Often in fandoms, you see the word of the creator of something being totally the final word about it. Sometimes you see somebody pitting two contradictory interviews against each other like "wow this person must have been lying one of these times. What's the real story of how they were inspired?"
and it just makes me think like, okay, but how would you actually talk about stuff you made?
Damn, if i was made to answer questions multiple times for my tiny tiny barely-anything stuff, there's no way I'd keep that consistent. If you asked me something like if my little comic characters are intentionally overused archetypes, I'd give you a completely different answer depending on chance, and each one would be true and contradictory. Like, yes? But also no. But yeah absolutely, but not at all, no.
It's funny that fandom culture tries to document this kind of stuff from the creations it follows. You have to build this kind of foundation of what's actually the most real fiction, or to follow a satisfying narrative about how something came to be.
But if you were giving answers about your own process, I feel like it would be like filling up a dryer full of marbles and having to explain what happened by way of describing a single marble's trajectory.
also in a weird way, i feel like stuff - shows, novels, whatever - get worse when the idea of what it is becomes so cemented that it leaks onto the creators, you know what i mean?
there can be a directly true answer as to what something's About, but it's all always comprised of a trillion things. I feel like believing your own hype just leads to trying to adhere to this simplified, understandable impression of what makes up the creation.
(that said, this isn't me trying to suggest like, oh, things suck now, fans are ruining it, or this is a problem that needs solving. I like things, I'm a fan of things! Stuff just happens. I suspect this thing is one of those things, and that's totally normal and fine)
