylon 5 has often
said, to suggest is to create, to define is to destroy.
Many people who create something they've worked hard on do not want to
talk about the creative process or to tell people what was intended.
To do so limits the interpretations and leads people to think that
there is only interpretation to the work. When the discussion stops
around such a creation, it no longer holds the interest it did.
If someone jumped out of a time portal today and said, "I've been
hopping around in time and know why La Giaconda is smiling," it would
limit the interest in the painting. If we knew whether the protagonist
picked the lady or picked the tiger, the short story would hold no
interest. If we knew for sure why Hamlet is such a wimp, much of what
compels people to reinterpret the play over and over would be gone.