Yes, statistically it is unlikely to be taken in that sense and it seems an important consideration. But it is a place where perpetuating the thinning of the concept happens. As in can be quite subtle, using the remaining degrees of freedom to support a revelatory rather than obscuring closer reading benefits from using every turn it is possible.
Might be specific on how I read and project meaning. Multimeaning messages are hard to manage.
I do think that you can get from
What is love? Baby don’t hurt me. Don’t hurt me. No more
to Amor Fati (which I guess I am kind of reinterpreting as Fate of Love rather than Love of Fate)
FWIW the original chorus didn’t use ‘love’ every time. It was only my intermediate (in my opinion over-)simplification that did.
I don’t think most people’s immediate interpretation of ‘love’ in this context would be as broad as this?
Yes, statistically it is unlikely to be taken in that sense and it seems an important consideration. But it is a place where perpetuating the thinning of the concept happens. As in can be quite subtle, using the remaining degrees of freedom to support a revelatory rather than obscuring closer reading benefits from using every turn it is possible.
Might be specific on how I read and project meaning. Multimeaning messages are hard to manage.
I do think that you can get from
to Amor Fati (which I guess I am kind of reinterpreting as Fate of Love rather than Love of Fate)