PBS Idea Channel does an episode on Evangelion.

[Henry Spencer]

It's been ages since I last posted here, but I thought that I'd stop by to show that a fairly popular YouTube user and PBS affiliate posted a favorable short analysis of the series and how it demonstrates the "Death Of The Author" phenomenon in considering that Hideaki Anno's views on his own series don't necessarily stop people from looking into his work (which ought to sound familiar to a bunch of you).

So... What do you guys think? ;)

[Chuckman]

He pronounced Asuka's name wrong.

Other than that it's a good summary of why Anno can be safely ignored.

[NemZ]

I was just coming here to post that link. Shoot.

Yeah it's okay, though I think they're taking Anno a bit out of context to say he thinks it's 'meaningless'. Refusing to tell you what it means and admitting he improvised some of it without a solid plan is not the same as dismissing the entire work.

[riffraff11235]

Huh, just noticed this among my subscriptions. Might give it a watch later today.

[FreakyFilmFan4ever]

Huh, someone beat me to it by a few hours. Darn! I guess I posted in the Discussion thread for nothing.

So, does this mean we can have an intelligent "death of the author" debate without the absurdity?

[Catamari]

WHELP! I think I found a new picture to use here.

[Angel of Will]

Here are my comments I placed on facebook and YT:

The author's opinion of his own work can be interesting or insightful if it tugs on our curiosities and interests that were engaged while experiencing the artwork, but it isn't necessary.

I'll say that the idea that the creator says it's without meaning is an oversimplification. Anno denigrates his work in SOME respects so far as responding to the idea that he was some genius that preorchestrated everything, and for someone of his position, it's fair for him to do so, but even in those interviews, and among others, he will detail his motive behind the series, and the state of mind he was in during production, as well as the research or thought that went into creating the elements and characters, and a meaningful picture is painted of the series' creation.

Not to mention that the series was co-created largely by other people he was close to and worked closely with. They were all part of the same generation that suffered Japan's economic crisis, and the responsive plague of otakuism and social anxiety. Their interviews aren't as denigrating of their work as Anno sometimes is, so much as I have read some.

Heck, in some interviews, he complains about people that hated his work for not seeing any meaning in it.

Though as I mentioned earlier, these are all just interesting footnotes. What's most important in a work of art is for it to offer truth, and as long as an author is being genuine or earnest in making it, it's possible for it to speak volumes of truth without his specific design.

[Nuclear Lunchbox]

I would agree with the notion that the intent of the author can be important for the interpretation of a work, but I also believe that it is possible to disregard the author's intentions entirely and to derive your own meaning from said piece.

[kuribo-04]

About the death of the author theory, while it is true that every person can understand the work in a different way, and there is no right or wrong, I'm positive most people care about the author's intention. When an author makes something that has a hidden meaning, I think it is often fun to think "Maybe here is some clue of the meaning", it is fun because the work is like it is because of the author trying to communicate something.

@Chuckman, I know that you defend this theory. I read your post about the hospital scene in EoE, and while I found it very interesting and well done, I just can't see some of the things you say related to the actual film. Your interpretation of some things related to religion contradicted Anno's statement about religion in his work. You can still make interpretations related to the Bible, but when I watch the film, none of them cross my mind. There is a part of the death of the author theory that I like though. The part that says that an author could make references that he doesn't even know about because it is something that is part of our culture and is in his subconscious. For example, why does Eva-13 have four arms? Maybe Anno just gave it four arms without thinking much about it, but was actually relating the four arms to something divine, because he has seen some deity with four arms. Maybe he knew that he was making a reference. This is actually the kind of conversation that you often encounter in evageeks, because you aren't actually saying "The four arms are a reference to a deity, I don't care what Anno has to say".

So in the end I think the death of the author discussions don't make much sense. Everyone tries to proof the other person wrong, and we end up forgetting that every work of art is "just something that some guy made and that we find interesting". Chuckman likes to see Evangelion and interpret the shi. out of it, probably because he likes doing it and thinks that Anno's interpretation isn't enough, other people are very interested in Anno (like myself). We sometimes fail to see that we are enjoying the same things in different ways, there is no right or wrong.

What I recommend is sharing both views. When you watch the film, why don't you try discovering what the author's intent was? But you can also have fun interpreting things like you want.

Another example. Chuckman, you once described Anno's director's cut revision of Kaji's death as a failure. There are many things that make me think that it isn't (For example, if you like death of the author, why don't you look at the director's cut as just another interpretation? You don't really care about Anno anyways) but what I think is most important here is that we need to understand different points of view. Maybe you liked the open ended nature of the first version? Anno was clearly invested in communicating the meaning in this scene, that's why he wanted to change it. You could say it was a failure because he didn't succeed the first time, but it's also true that being the director is not the same as being the viewer, so communicating something to an unknowing audience can sometimes go wrong, like this time, and you can't really consider the second version and Anno's clarification later wrong, in fact, I'm happy that he made the statement, because it shows that he is trying to communicate something, and I like that, and Evangelion is a very personal series, with the protagonist being a self insert of the author (you must admit that that makes Shinji interesting) so communicating the "true" information was important for Anno and also for me. Sometimes he was still open ended though, like in EoE. I'm sure that his feelings are still there in his final scene, but we can only speculate. (When I see it I feel like I know what it means, I could be wrong, maybe I understood Anno, but that's why I try to avoid these definitive answers to interpretation in film, I just want to see it and enjoy it.)

I will also say that I don't really like film theories, because they try to explain and give answers, something that reminds me of science, and I prefer to see art as something natural, something that I just feel without really caring about the most appropiate way of enjoying it (not that that exists).
In the end my interpretation of Eva is just one more, but still, I try to understand what Anno meant, even if I am not Anno. Maybe I can be him through Eva, I'm sure that is one of Anno's desires, communicating his thoughts and feelings. Why did he care so much about people knowing that Misato didn't kill Kaji? Because it is something that defines the character probably. Why doesn't he give a shit later in EoE's ending? Probably because there are no rules in art. He just did things like he felt he should do them in that moment, and I'm OK with that.

I hope I explained myself correctly. (

EDIT: Angel of Will and Nuclear Lunchbox, I completely agree with you.

[ILUVASUKALANGLEY]

i know its an old thread but i find the fastness of the editing and him talking annoying, I really couldn't watch much of it.

I also find it annoying them using random clips and memes though I guess the younger generation would enjoy it more than me. this is annoying as the soup on A&E is to me.