[ SECRET POST #2811 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2811 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.

__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.

__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 056 secrets from Secret Submission Post #402.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Except headcanon is objectively wrong if it's opposite of canon. If a character is said, like, to have a favorite color or have a backstory where X is an important factor, unless you're AUing, your headcanon does not trump canon.

(I will make note: this doesn't mean trans headcanon are wrong, as you can spin it as post-op and whatnot! I'm just saying that painting a broad brush of "headcanon can never be wrong" is kind of wrong in itself--some are okay, some are objectively wrong)

[silverr]

I see your point but for me it's more of a grey area, (or perhaps I'm more splitting hairs) because by that definition fix-it fix (especially the sort that "fixes" canonical character death) and a lot of AUs are then "objectively wrong" ... which I suppose they are, in the sense that they are counter to canon! Still, I want a better label than "wrong" for them: variations on a theme is one of the general joys of making fanworks, after all. ~ I guess my point is more that to me, attacking people for their headcanons begins to edge into "you're interrogating the text from the wrong perspective" territory. If someone's having fun and isn't attacking anyone else, leave them be unless they've specifically asked for a fact-checker.

(Not that that you can't ask someone what "facts" (i.e., canon evidence) they're basing a particular headcanon on -- but even then, unless they're open to learning that they based their headcanon on faulty information, it generally does little good to point out errors. A small example that I can think is that for years in a certain naimanga fandom, one character's name was thought to be "Afeika" ... but as it turned out that this was due to mis-hearing (mis-translating?) a sentence that went something like "I am a thief, a robber" as "I am Afeika, robber." People who had adopted Afeika for the character got very defensive when it was pointed out that The Thief King's name wasn't defined in canon, I think because those who pointed out the error often had such a "OMG U R such an idiot!" attitude. Ultimately, did it matter?)

I guess this is why I tend to believe that while facts can be labelled as right or wrong; interpretations, opinions, and headcanons? Not so much ... as long as it's clear what the distinction is.