"Even Momma Said It..." Angela Thread (Spoilers)

Post by **The Adversary** » 07 Dec 2009

If people didn't analyze the figures hanging on the wall, people would still believe they were female. Analyses are imperative to understanding.

Post by **liquidus118** » 07 Dec 2009

MMY wrote:If people didn't analyze the figures hanging on the wall, people would still believe they were female. Analyses are imperative to understanding.

True. I agree though that analysis - especially in Silent Hill, is important to gaining a better understanding of a series that definitely deserves it, I just think maybe in that thread we were looking too closely - to the point we couldn't see the full picture.

Though maybe me believing that over-analysis is possible with SH automatically makes me an idiot, but it seems this forum is one of the rare places where people respect others percetions and views, so I'll stick with the more obvious choice that she WAS sexually abused.

Post by **The Adversary** » 07 Dec 2009

How is it "more obvious" when so much evidence relies solely on interpretation? and so much more has come into question?

Post by **liquidus118** » 07 Dec 2009

MMY wrote:How is it "more obvious" when so much evidence relies solely on interpretation?

Well since she says things like "Or you could just for me to, like he always did" and "You men, you're all after the same thing!" and the fact that the Abstract Daddy looks like a bedrame with a guy (From what I can see) on top of a screaming woman the idea that she was sexually abused would probably spring to mind pretty quickly.
And I know that in the other thread you disproved some of the stuff but that's why I'm saying it's the more obvious one; the conclusion most people reached without analysing it as deeply as that thread did.

Post by **Darkness Concept** » 08 Dec 2009

^ I think what you're trying to say is that you are sticking with the most common initial reaction to Angela, correct?

Post by **The Adversary** » 08 Dec 2009

>I know that in the other thread you disproved some of the stuff but that's why I'm saying it's the more obvious one
This is an incongruity: If it's been disproven, how is it also "more obvious"? and why would it even be believed at this point once it's been disproven?

I simply don't understand the mindset. That's like saying humans believed the sun revolved around earth b/c it was "obvious." Then it was proven the earth revolved around the sun, but people still believed otherwise b/c it was humanity's initial reaction to what revolved around which.

D.N.C.