Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Scotty

Podcast Review of BNW

28 posts in this topic

On 10/17/2017 at 11:17 AM, Valenhil said:

I...don't really see it?

To be honest the only problems I have with the script right now are Sabin and Relm, which get lines referencing a characterization they didn't really earn, and replacing memetic lines with fourth wall jokes.

The connection between Sabin and Rei is the aloofness factor. Rei doesn't really fit in anywhere he goes because he's an outsider, but rather than feeling self-aware, he just kinda shrugs it off. Sabin, although royalty, has spent the last decade of his life living in isolation and thus behaves in the same manner. The fact that he *is* of royal blood is (at least partially) what gives him confidence to behave in this manner since nobody can question the fact that he *does* belong.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Idnex said:

No, that is not how objectivity works.

I questioned it the same way Idnex just did here when I first read it, I've just not been present enough to formulate a response. Anyway, just here to agree with Idnex on this -- don't mix up "majority" with "objectivity". Also, there is no reference to support the claim that Woolsey's original, unaltered script is favored by the majority -- in my experience, it's the opposite (which in no way is proof of anything, just pointing out that what we "feel" isn't reliable -- at all).

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the topic of what is objectivity, it's easy to define but hard to prove or disprove.

Objective just means it's independent of the subject.  It's a truth/fact/thing, that exists regardless what people think about it.  It's not impossible for there to be objective standards for writing, music, beauty, etc. just because consensus doesn't exist doesn't mean objective standards don't exist (this is corollary to the fact that consensus can't prove the existence of objective standards).

You can see this in situations where there clearly is an objective truth.  The world is definitely round, but flat earthers exist.  Just because flat earthers are wrong about the earth being flat doesn't mean the shape of the earth is subjective.

Objective vs. subjective is really just a conversation stopper; it's better to look at writing functionally.  The dialogue has a purpose, there's some goal the writer wants to accomplish; we can look at whether their goal makes sense, and at how well their writing accomplishes that goal.  Leave the Objective vs. Subjective debate to philosophers, it's better that they waste their time then us.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0