[EVA] Progression of my Evangelion interpretations, theories, etc
kari.lehikoinen at opaasi.fi
Mon Oct 23 10:24:09 EDT 2000
> >>Although the literature of EVA gives a lot of information, all of which
> could have been picked up from the show, it doesn't really conclude
> 1) All of which could have been picked up? Not really. There's multiple
> instances where the book states as facts things we the viewers could only
> roughly guess (with a great deal of perception).
Well, yes, that's what I meant. The truth was in there. But it was confusing
and hard to understand, and I think it was purposefully made so. I, for one,
thought something like "I'm not sure, but it might be like this...". The show
really, in any point, doesn't say: "It's like this,...". The book clarifies
something, but leaves many things unclear.
> Did you, by any chance,
> know the definition of the Tantai before viewing the RCB?
Actually, yes, sort of. I had read something about Kabbalah after viewing
the Tv-series, and I sort of roughly quessed :).
> 2) I never said it concluded anything, did I? The "completeness of the
> framework" implies having all the facts on file.
Right, you didn't, and I'm not blaming you for it. I just took the opportunity
to express my opinion, that all the things in Eva about NERV, SEELE, Angels,
EVA, and souls was made purposefully hard to understand.
More information about the oldeva