The Text Says No: Why you can’t interpret Limbo any way you want

Nightmare Mode's Eric Swain explains why the myriad of interpretations of Limbo cannot be.

[frelyler]

Interpretation is just that, an interpretation. It's what makes us unique, there is no right or wrong to it, it's how you view something and take a personal meaning from it. To limit someone's interpretation is to take away their unique human attributes. To say someone is interpreting wrong or they can't do it a certain way is like saying you are breathing wrong, You either breathe or you don't. You can either interpret something or not. There is no right or wrong and the title of this article disproves the authors pretentious rant. Who are you to say what interpretation should be, regardless of what the intended message was, you can still make something it was never intended to be and give meaning to it. What a pretentious know it all.

[Necros]

There is a difference between interpreting and cherry picking facts - while coming up with your own - in order to suit your theory. The later isn't interpreting - it's wishful thinking.

If that's like saying one is breathing wrong, then YES, someone IS breathing wrong! Instead of inhaling and exhaling, they are just exhaling and exhaling!

The fact a comment seems based on the title of the article shows me yet another thing: you can't interpret an article you have not read it yet.

[frelyler]

I read it alright and my opinion has not changed. "Interpretation: an explanation of the meaning of another's artistic or creative work." There is no right or wrong, just a person's viewpoint. One set of facts may mean something entirely different from one person to the next, does that mean someone is wrong? Absolutely not. An author may say he meant his work to mean A,B or C, yet someone who viewed the work may have a completely different interpretation, than A,B or C. Look at the bible, there are so many ways to interpret that book, yet all of the interpretations are just that. There is no right or wrong to it. I took issue with the title because it is pretentious and the author basically boasts his ideas and viewpoints are concrete, impossible and that is a pretentious stance. Now, in regards to my comment about breathing you did not understand it. Let me put it this way, it's like saying someone is exhaling wrong. You either exhale or you don't there is no right or wrong. You either breathe or you don't and you interpret or you don't. To claim you are the absolute authority when it comes to interpreting work is just what I claimed the author was, pretentious.