Castlevania Dungeon Forums

The Castlevania Dungeon Forums => General Castlevania Discussion => Topic started by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 12:38:10 AM

Title: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 12:38:10 AM
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fl.wigflip.com%2FSvWPH6mb%2Froflbot.jpg&hash=c714c46395f06b644e89f6b4f3bd5501)
Nick Fury delights at the sound of rustled jimmies

Quote
"A narrator should not supply interpretations of his work; otherwise he would not have written a novel, which is a machine for generating interpretations."
— Umberto Eco, postscript to The Name of the Rose

This was going to be a response to my very awesome and passionate debate with D9 in the Barlowe thread, but I judged that topic has been derailed enough already and so I shall move the debate (which has also shifted in focus significantly) here to a new home and invite people of all literary persuasions to weigh in.

But, before we get started here, let's get a disclaimer out of the way.

THIS IS NOT A DISCUSSION OF WHAT IS CANON OR WHAT IS NOT, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ON NARRATIVE THEORY, ART, AND ART APPRECIATION

Given the argument I'm about to make, I fully expect jokes to be aimed at me once people have read this. Go ahead, I've pretty clearly got it coming but I felt this was important enough to risk some barbed humor.

I'm a big believer in Death of the Author.

Here's the deal: Iga, while knowledgeable and passionate about the subject matter of Castlevania, is not god. He can offer very enlightening details on his intent, and fascinating tidbits and interpretations, but in the end, a story is owned by the reader, not its author.

Iga just happened to collect royalties on the damn thing.

So he can "clarify" as much as he wants, but his views are no more authoritative than mine. A canon only holds for those who agree to it, and I, for one, have not agreed to the entirety of what Castlevania's canon brings to the table. This doesn't break the franchise for me. I disagree with a lot of stories. That's okay though. That's good. It keeps debates interesting. The spirit of Iga's canon is in the right place, surely, but in light of finding better explanations, I will lean on the side of what I have found explains things best. Sometimes that's whatever the current "official" explanation is, other times it's what I have come to see as true.

Alternative facts are not a nice thing to have in one's White House, Kremlin, or Downing Street, but in fandom, they're the lifeblood of a debate. It's part of why Castlevania persists.

Once the story hits public eyes, an author's intentions and biographical facts (the author's politics, religion, etc) should hold no weight in regards to an interpretation of their writing. In other words, a writer's interpretation of his own work is no more or less valid than the interpretations of any given reader.

I'm gonna quote TVTropes here because, as usual, it's phrased brilliantly there.

"Although popular amongst postmodern critics, this has some concrete modernist thinking behind it as well, on the basis that the work is all that outlives the author (hence the concept's name) and we can only judge the work by the work itself. The author's later opinions about their work are themselves a form of criticism and analysis, and therefore are not necessarily consistent with what's written unless the author or publisher actively goes back and changes it—and it can still be argued that, since the original work still exists, the author has merely created a different version of it."

So, Iga's notes and interviews are fascinating. They lend a lot of helpful information about his intent and the development process. But they are by no means authoritative just because Iga said them/wrote them. That being said, if Iga is the creator of the particular game in question, I do tend to weigh his input more heavily than I would if he were talking about, say, Simon's Quest for example. I generally like to believe an author at least has a more concise view of works they personally handled, but this is no guarantee that one should accept it just because the author said it.

We also have our own fanons regarding Castlevania, and sometimes it keeps with official continuity, other times we lambast or outright ignore elements we don't like.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.tvtropes.org%2Fpmwiki%2Fpub%2Fimages%2Ffanon-discontinuity_xkcd4_9883.png&hash=463a0571536de8704793074e68784485)
I tend to do this to people who insist Torchwood: Miracle Day was in any way good.

Quote
Comic Book Guy: That was an imaginary story dreamed up by Jimmy Olsen after Supergirl's horse Comet kicked him in the head. It never really happened.
Bart Simpson: Hey, none of this stuff ever really happened.
Comic Book Guy: ...Get out of my store.
— The Simpsons, "Husbands and Knives"

Now, fanon discontinuity can make debate very difficult (again, guilty as freaking charged here), but it still ties into the above principle: that the author, and said author's intent, is not the only valid viewpoint or interpretation. Or, in simpler language, "the beholder has rights too."

Foooor instance... I personally don't even really acknowledge Dawn as canon at all. In my opinion it's a badly and sloppily written installment that raises more questions than it answers. Fun game though. So I regard Dawn like Iga regards Legends: fun game, but it just doesn't properly fit.

This is obviously a minority view, and I'm okay with that. But I have found that when one removes Dawn from a list of "things which have happened in the Castlevania universe", a host of things make much more sense. Ignoring it isn't something I did lightly though, as I used to be quite a canon purist. After playing through it a dozen times and trying six dozen different ways of understanding it and how it changes things simply because the developers needed some sort of plot justification for why things happened, I finally realized that it was just never going to make logical or narrative sense to me. In my eyes, it's the problem child of Castlevania's plot. Fortunately, it's at the extreme end of the timeline, doesn't really deal with any major events (mostly just serving as a rehash of the previous game), and is relatively easily and harmlessly chopped off without affecting anything else in the series. Sort of barely like a tumor, but I don't go back and revisit those because they were a fun romp through Dracula's Castle That Isn't Actually Dracula's Castle.

Okay the tumor comparison was mean. Dawn isn't quite that bad. Like I said, it is a fun game. I just skip the cutscenes.
Because, as Sterling Archer once said (on a show that is a work of fiction) "the mind, can, in fact, vomit."

Canonically, it does happen. It explains things. Or at least it tries to. And there are definitely guys in the fandom who swear by the Dawn of Sorrow New Testament. Doubtless, I'm sure that Iga meant for these events to be canon (or Konami just forced him to rush a story so they could get another game out, which would explain a lot). That's cool. I try to be chill about these sorts of disagreements when they come up because I'm clearly one guy who has personalized my headcanon and most people would rather go with the official explanation. You keep doing that, guys.

But I'm in danger of rambling forever on this topic, so I will finish this as concisely as possible.


And that's really all I have to say for now on this topic.

Have fun debating, my little nerdlings!
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Dracula9 on February 13, 2017, 01:07:45 AM
IGA might not be the be-all-end-all but frankly some of you fans need to let the hatred go. Y'all are just as bad as the fanatic IGA fanboys. Extremes are almost never beneficial, to say nothing of practical or effective.

I don't like/get/agree with it = "IGA is the worst person ever and he ruined muh favorite vidyagaem because he's involved with the stuff I don't like/get/agree with" is bullshit logic and anyone endorsing it should be fucking ashamed of themselves for the display of intellectual dishonesty.

Not saying you're enforcing it with this, but I've gotten some heavy-handed hints you've got at least part of one foot in that pond, and I also wanted to put it out there that those in that pond are self-righteous asshats. World ain't black-and-white, ya cranks, so quit treating shit like it is.

Now for a breakdown:

1: If it's a game he led, yes, he is. No fan's opinion plays into it, nor does any artistic or literary theory one can cite. If he officially led an official entry that has not been officially retconned, then everything therein is officially sanctioned and is part of the canon. Whether any of us like it or not. I, for example, am no more exempt from this fact than anyone else. There may not be any real penalties for breaking it, but the canon is still the law.

2: By all means! Just don't treat what you come up with as superior to the canon, or that the official writers are somehow inferior to you, a fan, whose opinions and writings are not accompanying an official salary from the IP holder(s). If it were indeed so superior to the canon, then it wouldn't be fanon.

3: "It's just fiction so there don't HAVE to be rules or anything sensible when you discuss it!" is basically what I take from this. Really wanna believe you don't mean this.

4: Ignore and defend at your leisure! I take no inherent issue (barring general "okay yeah I don't like/get/agree with what this person's written" thoughts) with fanon or ignoring disliked canon...until #2 shows up.

5: No, it isn't. "I just don't like it" is self-validating and requires no further explanation if the person invoking disliking it doesn't want to. Bringing #3 into the mix turns it into an under-the-rug sweep to avoid debate because no rules means one can dismiss or accept literally anything's validity as an opinion or argument based solely on how much they like it, and more serious debates run successfully on more fact than opinion. It's much like a child hides something they've broken to avoid getting in trouble. Dislike is free. Bullshitting additional validations where they aren't inherently necessary has a price tag. And sales tax.

6: Agreed! If drawing your own conclusions heightens enjoyment, then more power to ya! Just...please don't bring #2 and #3 to the party. I might not like a given politician or whatever, for instance, and think my ideas are better, but thinking my ideas are better doesn't make me on-par with or actually better than that politician in power, political skill and official status, does it? Same principle applies. Do whatcha gotta do to have fun with the game, but don't expect everything to just be hunkydory if #2 and #3 crash the party--unless crashing the party with them is something one enjoys, in which case the warning about opposition need not be reminded as one's likely well familiar with it already.

7: You need not agree with or enjoy it, but canon is indeed a contractual obligation--not necessarily one relating expressly to fans, but definitely one relating to what's official and true and what isn't. It remains a guideline only insofar as "here's what's true and not budging no matter what you say about it, so keep that in mind." Make up whatever you fancy...just remember that it's not automatically better than or able to seriously replace the canon just because you think it's better. You do you, but remember that at the end of the day it's only you that you be doin'.

8: No argument, and all should strive to ensure the inverse also remains true as much as possible.

Stay Woody, my friends.

(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FX2K6U7y.jpg&hash=0b5d523c1d153ff2f54fb6a34c34ae55)
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 01:46:36 AM
Here's the problem with all of that D9.

Bucky was dead as a doornail for 70 years of Marvel comics. Then suddenly he wasn't. Jason Todd was deader than a zombie for 25 years of DC comics. Then suddenly he wasn't. Whole plotlines were written and carried out. Their partners and teams mourned them, and the comics world moved on. Their corpses were retrieved and examined, and the canon pronouncement was solid.

Fiction is never permanent. It's fluid, subjective to the whims of both writer and fan. It's imagination land.

In both instances, it happened because fans vehemently disagreed with canon. Fans have input. A LOT OF IT, in point of fact, second only to the actual writers.

It's also worth noting that Hideo Goddamn Kojima is a major proponent of Death of the Author AND Broad Strokes (wherein only the basic gist of events, or certain elements of it, remain canon) and has freely applied both to all his own games, and has encouraged fans to do the same. I find this very sensible in a game developer. But enough about that.

Iga's a great guy. I never want to sound like I'm Iga-bashing because I strive to avoid such behavior, especially considering that he nearly single-handedly saved Castlevania from destruction more than once with his intense passion for the series. But, honorifics aside, implementing an official canon was easily the worst decision he's ever made in his career.

Prior to this, Castlevania was essentially a collection of folktales in video game form. Some of it might have been true, or all of it. Or none of it. As a story, Castlevania has always worked best with this arrangement. Shoehorning in a canon (with remarkable success, it must be said, given what that effort was up against) was a Herculean task on the level of deciding what should be present in the Bible. But like the Bible, what ended up surviving as the "official canon" in the end is only one version, however "official" that version is claimed to be.

To paraphrase one of my favorite characters: "It is difficult to express. Their conclusion is valid for them. Our conclusion is valid for us. Neither result is an error. An analogy. They say one is less than two. We say two is less than three."

Now, there are Christians who follow the Bible with the Gnostic Gospels that had been cast out by "official" councils fitted back in. This is, by definition, nowhere CLOSE to the "official" Bible, but these are still Christians. They just have a different version of the Biblical canon that is true for them without affecting the rest of the Christian population. Mormons, with their additional Holy Text, are much the same way. But here we are dealing with something that isn't world-bendingly important. We are dealing with something where we knew it was all made up before we even got involved in it, and only things which have happened truly deserve to be called history.

Now, given the fact that Castlevania has AT LEAST 3 different timelines (probably more if the gaiden games don't all take place in a cohesive timeline on their own), it shoots the idea of a "Single Universe Canon" down in flames. Castlevania has already proven that it's own canon is highly malleable, and many such as myself agree that it never truly needed one in the first place.

But my biggest point is this: the canon ultimately does not matter more than a quark's neutrino-sized dung unless you personally decide it does. Why? Because it IS fiction. It IS made up. It IS art. Art is MEANT to be interpreted and reinterpreted. In the realm of art, there is no true Objective Reality, only what you make of it.

So go on and quote Iga's version of the tale. It's a wonderful tale and I enjoy the vast majority of it. But objectively, here in the real world, his explanation of the painting he's made (and it is a pretty pretty painting) has no more weight than mine. If Shakespeare were to take a modern high school exam based on his own work, he'd flunk it. Hell, Asimov DID flunk tests based on his own work during his own lifetime, because interpretation is king, and no two are alike.

Konami can tie me to a chair and beat me with a truncheon to try and get me to accept their every word, but they shouldn't be surprised when I spit blood in their faces and whisper "No."

Because it's not a contract. Nobody signed anything. Contracts have to be agreed upon by both parties.

Unless you DID sign something, but that's between you and your lawyer.

[Edit] and here I am laughing at my own lawyer joke far more than I probably should be. C'est la vie.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Dracula9 on February 13, 2017, 02:02:47 AM
You don't have to accept, condone, agree with, or even like the canon.

Your opinion doesn't retcon it. It's all true and official regardless of what you like and dislike.

That's what you're not getting, because you'd rather soapbox artistic philosophy than accept the reality of the word "canon."

I hate just about everything in Dawn. Its narrative is cliched as shit and its characters are fucking boring. Guess what? Dawn still happened and Dawn's still part of the timeline. Don't see me bitching like I'm better than Dawn's writers because I might be able to write something that's better from a storytelling perspective.

I stick to the canon because I like filling in gaps that improve the shitty parts of it while also fitting in nicely. That's how I seek to improve the canon--beating it at its own game. Accepting all of it openly has nothing to do with it. So quit assuming that shit.

Fiction's not permanent? Hate to break it to you, but until Rowling rewrites them all, the Harry Potter books remain the only "officially true" Harry Potter story, in addition to whatever little tidbits Rowling's declared on Twitter and spinoff titles (Dambledrooz being gay, for instance). The best HP fanfic in the world doesn't become anything greater than fanon because it's of better quality than the source. Fiction is written by real people using real writing styles and real literary methods. That means rules exist. Pretending the rules don't matter doesn't make your argument more correct. You mention comics bringing back dead characters? Guess what? Until those resurrections were published, those deaths were true and official and canon no matter what fans thought. Their input didn't alter the canon until publication. And now Jason Todd getting Lazarus'd is the canon truth until something new is published on the matter.

Fiction is fluid, but it's more dough than water.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 13, 2017, 03:50:26 AM
You don't have to accept, condone, agree with, or even like the canon.

Your opinion doesn't retcon it. It's all true and official regardless of what you like and dislike.

That's what you're not getting, because you'd rather soapbox artistic philosophy than accept the reality of the word "canon."


^This^

All I'm basically hearing is that BA doesn't like the Castlevania canon. This is exactly the same situation as when people didn't want to accept that Chronicles essentially took the place of anything that was the canon version of Simon fighting Dracula before Castlevania II. Why? Because they couldn't bare the thought of SCVIV not being 'canon'.

Look, games, stories etc are retold all the time and things don't always add up. There are certain "assumptions" which at times, in more complex stories (Star Wars, FFVII, and so forth) where things are told and re-told differently, that's biound to happen sometimes. (Even in Superman Returns, Kal-El came back to an Earth ripe with cellular phones and LCD monitors.) Some things are for the sake of convenience, some are done in jest etc. However, there's still one main definitive set of events which 99% of the time, can not be debunked.

I have no issues with poetic licence to fill the gaps, to a certain degree. I have no problems with elaborate fan theories which make historically accurate and proven sense in order to explain away anomalies or abnormal plot elements. Hell, as a theorist I put that into my own timelines all the time, mainly Castlevania and Zelda. (I could and have thrown out a timeline explaining how the Sleeping Zelda from Zelda II is actually the first Zelda, but I have to accept that it's not canon #fanondorf) But here's the thing, these theories and timelines don't debunk the existing canon, which would otherwise comprise the creators' intention.

Trust me BA, I loved your theory about Samus in Other M being a clone of the original, it explains away the game's flaws "for the most part" and I think it would be worthy of the Pokemon-'Ash is actually still in a coma'-tier of worshipped and renowned fan theory. Second only to theories such as "Link is dead in Majora's Mask", which although disproven, in an extremely fucking cool theory which deserves props till the cows come home and then some, because it's sheer intelligence to whoever thought of that.

In terms of Castlevania, I would say that it's difficult to quantify the weight of the difference between the Japanese and English versions, particularly with games which involve a lot of elements to the main story's arc (of crucial importance) i.e. games such as LOI and AOS. There are some things which simply get washed out or neglected in translation. There will always be some elements explained differently where languages are involved and although this can be helped, it probably won't, because of the target audiences involved. I digress...

CV is a different series, because although it started as loosely connected games, Iga bound them together more indefinitely by introducing elements that we hadn't previously seen. Iga's canon doesn't include all of the games, and I've yet to see a linear CV timeline which does. However, Iga's timeline does give a clear intention to the games which it includes, and there were obvious ideas re-used from the games which were not included (COTM's dynamic between main character and support character are similar to HoD's, Legends was retconned but then OOE featured a female protagonist, etc.)

But, honorifics aside, implementing an official canon was easily the worst decision he's ever made in his career.

Prior to this, Castlevania was essentially a collection of folktales in video game form. Some of it might have been true, or all of it. Or none of it. As a story, Castlevania has always worked best with this arrangement.

How is it the worst choice he's ever made? That's just ridiculous and has to be coming from a place of pent up emotion.. Sorry you feel that way, but I don't agree with this. CV's story has never been the reason people play it, the gameplay and atmosphere (ost, eeriness and how the game feels) has always been the reason myself and people that I know have loved CV, have played it. The story is a bonus if you're into it and if not, it's there anyway, it give the game context, it gives characters life and development, it puts chronologically dated events into their current day's perspective and makes them relevant again. I will also say Iga did those things with a constrained budget pretty much every time and did a way better job than MS ever did.

I also don't exactly appreciate those personals toward Iga, the man is doing a lot for CV's memory by making BS and giving hardcore fans what they've been longing for. You know of his career, but you never stood in his shoes or did what he did, so just think that you may have done the same thing if it was your career. 

Konami can tie me to a chair and beat me with a truncheon to try and get me to accept their every word, but they shouldn't be surprised when I spit blood in their faces and whisper "No."

Dude, you sound like you're a teenager who is being told off and can't get their way here. I know Bloody is part of your name, but this "no canon" thing is as much if not more of a theatrical production of your own mind-scape than it is of you being 100% serious.

Konami don't give a shit whether you like the canon of a no-longer existing franchise, if they cared they'd be taking your money right now along with everyone else's in this forum.

The bottom line is that there's always been an intended canon at x,y, or z given point in time. Iga's canon was the most relevant canon and it was almost wrapped up. If the existing canon was that malleable, MS would have never made LOS a separate entity altogether, so not as to alter the existing fabric of the CV universe. Granted the story clashed with the old CV, but they could have retconned LOI and made LOS an origins story, yet they didn't. Hence, Iga's canon does stand. 
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: aensland on February 13, 2017, 05:50:48 AM
Prior to this, Castlevania was essentially a collection of folktales
No?
Castlevania, regardless of canon or not, was always the story of the good vs the evil, featuring a certain family , just because you saw the USA CV1 booklet it doesn't means Castlevania is what you think it is

Konami can tie me to a chair and beat me with a truncheon to try and get me to accept their every word, but they shouldn't be surprised when I spit blood in their faces and whisper "No."
Man, you're really dramatic, you should lay down the comic reading for a bit.
Regardless of if you accept the canon or not, the games will be always there, my second favourite game is Legends and it's not like it vanished in thin air just because Igarashi said that Sonia never existed.


Castlevania is the usual case of a consistent canon butchered by early localizations because "people won't get the wacky nips writing" and I think that discussing it it's probably the most healthy thing to do right now because what else can be done? cry about pachislots, call Lord of Shadows garbage? or worse yet, ask "what is your favourite castlevania" for the 1000th time?
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: SecretWeapon on February 13, 2017, 07:41:02 AM
You don't have to accept, condone, agree with, or even like the canon.

Your opinion doesn't retcon it. It's all true and official regardless of what you like and dislike.

That's what you're not getting, because you'd rather soapbox artistic philosophy than accept the reality of the word "canon."

This. No offense to the OP but what a stupid opinion. You can have your alternative facts if you want but they're yours only and unless you become head of the series or the current head sees them and decides to incorporate them, they will remain that way.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: X on February 13, 2017, 10:44:49 AM
Quote
IGA might not be the be-all-end-all but frankly some of you fans need to let the hatred go. Y'all are just as bad as the fanatic IGA fanboys. Extremes are almost never beneficial, to say nothing of practical or effective.

I don't like/get/agree with it = "IGA is the worst person ever and he ruined muh favorite vidyagaem because he's involved with the stuff I don't like/get/agree with" is bullshit logic and anyone endorsing it should be fucking ashamed of themselves for the display of intellectual dishonesty.

Not saying you're enforcing it with this, but I've gotten some heavy-handed hints you've got at least part of one foot in that pond, and I also wanted to put it out there that those in that pond are self-righteous asshats. World ain't black-and-white, ya cranks, so quit treating shit like it is.

^
Speaking of 'letting the hatred go'.

IGA has made some good CV games. I enjoyed playing them, and still do. But his canon take of CV is something I personally don't recognize. There's just too much that falls through the floor by the end of the day. IGA did state in an interview that he glossed over some elements in order to tie in all the existing games' stories (not counting the ones he retconned). But by leaving out some elements without dealing with them instead, created just as much problems as it did fix. I personally don't recognize the LoI Dracula origin (Dracula didn't need one and that's how it should have stayed. The more mysterious the villain, the better), I'm not all for the concept of alchemy in creating the Vampirekiller (the mystical/holy whip of a divine power is more accurate to me), and games like DoS, Judgement, and CoD are irrelevant to me in terms of their story. Bloodstained on the other hand is something that IGA is creating from scratch without stepping on the continuity of another series' toes. He'll have far more success with Bloodstained's story then he ever did with CV's story. And I eagerly await to see bloodstained in action for myself. On another note; While IGA wasn't all that good in terms of telling many a CV story, he did what Mercurysteam could not--retain the Castlevania feel in all his games.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: theplottwist on February 13, 2017, 01:18:18 PM
(https://castlevaniadungeon.net/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FUCx6Qvn.png&hash=b9138dcb52f12a70e9b57a6b02e3dba8)

Here is the thing: You're valuing your opinion equal (if not higher) than a person who was paid to do research and to produce the plot of the game product that you consume -- not develop. This person has not only done extensive research, but has had contact with the previous people involved with the same product to know what their intentions were and where their stories were heading. This person lost nights of sleep and the company of his family just so you could come here and say "Nah, my headcanon is better. Fuck the canon, I'll play by my own rules."

You don't get to say "it's just fiction, chill" because it's not "just fiction". It's years of hard work, sweat, blood and tears. Castlevania has an impact on the world and on the people involved with developing it.

While you can play by your own rules, you'll be ostracized for it. Because the majority of us respect the writer enough to not think we are above the rules he set for the story he has created. This will lead to you discussing apples while all of us are discussing oranges, and all in the name of a sincerely bullshit statement that is as subjective as you claim IGA's "opinion on his work" to be:

"but in the end, a story is owned by the reader, not its author."

What use, then, do we have for authors? If we can just up and shit something we think is superior, then no use in even buying books at all, right? But that's not the reason we buy stories. We buy them to be surprised with every next chapter, not to "compete with the author".

Look, if I write that John could fly because his head could inflate when he blew his own thumb, you better believe that's exactly what I meant. Doesn't matter what you think, doesn't matter if you like it. It's a "like it or leave it" kinda deal -- either you suck it up that John could fly due to his inflatable head, or you'll have to write your own story with your own John that flew by some other means. It's not a competition. The moment you buy my story, you ARE signing a contract to let ME tell it to you -- you don't get to rewrite what I did and act as if it has as much intellectual value.

This thread reminds me of that episode from My Wife and Kids where Jay is so up her own ass that she believes to know better what the author thinks without doing any research- better yet, after doing "her own" research. When Michael contacts the author to know their intent and brings this info back to Jay's book club, she refuses to even acknowledge the correct spelling of the author's name, all because she values her own opinion WAY too high.

Episode, for reference:



This is called "respect". You respect the writer and his work enough to not try and pretend you're better than them at their own creation based on their own thoughts. On their own creation, yes, they are god. The entire plot of a story revolves around WHAT THE AUTHOR THINKS AND WANTS TO TRANSMIT. This is the whole reason why you can't bend it to your whim -- the story breaks.

Sure, you have works that are meant to be interpreted and open ended. Castlevania is not such a work, and I don't think I should quote manuals to tell you that. Castlevania is not a philosophical essay nor commentary in subjectivity. You may argue here that it is commentary on subjectivity because Dracula thinks the powerful define justice, but you'd be missing the story is telling you that this is WRONG and Dracula is incorrect on his assumption.

I wonder what would happen if IGA sat down one day and thought exactly like you do -- screw the previous work, now Belmonts will be ducks disguised as humans. And Dracula's "kill all humans" schtick will just be slang for "I really love tomato juice". Not only that, but decided that this should be canon ALONG WITH the previously established work.

Ask yourself what would happen if he thought that his opinion was just as high -- if not higher -- than the statements of the previous developers on Castlevania, instead of respecting and BUILDING UPON their work, and subsequently earning the right to have his opinion be as high than the other authors'.

LoS may have been mostly shit. But I have infinite respect for Alvarez in that he chose to do his own story -- going as far as to claim it doesn't belong on any canon but his -- instead of crapping up something on the canon just because "he didn't like it" or because "it didn't make sense to him".

TL;DR: I think your "the story is owned by the reader" act misinterprets the meaning of the line and is incredibly disrespectful to the writer. I am a writer myself, and if some fan of mine one day comes spouting this kinda nonsense to me after reading something I DID NOT meant to be "open ended", spent sleepless nights crafting it, years pondering specific plot points and innumerable hours away from my loved ones to build it, I'll sucker punch their neck so hard that their esophagus will turn into a snorkel.

You tried this stunt before. It didn't work. Now you have framed it with long words, funny references and quote mining, and it still doesn't work. It doesn't work because it wants to divide a fractured fanbase even more.

Also, some things I should mention:

"Despite the theory's title, Barthes never says that the author's own interpretation is completely unimportant—just that it is only one of many possible interpretations. This also does not necessarily mean that every interpretation is equally valid; an interpretation that is based on a flawed, incomplete, and confused reading of the text will always be flawed, incomplete, and confused regardless of how much Barthes' essay is raised in protest."

"How, for example, could a general criticize an underling for getting something absurd out of a set of instructions he or she may have given them? "Sir/ma'am, what makes you think you know what the orders meant just because you wrote them?"

The vibe I get from your post is "I did no research but I also want to be right, here is some essay proving it!!!!!"
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: AlexCalvo on February 13, 2017, 01:58:40 PM
Castlevania has been a game that focused on it's own continuing history since the beginning. And very early on a continuing timeline became one of its more attractive story elements.  It has always been about the continuation of a timeline, and what Iga did was 100% the natural progression of this.  He simply took what was already the idea of how the games related to each other and solidified it into something a little more concrete and consistant.  It seems like you just really like the idea of very roughly connected folk tales, I recommend the Zelda series.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: DarkPrinceAlucard on February 13, 2017, 02:34:07 PM
I find it disappointing that fans feel the need to constantly castrate what IGA did with the series, here is a guy who obviously has A LOT of passion for CV as a whole which is far more than I can say about any other game director/producer I have seen in the industry, most are mostly Business>>>>>>>>passion when it comes to making video games, IGA on the other hand was someone who not only loved the series but also made it a point to try to actually resonate with the fans as a whole. IGA only tried to do the best with what was given to him by Konami, he tried his best to make the continuity and storyline of Castlevania as coherent and believable as possible which is already not a easy task as is but he still managed to pull it off the best he could and I personally liked it.

In short I feel IGA gets far to much flake from certain fans, someone as passionate as him that cares about the fandom should not have his OFFICIAL CANON work be ignored simply because some fan feels its not up to snuff within their own personal headcanon because after all who are we as consumers to think we know more than the official source of Castlevania in Konami/Igarashi?
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 03:03:59 PM
Things here are a little more heated than was my goal, but I suppose I invited that with how sternly I wrote things.

But here's my deal. I'm a storyteller myself. A writer. I write stories to tell them. What is official is less interesting to me in the face of "what tells the best story"? This is admittedly a very abstract way of looking at things. I compare what I have been given to everything I have come to understand, and use what I know to better explain the things I don't. Now fortunately, this is mostly in little matters unconnected to plotlines.

My issues with Castlevania's canon have pretty much always been boiled down to "they could be telling this in a much more impactful/meaningful fashion". Iga is, and I say it for the umpteenth time, a fantastic storyteller when he's left to do his own thing and let his artistic side take over and work in concert with the his team's. Fortunately, the vast majority of his games fall under this category. Even under all the schlock anime cliches, Nanobreaker had excellent running themes and a story that's worth telling. This is why Dawn (and to a lesser extent, Portrait) infuriates me so much as a guy who writes this sort of stuff himself. There's not a line of Dawn where I feel it is anything other than a forced contractual obligation that Iga honestly had no desire to actually do. The whole thing reeks of "there were a million other Castlevania games I could have been making but Konami made me do this one instead". This is also why the game's explanations seem to fly in the face of all established series logic. It is hands down the worst writing of Iga's tenure, but I don't blame him. I blame Konami's lawyers. But as a guy who is always looking for what tells the best story, Dawn singularly stands out as a story that shouldn't have been told in the first place.

Portrait might have been this, but the second half of the game saves it from the scrappy heap and tells a great story about legacy and family ties. I do think the World War II setting was wasted, but that's my only lasting complaint. What this says to me is that unlike with Dawn, Iga saw that obligation coming in advance, and took measures to prepare for it, and by Order of Ecclesia, he was back in the saddle and at his best again. True, it wound up being effectively his narrative finale for the series chronology, but damn it was a fine note to end on.

It's clear that y'all think I'm wrong on this. Maybe I should put more stock in canon (there's that word again). But as long as there's a story to be told better, I can't. I've tried and I just can't. To me, the argument is essentially this: holding yourself as beholden to whatever is (currently) canon is like arguing numbers, which presents a finite amount of everything present. It is inherently limited. Arguing the merits of the actual storytelling itself, rather than what the story fits into, is like discussing the beauty of an art gallery. There is no end of perspectives and new understandings. A whole lot more "well shoot, I never thought of it that way" instead of "well actually the director's sister's cousin's boyfriend said THIS so it clearly means that". I'd rather encourage the community to seek "I never thought of it that way" instead of "WELL ACTUALLY...!" because it promotes better longevity and, despite passionate negative feelings in the short term, better health of the fan community as a whole. Otherwise we trap ourselves into a grey world of "what's your favorite" threads and "let's bash Lords of Shadow for the millionth time".

And Dawn's story will forever be a black stain on the series.

But that's okay. I don't blame Koji Igarashi-sensei.

And hey.

At least it's not EROTIC VIOLENCE.

Assume nothing, question everything.
The answers you get when you do can surprise you.

The end.... or is it?
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: theplottwist on February 13, 2017, 03:23:43 PM
This is also why the game's explanations seem to fly in the face of all established series logic.

Help me here: What do you think, on Dawn of Sorrow, that flies in the face of all established series logic?

Help me understand the issue.

I dislike DoS' style of narrative and animu themes, but I don't see where are the contradictions. Let's work them over and discover what the issue is, objectivelly speaking.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: SecretWeapon on February 13, 2017, 03:26:49 PM
Quote
My issues with Castlevania's canon have pretty much always been boiled down to "they could be telling this in a much more impactful/meaningful fashion"

Tough luck CV isnt your series, it's Konami's. Go find something else or write something yourself author. And probably theplottwist headcanon version of events is better than yours anyway.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: VladCT on February 13, 2017, 03:27:02 PM
Honestly, I think it's fine if you want to ignore certain parts of canon... as long as you clearly acknowledge and mark it as your personal fanon. Personally, what's important for me is the clear distinction between canon and fanon so that the lines don't get blurred and fanon gets mistaken for canon (looking at you, Touhou fans).
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 03:44:44 PM
Help me here: What do you think, on Dawn of Sorrow, that flies in the face of all established series logic?

Help me understand the issue.

I dislike DoS' style of narrative and animu themes, but I don't see where are the contradictions. Let's work them over and discover what the issue is, objectivelly speaking.

I'd love to do so over PM but I'd like to keep this thread "complete". I've kind of said what I've wanted to say here, and feel better for having done so. But you've always had a good eye for explanations, so PMing would be awesome.

Honestly, I think it's fine if you want to ignore certain parts of canon... as long as you clearly acknowledge and mark it as your personal fanon. Personally, what's important for me is the clear distinction between canon and fanon so that the lines don't get blurred and fanon gets mistaken for canon (looking at you, Touhou fans).

Admittedly, a bit more than half the time I don't preface things as well as I should. I'll accept, for instance, that Dawn happens in canon and discuss it with someone all live long day (or until I get bored and start playing Skyrim), but as far as my personal reckoning goes, it's a gaiden "what-if" tale.

Tough luck CV isnt your series, it's Konami's. Go find something else or write something yourself author. And probably theplottwist headcanon version of events is better than yours anyway.
1. True
2. I did and it was AWESOME (and makes more than a few nods to Castlevania) and I'm on track to publish later this year.
3. Probably, but how about you twist that knife a little more while it's there?  ;)
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: theplottwist on February 13, 2017, 04:07:35 PM
I'd love to do so over PM but I'd like to keep this thread "complete". I've kind of said what I've wanted to say here, and feel better for having done so. But you've always had a good eye for explanations, so PMing would be awesome.

Just send your points over PM.

To be clear, what I'm setting out to do here is explain the context of your issues IF there is one. I'm not agreeing to debating subjective matters ("this animu bullshit is terrible") because there really can't be any resolution. What I'm agreeing to do is to do exactly what I always do: Point out details, explain them in the big context of the canon and use sources to back it all up.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: DarkPrinceAlucard on February 13, 2017, 04:19:35 PM
Just send your points over PM.

To be clear, what I'm setting out to do here is explain the context of your issues IF there is one. I'm not agreeing to debating subjective matters ("this animu bullshit is terrible") because there really can't be any resolution. What I'm agreeing to do is to do exactly what I always do: Point out details, explain them in the big context of the canon and use sources to back it all up.

I'm interested in this as well, why not elaborate on your point here The Bloody Aperture?

It does pertain to the topic discussion at hand after all so a pm should not be necessary, I'm curious how it contradicts the established mythos as well.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 04:21:50 PM
Boy I'm probably going to see my ancestors for this.

Word for word the PM I sent:

Okay, so my biggest standing issue is the discarding of the Candidates theory that Aria introduced and that Dawn shoots down in flames.

I can buy Alucard's assertion that anyone can become what Dracula was -- this is something that Lament explained very well. But I DO believe that the story simultaneously tries to hammer home that various aspects of Dracula ARE reincarnated (not resurrected, but proper reincarnation), and so these people are those we call "dark lord candidates" who by the nature of their birth take to the role with far greater ease than Jim Bob the 56 year old IT technician who lives in a bachelor pad apartment. Furthermore, Soma, Dmitrii, Dario and Graham all exhibit traits that are fundamental to the being we know as Dracula, which I have covered previously. This is something that was also done in the Final Fantasy VII universe with Kadaj, Loz, and Yazoo all being "candidates" for Sephiroth's role but each emphasizing a different aspect of him, so it's very little trouble for me to see how Dawn of Sorrow would work with a similar theme, especially given that Final Fantasy VII is a tremendously influential series that Iga (by virtue of working in the avenues he does) couldn't possibly be unaware of or unaffected by.

But instead, the game builds this up for the whole duration and then during the last lines of dialogue calls it patently bullshit when it seems most obvious that both angles are true and not mutually exclusive.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: SecretWeapon on February 13, 2017, 05:28:46 PM
1. True
2. I did and it was AWESOME (and makes more than a few nods to Castlevania) and I'm on track to publish later this year.
3. Probably, but how about you twist that knife a little more while it's there?  ;)

1- Yes.
2- I doubt it
3- See 2. And change that ridiculous signature ffs
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 05:51:12 PM
And change that ridiculous signature ffs

Gonna embrace my inner child here.
It's not changing until I get bored with it.

And mostly because I don't like being demanded to do things by rude people who don't bother with asking nicely.

PlotTwist and DarkPrinceAlucard are reasonable guys who, while stern and more than willing to backhand me in the face with some humble pie when I need it most, asked nicely for engagement. It makes me want to play ball by their terms and conditions much more than you demanding I do something to suit your tastes. I'll grant this is slightly hypocritical of me given past remarks I've made, but nobody's perfect and improvement is an ongoing process.
Don't be like me.
Be like PlotTwist and DarkPrinceAlucard.

Inner child rant done.

[Edit] I did pare the sig down some though.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 13, 2017, 06:34:35 PM
So basically you don't like how other people aside from plottwist and alucard are speaking to you, yet you can shit canon, which is a historically cemented set of transpired events and reasoning by the creators? That's funny to me, not in the "ha ha" sense.

You can believe whatever you wish, I personally don't believe your beliefs will change because people are asking nicely, nor do I have vested  interest in seeing others change. It's not what this is about imo. If people don't want to believe the canon, they don't have to. I simply haven't seen reasoning to the tier of your Other M theory (which I've praised btw) in doing so.

Plottwist raised that he thought this was a 'lazy' attempt to subvert the canon by using fancy words and writing peoples eyes off. I tend to agree with this line of reasoning. I'm all for embracing differences, however, your last post basically said "screw the canon and all who believe it", which is not the correct way to approach it imo. There needs to be logical reasoning, not just an endless sea of words.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Lumi Kløvstad on February 13, 2017, 06:52:23 PM
So basically you don't like how other people aside from plottwist and alucard are speaking to you, yet you can shit canon, which is a historically cemented set of transpired events and reasoning by the creators? That's funny to me, not in the "ha ha" sense.

You can believe whatever you wish, I personally don't believe your beliefs will change because people are asking nicely, nor do I have vested  interest in seeing others change. It's not what this is about imo. If people don't want to believe the canon, they don't have to. I simply haven't seen reasoning to the tier of your Other M theory (which I've praised btw) in doing so.

Plottwist raised that he thought this was a 'lazy' attempt to subvert the canon by using fancy words and writing peoples eyes off. I tend to agree with this line of reasoning. I'm all for embracing differences, however, your last post basically said "screw the canon and all who believe it", which is not the correct way to approach it imo. There needs to be logical reasoning, not just an endless sea of words.

Well, I am definitely under the influence of emotions I shouldn't even have given how petty my circumstances are. Honestly, I know I majorly butt heads semi-annually here it seems, and every time I at once feel pissed off and sad at myself at the same time. This is not me asking you to feel sorry for me. This is me attempting to explain me as I am. But needless to say, emotion is a terrible thing for polite discourse. I try to dial it down, but I end up dialing it up instead. These sorts of discussions, I am now convinced, aren't well suited to text because intent and tone come across terribly in that environment. I dunno, maybe if it were video chat this whole thing would have gone smoother, more politely. But now I'm just making things worse by trying to put the Humpty Dumpty I knocked over back together.

That being said, beliefs don't change, as you said, because people ask nicely. But attitude often does. At this point, I'm just tired of the drama I didn't even mean to unleash.

My whole argument meant to start as "canon is great, but don't arbitrarily limit yourself to just one way of looking at things. Read between the lines, form your own conclusions." Which should be my new signature. Screw it, it will be.

And then that somehow mutated into this hot gooey mess and I can't even clearly remember all the particulars of how. I swear to everything I hold dear I don't mean to do this

Anyway, I really wish a mod would come along and lock this damn thread already. What was meant to inspire a friendly but fast paced and intense debate has ended horribly, just like last time. Sorry that this ended such a dramatic and rude disaster.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: zangetsu468 on February 13, 2017, 08:52:27 PM
Anyway, I really wish a mod would come along and lock this damn thread already. What was meant to inspire a friendly but fast paced and intense debate has ended horribly, just like last time. Sorry that this ended such a dramatic and rude disaster.

Why though? The idea is appealing to some of us, but it just needs more thorough researching.
If there's a reason you don't consider certain games canon, I'd much rather hear those, than the canon completely being thrown out the window. I don't think locking the thread is the answer either. All I'm putting forth is "what is the key element to what you're suggesting" i.e. We know you dislike the canon, what will you propose in its stead? This will require a lot of research, but it will be doable.

I don't think you need to apologise, I know I'm certainly not looking for one. I'm just pointing out that you can't deride others' beliefs, not because its a consensus, but because you don't want them deriding yours. That's all.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Dracula9 on February 13, 2017, 11:01:52 PM
And then that somehow mutated into this hot gooey mess and I can't even clearly remember all the particulars of how. I swear to everything I hold dear I don't mean to do this

Anyway, I really wish a mod would come along and lock this damn thread already. What was meant to inspire a friendly but fast paced and intense debate has ended horribly, just like last time. Sorry that this ended such a dramatic and rude disaster.

This is why we take a step back from emotionally-driven opinions before making attempts to open the floor for discourse and discern whether or not the standing argument is bogged down by over-reliance on subjectivity.

I enjoy debating with you most of the time, but there are certain instances whereupon you regard your opinion(s) as greater in objective value than they are. As previously mentioned, you don't see me constructing my arguments here based on my opinions outweighing the facts--my arguments herein are centered around the objective nature of canon details.

And if you're upset by or ashamed of how much heat has occurred, then you may want to consider stopping this kind of behavior:

Quote
And mostly because I don't like being demanded to do things by rude people who don't bother with asking nicely.

Quote
To me, the argument is essentially this: holding yourself as beholden to whatever is (currently) canon is like arguing numbers, which presents a finite amount of everything present. It is inherently limited.

Quote
Otherwise we trap ourselves into a grey world of "what's your favorite" threads and "let's bash Lords of Shadow for the millionth time".

Quote
I'd rather encourage the community to seek "I never thought of it that way" instead of "WELL ACTUALLY...!" because it promotes better longevity and, despite passionate negative feelings in the short term, better health of the fan community as a whole.

Quote
Canon is great, but don't arbitrarily limit yourself to just one way of looking at things. Read between the lines, form your own conclusions."

Quote
It makes me want to play ball by their terms and conditions much more than you demanding I do something to suit your tastes.

Et cetera, et cetera. I'd quote other posts in other threads for emphasis, but I'm keeping it relevant to this thread alone for clarity's sake. You throw down the gauntlet and then get defensive and accusatory when things don't go your way--all this guarantees is that you're gonna piss people off, something completely counterintuitive to what you claim to be is your endgoal for the fanbase. It's great when you realize you're dug yourself a hole and display open humility, but it shouldn't take a shitstorm for you to be humble about your opinions. Kinda defeats the purpose of humility when it's selective only when you're out of other options.

It's like you went to a biker bar and punched a random dude in the nuts, tipped over all the bikes outside, and told everyone there to fuck off...and then got surprised when a bar brawl started. You get what you give.

Now, let me break down the above quotes just for good measure of explaining what I mean.

Quote
And mostly because I don't like being demanded to do things by rude people who don't bother with asking nicely.

1: Most folks here have, at some point or another, granted you the levels of courtesy and tact you seem to be requesting with this assertion. Your unwavering opinions and pontificating of them more likely than not contributed to them feeling their goodwill was wasted, and over time gradually pissed off and frustrated them from dealing with it multiple times.

2: You mean like the guy declaring something factual and objective to be worthless and that his opinion and skills are superior to those who have been doing it for a living for decades?

3: "I don't like being told to fuck off and wish everyone would treat my discussions respectfully, so here's me doing the inverse to them--why are they telling me to fuck off and not treating my arguments the way I'd like??????"

4: You get what you give. People react to what you hand them, and if you hand them something shitty you relinquish the right to be taken aback when they react negatively in return. It'd be different if you presented your arguments in a manner that didn't shit on the canon-faithful or narcissize itself as greater than those who created the world and lore long before you had your own thoughts on the matter, and were still being met with the same kinds of responses. But you didn't, so it's not.

Quote
To me, the argument is essentially this: holding yourself as beholden to whatever is (currently) canon is like arguing numbers, which presents a finite amount of everything present. It is inherently limited.

Sure, keep making boldfaced assumptions and lumping anyone who values the canon into a "you're inferior to me because you don't think like I do" pen and pointing at them in the village square. That's a good way to get people to treat you and your arguments more tactfully.

Quote
Otherwise we trap ourselves into a grey world of "what's your favorite" threads and "let's bash Lords of Shadow for the millionth time".

True, same old shit gets boring, but that's not your call to make. Fans can discuss whatever the hell they want and you don't get to control what subjects are and are not "valuable." This is not 1984 and you are not Big Brother.

Quote
I'd rather encourage the community to seek "I never thought of it that way" instead of "WELL ACTUALLY...!" because it promotes better longevity and, despite passionate negative feelings in the short term, better health of the fan community as a whole.

Altruistic and noble as a cause, but again not your call to make. Growth of any community is like evolution--you cannot force it to advance at a faster rate because you're impatient. It is a slow and tedious process that yields the most sensible contextual outcome naturally over time.

Quote
Canon is great, but don't arbitrarily limit yourself to just one way of looking at things. Read between the lines, form your own conclusions."

Again with looking down on anyone who disagrees with you. "Form your own conclusions...but if they conflict with mine they're wrong."

Quote
It makes me want to play ball by their terms and conditions much more than you demanding I do something to suit your tastes.

Completely hypocrisy. You rubbed another man's rhubarb and now you're surprised he's rubbing back. Not how it works. You don't get to control how people interact with you. All you have control over is how you yourself interact with them, which will affect the inverse over time. You make brazen assumptions and accusations, you reap the repercussions of those being assumed and accused upon.

So all in all you don't like the reception you've gotten. That's fair. You might've started it but it's fair enough to have misjudged the tide and regret taking a dip.

Way I see it, you have two options:

1: Apologize and self-deride in too-late humility, drop off the map for a short period, and then come back and do it all again later as you've done in the past, ensuring the shit will continue again later anyway. You've done it before and it annoys the shit out of me when you have, but it's your decision regardless of what I think of it (boy, doesn't that sentence sound familiar?).

2: Actually look at what you're doing and saying and the effects that has, and make a change in some form or another that counters those effects from happening again. Since people here generally aren't braindead or unmovably prejudiced about X or Y, it should be obvious that reception to your thoughts will be dependent on the manner in which you present them. Do a better job of that, and more favorable results can be expected. It's basic social psychology--you act the mickey, you shouldn't be surprised if the rest of the Disney cast shows up.

It's up to you, in the end. You can apologize and then just do it again later and invalidate that apology, or you can actually try and work on the things you do that piss people off to begin with. Most counterarguments here have less to do with your actual opinion and more the way you presented it, which I think says a lot about the people here.
Title: Re: The Death of Iga (he's not actually dead, guys), and Fanon Discontinuity
Post by: Gunlord on February 14, 2017, 01:15:35 AM
I think it may be good to lock this topic. I don't think anyone was trying intentionally to be disruptive or unproductive, but judging by Bloody Aperture's posts, he's in an irksome state of mind right now and it might be good for him to take a breather for a bit. Other folks would find that relieving too, I think.