Are deconstructions subjective and a point of view, rather than a form of analysis?

RocketDude · 2011-09-01 21:28:05

^...Wait, really?

Bob · 2011-09-01 21:28:51

~~Then how the hell are DYRE and evilneko such good friends?~~

They don't?

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 21:29:19

I meant sexually.

Vivi · 2011-09-01 21:29:35

Someone should be a Kodomo parody anime with what Bob said. Some old guy perving on little girls and getting his ass handed to him in various ways, forall eternity. It could be like a Wile E Coyote type of thing

^Implying circlejerking means you have to be attracted to the people.

Bob · 2011-09-01 21:30:15

-sigh- If only I could draw. :<

Vivi · 2011-09-01 21:32:38

I would watch that show like you don't know what.

Also, all of the little girls are based off of popular female anime characters, and they all someone remain oblivious to this pervy guy and his schemes, dodging and avoiding all the traps just like a cartoon little kid.

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 21:32:43

Implying circlejerking means you have to be attracted to the people.

Well, duh, I was just using it to mean a literal circlejerk rather than the metaphorical one, jeez.

And yes, yes you put your hand in places you want it to be, not just randomly in whatever person's crotch you want to sex up.

You never know when you'll get acid on your hands.

Vivi · 2011-09-01 21:34:53

I also meant literal circlejerk.

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 21:37:10

hence the second and third paragraphs.

Bob · 2011-09-01 21:40:03

Also, all of the little girls are based off of popular female anime characters

Hmm... So, there'd be a creepy emotionless girl, a German tsundere, an annoyingly smug girl and her obnoxious, equally annoying, bubbly little sister, an otaku... And some other ones.

DonZabu · 2011-09-01 21:40:09

Soggy Biscuit.

Bob · 2011-09-01 21:41:17

WHY

WHY DO I KNOW WHAT THAT IS

DonZabu · 2011-09-01 21:45:03

It'd make the forum circle jerks we usually think of a lot more interesting, that's for sure.

Vivi · 2011-09-01 21:47:08

But...is being able to win TRULY a good thing?

Counterclock · 2011-09-01 22:12:18

A better deconstruction would be following a group of female teenagers who try* to sexualize themselves because of the supposed maturity and popularity of it, but then they slowly and surely realize that the entire concept of it is completely fucked up.

*: Emphasis on try

Vorpy · 2011-09-01 23:01:54

@everyone discussing the KnJ deconstruction

that's not what deconstruction means

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 23:05:28

> Implying that Deconstruction meant anything even when Jacques Derrida coined the term.

Chagen · 2011-09-01 23:08:04

Deconstruction: Taking a litery device--a trope--and showing off the what would need to happen to cause that trope in real life/what would happen if that trope happened in real life. Used to show off how unrealistic some tropes can be.

AND THAT WAS THE END OF THAT DEBATE

RocketDude · 2011-09-01 23:09:51

Apparently, though, there's a definition of Deconstruction as used in Literary Analysis that means "Taking apart the language of something in order to see any contradictions."

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 23:11:33

Not necessarily the language so much as the content. But yeah, the original term means "Taking the content apart and studying it carefully, analysing each part and how (And if) did it fit with the other parts"

Vorpy · 2011-09-01 23:12:52

Yes, tropes can deconstruct things, but I don't think stories can deconstruct themselves.

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 23:13:27

You need an intro to post modernism ASAP

Nova · 2011-09-01 23:20:24

DeAngelis writes:

Most people have not yet read Nymphet, since we haven't even published it yet, so I would like to clarify an important point: Nymphet is a story about a mischievous young girl who tries to sexually entrap her teacher. The important context here is that the girl's advances on her teacher are never reciprocated by him; her teacher is horrified by her actions, and his romantic interest is in fact another adult teacher. The comedy arises out of this young girl saying and doing improper things (much like Crayon Shin-chan, which is currently being aired on Cartoon Network) and seeing her teacher squirm with discomfort and shock while he struggles to keep his composure, at the same time trying not to make a fool of himself in front of the woman he loves.

What's the point he is making there? He's saying that the situation is one where a little girl sexually teases an adult teacher, who isn't interested, no sex takes place, and (by implication) that's better than the reverse situation, of an adult molesting an unconsenting child. His point: the instigator makes a difference. A sexually aware child being the instigator with a responsible adult who acts responsibly (so that nothing actually happens), is better than a sexually unaware child being exploited, with an irresponsible, criminal adult as instigator.

In real life, that comparison seems obviously correct. Rape is really bad, right? But as for fiction, I think he may have overlooked something critical about North American culture which differentiates it from the context where, as DeAngelis goes on to say, Kodomo no Jikan "is not considered pornographic by any means, and Japanese would be shocked to hear this sort of accusation about what they consider to be a mainstream property." The missing insight is that the "mischievous young girl" scenario directly conflicts with the script for adult/child sexual interaction baked into almost all North American thought on the subject. We know how the world is supposed to be, we know how the world must be, Kodomo no Jikan doesn't fit into that world, and it's unimaginably offensive to many North Americans because it's literally unimaginable to many North Americans.

As North Americans imagine it, children are not sexual beings. Sexual contact (even if only potential) between adults and children has to be framed as an adult pervert exploiting an innocent child victim. That's just the way it is and the way you're required to think about it. You are not allowed to frame it in other terms. If you do, no matter how strong the facts may be on your side, it's you that is wrong, not the social construction. Those statements are made explicit in sources like R. v. Sharpe with its talk of "cognitive distortions": there are some thoughts that are the wrong thoughts to think, and a child as sexual instigator instead of sexual victim - indeed, a child as anything but an object - is one of those wrong thoughts. Good people aren't allowed to think that.

RocketDude · 2011-09-01 23:34:23

DeAngelis? Since when did Derek D of FastLaneDaily write papers about this stuff?

Nova · 2011-09-01 23:36:34

No, it is this guy.

The first paragraph contains a link to the essay I lifted that from.

RocketDude · 2011-09-01 23:38:06

So, the essay writer is saying that "Blah Americans cannot grasp the concept of little girls being sexually attracted to adults therefore you're wrong"?

Bob · 2011-09-01 23:38:51

Nymphete?

Nova · 2011-09-01 23:39:44

I believe his point is "North America has different cultural values than Japan does."

^ I do not know.

Nova · 2011-09-01 23:40:23

Nymphet is another name of Kodomo No Jikan, apparently.

MillerCross · 2011-09-01 23:41:00

De Angelis is saying that Japan and America have different censorship culture. But it doesn't mean that Japan condones Paedophillia. It's just that what's considered porn here is not considered porn there.

Also, I may dislike manga, but I'm liking this guy already. <3

^Yup. Just googled it.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Are deconstructions subjective and a point of view, rather than a form of analysis?

Comments