The Creator Said So! — So What?
This post was created as a response to video:
This raises an interesting topic, not just about the meaning behind an anime but creative output in general. Do creators get the final say in how their work is interpreted?
You might think the simple answer is yes, their work means what they intended it to mean, end of story, right? I suppose it depends on why the individual created their product in the first place; was it to elicit an emotional response from their audience? Perhaps it was simply to make money. To avoid answering a question with additional questions and rabbit holes, I’ll just stick with the first one because it’s italicised. Just be made aware that whatever conclusion I arrive at today, most certainly will not have considered every layer to this conundrum, not by a long shot.
I argue that the consumer matters more than the final product, because it’s fair to say that the consumption of the respective product is the ultimate goal of its inception. The controversy that surrounded the meaning behind Evangelion (Anno, 1995) stems from its consumers, not the creators. Anno was merely honest about his feelings, which was a difficult pill to swallow for fans who connected so closely with the characters within the narrative. However, consumers digging for self-reflective meaning and purpose beneath the surface is not new, nor happenstance. It is a humanistic quality to crave both connection and closure in what we experience and what media we consume. Connection is present in the very fabric of what makes a story character likable by audiences (Iglesias, 2005).
[Spoiler alert for] The Beginner’s Guide (Wreden, 2015) draws an interesting comparison between the role of the consumer and the creator, and I’ve no doubt this was intentional in its design and narrative. The story of this game puts the player in the shoes of its maker, and his interactions as a consumer with a friend developer’s work; Coda. As the narrative unfolds, it becomes apparent that the player, contextually as the consumer, is forcing meaning upon Coda’s small and simple game designs. Digging to find underlying intent and define his (Coda’s) character based on these findings — it remains open to interpretation whether there really is any meaning or not behind Coda’s work; it’s beside the point. Coda does not appreciate the manner in which his work is consumed by the player, causing him to end their friendship as a result. This leaves the player to reflect on whether they were right or wrong, to force meaning or to just appreciate the games for what they were, small and simple unfinished designs. I feel I must note; there’s also a huge amount of speculation and interpretation to the meaning of the game and its characters outside of the game’s narrative, but that’s for another discussion.
I have personally experienced a similar situation in a narrative game I penned and developed, one of its first players drew a connection between two of the characters that I hadn’t even considered. They went on to submit fanart depicting their interpretation and experience with my work, which was both enriching and eye-opening for myself, this was also the day I learned what headcanon meant. There was a moment when I told the player (lightheartedly) that their interpretation was horribly wrong, how could they have come to that conclusion when I wrote the damn thing and barely saw this connection?! Their response; “I don’t care!” The confrontation provoked a moment of self-reflection for myself. My own media was flourishing as a direct interaction from its consumer and how it affected them individually; it no longer mattered if it was in the way I envisioned it.
What did matter is what my audience could take away from my product, to appease and fulfill them in whatever way it was able, at an individual level. If a hero’s journey in Evangelion helped someone with their own troubles, then who cares if that was the underlying intent? The media was consumed in an individual manner for the betterment of that person, that should be enough. Anno, myself, and other creatives should probably think this way moving forward, because what we create is inevitably guaranteed to be interpreted differently by individual consumers — accept it and embrace it, along with the growth of your product.
Bibliography
Anno, H. (1995). Evangelion. Retrieved 25 October 2019, from https://www.evangelion.co.jp/
Iglesias, K. (2005). Writing for emotional impact: Advanced dramatic techniques to attract, engage, and fascinate the reader from beginning to end. WingSpan Press.
PBS Idea Channel. (2013). Does It Matter What Evangelion’s Creator Says? | Idea Channel | PBS Digital Studios [Video]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVm65tlhqw8
Wreden, D. (2015). Everything Unlimited Ltd. Retrieved 25 October 2019, from http://everythingunlimitedltd.com/
