Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo
Of course not, I usually trust them. But when an author proves to me that the truths of his story can be changed at any given moment as he see fit, of course I can't trust him anymore.
Ironically Ryuukishi seems to realize the importance of trust between reader and author. So why he decided to betray it is beyond me.
|
Well authors usually do not use red truth to begin with anyway.
In the general expectations I have of literature to give foreshadowing enough to allow reasoning out the story, I don't really think Ryuukishi broke any trust.
He did a lot of unconventional things, but he gave us plenty to guess at them.
The only thing I think anyone can say is that Ryuukishi didn't explain to us what game we were playing at and what rules it used. However we were warned in arc 1 itself that the goal of the game was to figure out these rules. Explaining the rules of his game is the equivalent to giving the answer, so he can't do that.
Trust however remains something that cannot be 100% certain, or else no one would ever fall to deception.
Edit: Aura, I think Jan was saying something like you can objectively fit a consensus within that subjectivity.
For instance "What is a christian?" would probably spawn an endless debate of subjectivity, but within a specific time and society you can reach a consensus as to that subjective definition. You can then assert wether someone objectively fits that consensus or not.
The best example I could give of that is that you can objectively say that someone is a "kid" or an "adult" even tho that is a very subjective definition, as long as I refer to the social/legal consensus of what is an adult/what is a kid.