[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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 <dave@sherohman.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.


Reply to: