DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Jxmwzgpv** · 10-01-2006, 07:00 AM

But at the bare minimum, as a rasikan, I feel an anxiety to have covered, at the least, what the artist 'intended' to offer.

But what you "cover" is vastly different (which is an understatement) from what the artist intends. Your whole life plays a part in it, and surely, you're going to see it differently. And one must not associate all this talk as a kind of mumbo-jumbo useful only when viewing obscure films. Hardly. Take the many mainstream films which we find awful or even offensive watching them through various prisms. Do those filmmakers intend to make a film that is, say, pro-casteist or anti-feminist? Are they consciously trying to make it that way? No, it's what we see in them.

Pardon the simplistic logic (but good enough I think); if we can bash up a film for all the bad things we see in it, it's only fair we approve of the good things, no?

10-01-2006, 07:00 AM	#4
Jxmwzgpv Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 434 Senior Member	But at the bare minimum, as a rasikan, I feel an anxiety to have covered, at the least, what the artist 'intended' to offer. But what you "cover" is vastly different (which is an understatement) from what the artist intends. Your whole life plays a part in it, and surely, you're going to see it differently. And one must not associate all this talk as a kind of mumbo-jumbo useful only when viewing obscure films. Hardly. Take the many mainstream films which we find awful or even offensive watching them through various prisms. Do those filmmakers intend to make a film that is, say, pro-casteist or anti-feminist? Are they consciously trying to make it that way? No, it's what we see in them. Pardon the simplistic logic (but good enough I think); if we can bash up a film for all the bad things we see in it, it's only fair we approve of the good things, no?
	Quote