Case (
case) wrote in
fandomsecrets2014-09-06 03:53 pm
[ SECRET POST #2804 ]
⌈ Secret Post #2804 ⌋
Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.
01.

__________________________________________________
02.

__________________________________________________
03.

__________________________________________________
04.

__________________________________________________
05.

__________________________________________________
06.

__________________________________________________
07.

__________________________________________________
08.

__________________________________________________
09.

__________________________________________________
10.

Notes:
Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 064 secrets from Secret Submission Post #401.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 - unrelated .gifs ], [ 1 - posted twice ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Re: T'hy'la
(Anonymous) 2014-09-07 12:46 am (UTC)(link)I'm not saying they MUST be romantic. I'm saying that I think Roddenberry included t'hy'la to show that lover is a valid (a valid, not the only) interpretation of their relationship in canon. That you can see them as friends or brothers or lovers or all three. And the editor's note gave himself an "out" which was kind of necessary given the climate at the time.
I'm not saying that t'hy'la is saying YES THEY'RE 100% CANON AND YOU MUST BELIEVE THIS. I think it's saying "This interpretation of their relationship is perfectly legitimate and equal to seeing them as friends or brothers." That there's nothing wrong with viewing them that way and if you don't want to you don't have to but if you want to, you CAN.
I wasn't suggesting that Roddenberry KNOWS that those passages were romantic, just that with the seriousness he treats their relationship with, I can't imagine him using anything in those passages as a JOKE.