Analysis/interpretation of Mirrorcle World PV

[ayu_fantasy]

It seems that you have thought through this alot... Thank you for this!

[ImpactBreaker]

Is there such a thing as "wrong interpretation"?

In my opinion, depending on the content of the artistic material, there may be. It's mostly obvious for those kind that are more concrete and objective, such as you reading a book and it says a certain character was murdered and buried; there's no way someone could interpret it like "oh but that character is alive (in the real meaning of it)". That would be a wrong interpretation.
However, in the case of ayu, her lyrics and sometimes PVs, carry rather vague ideas. ayu never seems to tie a definite conclusion to most of her lyrics and videos, so there's plenty room for interpretation. Since she makes everything quite vaguely/incomplete, a place for a "wrong interpretation' or a "stretch" gets lost, because nothing is tied to a definite conclusion. I hope I made sense here.

[Raiu-Ayu]

Wow man!! That is deep!! The PV seems really different to me now...

[jon_the_d]

story for you:

another singer releases a song with fairly deep and profound lyrics, and the artist's message and the songs meaning puzzled the fans, so they debated at great length on the official forum. There was much discussion and various people were convinced that their interpetation was THE right one. Eventually, the artist posted (as it was the official forum he visited it often and posted occasionally, and was particularly interested to see what his fans thought of his new songs). He said, "right, sorry, I can't lurk here any longer, I've got to leap in and tell you how completely WRONG you are, what this song is about is this:..."

The artist is the only person who truly knows the message and meaning, as it is their creation, their idea. and any other interpretations are wrong. I'm not saying idealist's is wrong, not at all, I think he may be very close to ayu's true intended meaning. unfortunately for us, ayu will probably not give away her true meaning, and so we can only try to guess. but the point of this post is to argue that interpretations can be wrong.

The only time I can see where ,pre than one interpretation can be right, is if there was no meaning decided upon in the first instance, and they just cobbled together a lot of random, seemingly meaningful imagery, without any thought or design. I think you'll agree ayu is not the kind of person to do this. which means there are definitely wrong interpretations of this PV and Song.

(to repeat though, before love appears or whoever completely misunderstands me again, I am not saying Idealist's interpretation is wrong, in fact I think it may be very close. but that doesn't mean that it is right, evenif we all think it's right, ayu might read it and say "er...no.")

We'll probably never know.

But I'm happy to try to guess.

[ImpactBreaker]

Originally Posted by jon_the_d

story for you:

another singer releases a song with fairly deep and profound lyrics, and the artist's message and the songs meaning puzzled the fans, so they debated at great length on the official forum. There was much discussion and various people were convinced that their interpetation was THE right one. Eventually, the artist posted (as it was the official forum he visited it often and posted occasionally, and was particularly interested to see what his fans thought of his new songs). He said, "right, sorry, I can't lurk here any longer, I've got to leap in and tell you how completely WRONG you are, what this song is about is this:..."

The artist is the only person who truly knows the message and meaning, as it is their creation, their idea. and any other interpretations are wrong.

It's their creation and their idea, but once they expose it to public, they can't force people to see it their way. That's one of the things about art. You saying that, almost sounds as if ayu hates a certain song she made, everybody will have to hate it, because she is the creator and she hates it, and the only reaction people can have to it is hate, not love, which is nonsense (in fact she doesn't like Endless sorrow, while many of her fans do). Who knows if Leonardo made Monalisa in order to have the dubious smile? Maybe he painted her just to paaint some weird woman without caring about the smile , but then other people noticed it and nowadays the painting is appreaciated because of that dubious smile. What if he was revived and said "gosh, I didn't really even attempt to do a dubious smile in this painting". Would the dubious smile be taken away? That's the great thing about art. It's somebody's creation? yes, but it can be appreaciated in different ways by different people, and as long as it is the artists call to have its work exposed to public, the public can react to that piece of work the way they want, not the way the artist wants. If the artist doesn't put any bounds or any clear direction as to where they want their work to follow, they should expect anything from it. That's ayu cases. Her lyrics are vague and unclear, which leaves the person reading them to take their own conclusions. ayu probably knows what she wanted to mean, but since she doesn't tell us, we are left to wonder that by ourselves.

[jon_the_d]

Originally Posted by ImpactBreaker

It's their creation and their idea, but once they expose it to public, they can't force people to see it their way. That's one of the things about art. You saying that, almost sounds as if ayu hates a certain song she made, everybody will have to hate it, because she is the creator and she hates it, and the only reaction people can have to it is hate, not love, which is nonsense (in fact she doesn't like Endless sorrow, while many of her fans do). Who knows if Leonardo made Monalisa in order to have the dubious smile? Maybe he painted her just to paaint some weird woman without caring about the smile , but then other people noticed it and nowadays the painting is appreaciated because of that dubious smile. What if he was revived and said "gosh, I didn't really even attempt to do a dubious smile in this painting". Would the dubious smile be taken away? That's the great thing about art. It's somebody's creation? yes, but it can be appreaciated in different ways by different people, and as long as it is the artists call to have its work exposed to public, the public can react to that piece of work the way they want, not the way the artist wants.

er...no.

whether people like or dislike a piece of work and whether the artist likes or dislikes the same piece of work has got NOTHING to do with the message the artist intended to get across.

their intended message, if they had one, is irrefutable. that is what the song, or poem, or novel, or painting was supposed to convey, the very purpose of its creation. if other people interpret it a different way, then it is a failure, either on the part of the artist to convey their message, or the part of the audience on failing to perceive the true message.

people might find other meanings, but just because they can be found, doesn;t mean they are right. indeed, if you found one of these "alternative" meanings, you have ultimately missed the artist's message and therefore not grasped the meaning of the piece.

[ImpactBreaker]

Originally Posted by jon_the_d

their intended message, if they had one, is irrefutable. that is what the song, or poem, or novel, or painting was supposed to convey, the very purpose of its creation. if other people interpret it a different way, then it is a failure, either on the part of the artist to convey their message, or the part of the audience on failing to perceive the true message.

well, there's a interesting brazillian book called "Dom Casmurro". This book taslks about a guy who gets in love with a girl who has "dissimulative eyes" called Capitu. Making the story short, the whole book focus on her dissimulative eyes, trying to imply she wasn't exactly a very trustable person. In a part of the book, he starts to speculate that she's probably cheating him with one of his best friends. Lost in speculations, he ends up assuming she truly cheated him after she gets pregnant and the child "resembles" a bit of his friend, but she promptly denies it. They break the relationship and their life turn into misery, but they never come back again. End of the book. The great mistery of the book is: did Capitu truly cheat on him or not? There's no REAL evidence that makes you assume if she did or not, even though the book tries to work on the disimulative aspect of Capitu's personality (the book is old, and no blood or paternity tests were available at that time). Maybe her dissimulated eyes and the fact their son looked a little like the other guy + a few other things that happen, make it likely that she cheated? But hey, what if everything was just things created on his mind because of his jealousy and she truly didn't? The book leaves you with that question. Is it wrong to think she did? Is it wrong to think she didn't? Is it wrong to be undecided? Obviously not. The writer of the book never left any notes giving any answer. Maybe he had an opinion about it, but since he didn't make it public, people are left to wonder what they want, and there's no failure about it. Maybe if he had tied an answer to it, the book would have lost its value as an artistic piece. Whoever read the book can have the feeling they want, and that's where art truly exceeds the simple concept of only being the "creation of an artist". If there's just the artist and the art, but nobody to appreciate it, the art does not exist.

Something simillar happensd in Agatha Christie's Murder on the Orient Express. Who was the murderer after all? Even though there's such a thing as an alternate ending telling somebody was the real murder, it is nothing but an example, and the book leaves you free to decide who actually did the murder. There's no failure in the book, in the person who wrote it or those reading it.

[zoomzoom]

Originally Posted by jon_the_d

There was much discussion and various people were convinced that their interpetation was THE right one.

But Idealist never claimed that his analysis was THE right one. It's just how he saw it. It's a nice read. Nothing more to it.

[Maemi]

for me,this PV sucks.

[jon_the_d]

agreed, because it was their intention to not reveal the "answer".

this links back to my previous post: (perhaps you missed it?)
from here there are two possibilities...

1# There is an answer.
The artist "knew" the answer, (it's their story, their characters, they can decide what the "answer" is if they want to), even if they don't reveal the answer in the book, the answer exists and it is the only true answer.

2# There is NO answer.
The artist never decided on an answer, they left it unanswered purposely, and as such there is no correct answer. only endless speculation.

however, you're talking about a "did she/didn't she?" kind of unanswered question. or a "whodunnit?" unanswered question. Which is still very differnet to determining what ayu's lyrics mean in mirrorcle world.

are you saying you think that mirrorcle world is a #2 kind of problem?
that the meaning of mirrorcle world is undecided by the artist? do you think ayu didn't actually decide on a meaning, and left it completely open?

I personally think that the question of mirrorcle world's meaning is a #1 kind of problem. Ayu knows what she wants to say, we don't, we can only guess until she gives us "the answer".

but as long as their is an "answer", there will be many many wrong ones.

[ImpactBreaker]

Originally Posted by jon_the_d

agreed, because it was their intention to not reveal the "answer".

this links back to my previous post: (perhaps you missed it?)
from here there are two possibilities...

1# There is an answer.
The artist "knew" the answer, (it's their story, their characters, they can decide what the "answer" is if they want to), even if they don't reveal the answer in the book, the answer exists and it is the only true answer.

2# There is NO answer.
The artist never decided on an answer, they left it unanswered purposely, and as such there is no correct answer. only endless speculation.

however, you're talking about a "did she/didn't she?" kind of unanswered question. or a "whodunnit?" unanswered question. Which is still very differnet to determining what ayu's lyrics mean in mirrorcle world.

are you saying you think that mirrorcle world is a #2 kind of problem?
that the meaning of mirrorcle world is undecided by the artist? do you think ayu didn't actually decide on a meaning, and left it completely open?

I personally think that the question of mirrorcle world's meaning is a #1 kind of problem. Ayu knows what she wants to say, we don't, we can only guess until she gives us "the answer".

but as long as their is an "answer", there will be many many wrong ones.

Well, I understand your point, though I probably have a different point of view. If ayu has the answer, but she has chosen not to give us, it is not wrong for us to come up with our own conclusions, even though the creation is hers. While ayu probably has made it with a #1 intent, the fact her message is so unclear and vague, leaving it open to different speculations (maybe this is where you mentioned the failure point, I dunno), and she has chosen not to give any explanation for it, to me it ends up fallen to a #2 type. You'll probably disagree but that's how I see it.

Also, what if there is a #3: the artist have their answer but don't give it, and want people to come up with their own conclusions, the way they want, meaning the others wouldn't be wrong either? How to make a difference from #1? It would be impossible, so to me artists who chose to hide the answer should be accepting to any kind of conclusuion made out of it.

[jon_the_d]

the main issue about being a #1 or #2 is whether the "answer" exists or not.

I never said it was wrong to speculate! No! it is fun to speculate! but me must accept that our interpretations may be incorrect if there is an "answer", whether we ever know that answer or not. (obviously, if we knew the answer we would not need to speculate or interpret)

as long as there is an answer, it will be a #1,
if there is no answer, and there never was, then it'd be #2

Ayu or whoever might make the lyrics or meaning vague and obscure to try to make the "answer" more illusive, but if the answer exists, then it's still #1.

Ayu always said she writes for herself....maybe the illusiveness is to hide the true meaning.

she is very clever.

[ImpactBreaker]

^Yeah, you make a lot of sense. I have to agree on that.

[jon_the_d]

I'm glad we're agreeing!

been nice talking with you

[jon_the_d]

so he claimed it was the wrong one did he?

what are you on about. read our discussion.

[zoomzoom]

Originally Posted by jon_the_d

so he claimed it was the wrong one did he?

what are you on about. read our discussion.

No, like you said, he speculated. He never said "this is for sure what ayu wanted to say". You seem to insist that he said "THIS IS THE WAY AYU WANTED US TO SEE IT" so you can prove him wrong.

[ImpactBreaker]

hmm maybe we're being a little nitpicky about concepts here. imo, Idealist posted what he believes the PV truly conveys. He doesn't force people to believe he's right though. It's up to anyone who reads it to agree or disagree, and even more than that, to appreciate it or not, either agreeing or disagreeing.

[jon_the_d]

well said impactbreaker. let's hope everyone else understands this from now on.

[GSC89]

Wow, just read the analysis, that was deep, I actually thought the PV was only just portraying her feelings about deciding to continue music despite going partially deaf.

[ImpactBreaker]

This is all going to a pointless discussion imo Will someone other than Love Appears even bother to read my interpretation on the PV? ahah I know it's **** but....I tried LOL (quickly tries a failed atytempt on getting the thread to its original point)