Deleted by author, probably.
That's a shame, some interesting stuff was said there.
Sorry about deleting it. I just felt like the thread was irrelevant because I thought it was received poorly. I should have given it more time. Anyway, I felt that the community could benefit from actively finding art to compare Yume Nikki to, being that it is a mashup of art itself, with no real direction.
I don't think that being received poorly makes it irrelevant. Talking about that stuff, even if it is negatively, is still talking about it. Shitting all over a thread energizes the community in its own way. Controversy shouldn't be avoided like that. Oh well.
Yes, shitting on a topic does create community activity, but in no way does it freshen the community. It festers the community by enforcing and circle-jerking the safest opinion to have. Anyway, I wanted to back out and deleting the thread was the best way I could avoid posting about it. Then there's this thread.
I don't mean to be a bother with the community, is all.
Anon who was offering criticism of your post, here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_gadfly
Your perception is curious to me.
You are accusing "us" (it was really only me) of creating a circle jerk, but then you say here you only want to present ideas that are not controversial? That is the very act of circle-jerk creation you are partaking in. You SHOULD post controversial ideas, or else you are as guilty as any of us.
Please read the above link. Socrates is rightfully hailed and eternally enshrined as the Grandfather of all Western Philosophy for his acts, primarily, as a social gadfly. If you perceive yourself to be a gadfly, there is no greater service you can offer to a given community.
Given this new information, whether or not you decide to continue your discussion about Yume Nikki as a work of art rather than a game is up to you.
I just liked my post where I compared the discussion of the topic's invigoration of the community to cancer cells. Sure wish I could read it again.
I don't remember it, but now I wish I could read it, too. Deletion really should only be a final resort, there is a reason saging exists…
I actually have bits of the old thread saved.
Since I have limited internet access at the moment, I saved the page for offline reading on my phone, and, well, here it is.
On another note, hopefully more related to the old thread, regardless of how much or how little thought or meaning Kikiyama put in the game, no art exists in a vacuum. The game was inevitably influenced by something, whether it be anime or other video games or novels or paintings or advertisements or some shit… Pointing out the parallels and similarities could give some pretty interesting insight, couldn't it?
I mean, I understand how someone who has seen all of the 53679 "MADOTSUKI WAS RAPED XDDD" posts can have a knee-jerk reaction to anything to do with theories and speculation, but come on, this stupid No Fun Allowed "everything about YN has already been said" attitude is totally unnecessary. It just discourages any positive discussion or creativity (and maybe like 2 shitty threads, which wouldn't be a problem considering the inactivity of this place).
And honestly, even if, as someone has said, every single thing about YN has been revealed, written out and presented, it's still fucking fascinating to find artists that have had absolutely no way of knowing about YN come to similar artistic conclusions as Kikiyama. Makes you think about what kind of lives they led, what kind of personality or way of thinking they had… What were they trying to say with this stuff??? For what reason?
Here's a drawing that I stumbled upon on the net, by a 19th/20th century French artist named Odilon Redon. It immediately gave me Yume Nikki vibes.
Here's a short description of his work from Wikipedia:
Redon's works were described as "a synthesis of nightmares and dreams", as they contained dark, fantastical figures from the artist's own imagination. His work represents an exploration of his internal feelings and psyche. He himself wanted to place "the logic of the visible at the service of the invisible".