Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-29788596-20160906011125/@comment-32182236-20190918215102

"I'm not adding lamposts to Undertale or inserting what I think the games mean as what Toby thinks the games mean."

Oh, I'm not saying you're doing it. This has been something the fans have done many years ago. You're just going along with what they're saying. THEY have been inserting what they think the games mean as to what Toby thinks the games mean. THEY'RE the ones "adding lampposts", by claiming that Undertale's message is that everyone can be saved, nobody's truly evil... Really, I'm just telling you to go with what the game itself says, rather than what the fans SAY that the game says.

"I concede that my initial claim of no character being evil was inaccurate and what I should've said is that the characters in Undertale all have positive and negative aspects to their personalities rather than go the 'no evil' route which in hindsight was lazy on my part. It would've been more accurate to say the characters had the potential to do both good and evil."

That is in fact true. In fact, I even agreed in that sense with Chara. I do think they were corrupted by something. But I wouldn't just call it a main point of the game, or something that the game "outright says". Not unless the game actually does say it outright. If we want the main point of the game, we might as well just look at what the game flat-out tells you. But, at least you're not claiming that it is.

"Don't kill, and don't be killed. That's the best you can strive for."-Asriel Dreemur

Now, I wouldn't claim that it's the main point of the game.. But I would say it's a far better candidate, simply because that's been explicitly said. Though it's truly impossible to know the author's true intentions. Which is why I tend to avoid looking for it. I analyze the game strictly on its own merit, and apply the literary theory of the Death of the Author.

...Sort of. Many use that to say that a story means whatever they say it means. I, however, use it to say a story means whatever the STORY says it means. As in, if the story has event X happen, and gives us conclusion Y as its meaning, and there's no evidence within the story that the narrator telling us the events is an unreliable narrator, then chances are, event X happened according to the story, and conclusion Y is the meaning of the story. If it wasn't meant to be there, it wouldn't be there. And if meaning Z was supposed to be there, it would be there.

"That was what I should've gotten across rather than the 'nobody is good or evil' angle which I admit isn't a detailed enough assessment and something of a blanket statement. Do you find this to be more agreeable?"

I would find it more agreeable.. As it is true within Undertale's world. But I wouldn't just say the game says it outright, when it really doesn't. I'd present the actual arguments supporting this position instead.