The Waifu Curse
Or The (Hopeless) Cycle of Media: Death&Rebirth and Second Death
Media experiences a certain life cycle over the course of its existence. Not only through its process of being created but long after it is in the hands of the public for any length of time. Some refer to this process as “Death of the author” or as a “dual authorship” relationship. While these topics are often brought up when the nature of interpretation is at hand, this process also happens amongst non-scholars and the average consumer of the media. Not only average consumers but the open market as well. What this means is that people (both with and without influence) are able to shape another’s creation even if they have no direct connection to that piece.
Death
There’s no direct term for this phenomenon but I’ve come to call it “Intellectual Property’s Loophole”. Following a certain philosophical mindset, if one’s being doesn’t exist without being observed, then one’s art only exists if it is viewed as well. What this ends up meaning is that one’s creation is as subjectable to misunderstanding as one’s own self. What this means is any misunderstanding or different perspective becomes as integral to the work of art as what the original artist put into it.
Has there ever been a show you’ve watched and there was a character that you felt you perfectly understood on a personal level? However, a certain change occurs in later iterations that undermines an aspect that you felt was integral to the character’s being? This could be a one-time gag that comes to define them or a reversion of their character to a state they were supposed to be passed. It’s very easy to blame the authors of the work for misunderstanding the characters they are penning but the blame also lies with those who consumed the media and defined characters themselves. Fanworks, fan theories, and fan interpretation all play a part in the creation of these later works and rebirths of characters.
If the original artist’s influence over the work dies once it’s available for any consumer to engage with, then a rebirth takes place once the fans begin to exercise their ability to create or take inspiration from the original work.
Rebirth
Fanworks and fan influence are integral to art’s memetic spread. After all, if something isn’t being talked about or being observed, then was it ever truly made? The sad caveat with creation is this “deal” of rebirth. From misappropriated quotes, opposite lessons being learned, or complete misunderstanding, all of these shapes a work’s rebirth. Some may attempt to further understand what the original artist tried to share. This, however, does not stop or invalidate another’s attempt to isolate one aspect of the work and tailor it to their own liking. This cycle is clearly defined in the average course of an anime/video game waifu’s existence.
A typical character written for a narrative is one that typically undergoes a narrative arc. They start in one stage of their life and then undergo a transformation by the end to effectively become a different person. But, once that work is in a consumer’s hand, that character doesn’t need to continue their arc. If there is an “ideal version” of the character for the consumer, then they possess the power and influence to define that character how they see fit. They could be as docile, aggressive, independent, co-dependent, angelic, demonic, flirtatious, or as incompetent as the consumer so chooses. This rebirth and restructuring of the character is an unspoken deal that the creator agrees to when they create a character. They allow for that character to be rebuilt as many times as the character is viewed.
What does this mean for works that continue from the original source? Should they use the original work and artist as the source of inspiration or is it their responsibility to also adopt the rebuilt versions of the characters that the audience themselves have created? Whichever version they choose to proceed with, will that “destroy” the other or will they both exist in the same space? What this means to authors and consumers can vary from perspective to perspective. What I propose to call this is the “second death”.
Second Death
If a piece of work is created by an original author and is later passed on to the consumers to create and interpret as they so choose, the original author and consumers can allow for the rebuilds to exist in their own world. No further influence from the creator is necessary and it is left just in the hands of those who consume it. Another choice could be to iterate based upon the consumer’s co-authorship. Create as defined by what the co-authors chose was important and forsake the idea of the work solely being that of one creator’s. A third choice (which appears to be a direction that more eastern creators are interacting with) is creating a response to the fanworks and interpretations of their original work through the guise of said work. Recognizing their own legacy and creating a response to it by acknowledging the responses and creations that were made after the first death.
If Death Of The Author could be interpreted as a type of call and response system, then the Second Death is the means by which that call and response can turn it into a conversation between the creator and the consumers/co-authors.
This system is theoretically how one could create a constant conversation with their fanbase through their own works but a factor that shows up is the financial stability of having this conversation with those who are as responsible for the character’s identity as the original creator. Disagreements on interpretation cause many in-person relationships to fall apart. Should a disagreement occur with those who provide financial stability for your original work, then you start losing the ability to respond simply due to the lack of profit.
The choice for the author is to let their work die and be rebuilt by the consumers, aid the rebirth in making continuations more in-line with the work’s new definitions, or make a work in response to the rebirth. There is no true escape from this cycle unless the uncommon occurrence of complete understanding or lack of a need to clarify if the perspective of both the author and the consumer completely align.
Ad-infinitum
Where does that leave the artist? What choices can the artist make when their work will be as subject to misinterpretation or misunderstanding as any other form of communication? It isn’t like social media or post-creation interviews don’t exist. An artist has multiple avenues by which to explain their intent with their works. This could help some people clearing up their own interpretations of what they consumed or it could be seen as too little too late. Its value is completely subjective to whoever witnesses and interprets it.
Another factor to consider is art’s expanded reach. What was once something that was regulated to a small area around the person who made the original work, all art now has the potential to be seen around the globe. Art exhibits and film festivals could be venues where creators could speak to those who saw their work and have a conversation with them. However, due to the larger global scale, speaking to each individual and seeing how closely their interpretation aligns with the artists’ intent is an impossible task even before language barriers are considered. The task of controlling the piece’s image was much more obtainable and reasonable.
The same could be said about a person’s being as well. The fewer people they know and who know them, the easier it is to maintain one’s own image. Once one’s notoriety balloons beyond what they can maintain, both their truth about themselves and other’s truths about the person become equally true.
What this means for art (and the general human condition) no lone person can say. All people can do is figure out what it means for themselves and proceed from there. You can choose to fight the tide and reaffirm who you are to the world and open a dialogue with others and consumers, you can let others determine the truth based on what is said, or you can try to co-exist with both the image and interpretation of yourself from yourself while also adhering to what is expected of you.
There may even be another path that I can’t see but I’ll have to wait for this piece’s rebirth in order to bear witness. Then the choice becomes how I chose to respond afterward.
If there’s one paragraph that I’ll allow to be self-servicing, it’s this one. Any piece of art or expression of self is done at the moment. A moment that is captured, distributed, interpreted, and analyzed long after the moment has passed. Once that moment has passed, the author’s own feelings and interpretations could (and very likely will) have swayed. This is what I believe to be the “true” death of the author. Once an expression is out, it can not be recaptured or remade. It exists as an expression of that moment. Interpretation can sway due to the moment it is witnessed and perceived even from the very same person merely three days apart from one another. Time marches forward but expressions of self allow a momentary blip of someone to live forever. How the present and future come to remember that moment is a matter of perspective.
Time marches on and brings change. Change can occur in anyone so long as they are willing to change. A piece of art can be reborn in as many different ways as possible as long as the original piece exists. This also means that a second death can always come as well. Marking the end of one “call and response” and creating another should the new call ever be heard in the first place. This conversation of interpretation is a foundational aspect of art and what makes creation so daunting but also so exhilarating for creatives.
Death paves the way for rebirth. Yet every rebirth eludes to the eventual second death. Be it from the original author, or someone else who consumed the original and become a co-author. Everything that lives is designed to end. What we create or choose to leave behind is perpetually trapped in this never-ending cycle of life and death. It could be seen as a curse. A never-ending punishment for wanting to express one’s self and obtain some form of immortality. Creation could be the closest mankind reaches godhood.
Whichever path a creative chooses to take, have faith that you’re taking a glimpse at that person at that moment. Life is made of moments but we can make many more and change with each one. Each new moment brings infinite possibilities for creation, interpretation, and inspiration.
