0

There’s always this inherent kind of limit to the self,” he says. “You know, there is a limit to how far one can connect with the world because of the self, and I think that’s what I’ve been talking about the whole time. Like, why is that hard? Like, why aren’t films true? Why aren’t songs true?

I don’t really get what he’s saying, especially the “why aren’t films true? why aren’t songs true?” part. Does it mean that life doesn’t go the way like films or songs? Like life doesn’t go the way you imagine/want?

3
  • 2
    Your English is far better than the incoherent blethering of the person whose inanities you are quoting. For the record, as far as I can work out myself, your understanding is correct. Jan 18 at 14:52
  • 1
    I'm reading it more as "films and songs and other artistic creations aren't perfect representations of the real world because there's a limit to how much we can understand the world", but the question kind of goes beyond English comprehension and into the realm of art interpretation, which is not really what we are equipped to do here. Jan 18 at 15:57
2

I think the meaning of this context is about the ability of a person. We have our limit. There are things in this life beyond our hand which are hard to do. We are living in real-life, not a dream. Everything is not as good as a movie or a song where the main character success and get what he/she wants.

So the part you are confused is simple. Life is not as good as a movie or a song

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.