Oct. 29th, 2008

elwen: (law talk)
So recently there's been a bunch of stuff about Code Geass in this magazine called Continue, including author interviews (?), a bio of Lelouch, and spoilers. )

The third time this was posted on [livejournal.com profile] code_geass, I responded that I was not going to accept any beyond-the-episodes evidence as conclusive. If the author wants spoilers to be true, he should say so in the episodes. ) I don't care what it says in some official guide or interview. What you broadcast is what you've got -- don't go telling the fans different stories after the fact. It's basically the same as saying, "Oh, I had this beautiful vision of how the story would go . . . but then the producers cut the number of episodes in half." Sucks to be you, but it doesn't change my opinion of the final product. I would have loved to see the other version, but if I can't, I'm going to ignore it entirely.

Anyhow, a few minutes later, I thought, "OMG, did I just apply original public meaning to Code Geass? @_@" Justice Scalia would be proud. Down with legislative history and authorial intent! D:

Con Law 101: Originalism is basically a theory about interpreting the U.S. Constitution that says you should look to the world of 1789 (or thereabouts) to figure out what the document means. Original public meaning is the form that says the meaning is what the public of that time would have understood the Constitution to mean. Other forms are framer's intent (what the framers intended it to mean when they wrote it) and ratifiers understanding (what the ratifiers understood it to mean when they ratified it). Compare reading a poem and thinking about what thoughts it inspires in your mind, versus trying to figure out what the poet was trying to say.

Profile

elwen: (Default)
elwen

March 2015

S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Jul. 21st, 2025 06:19 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios