fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3035 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3035 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

__________________________________________________

13.

__________________________________________________

14.

__________________________________________________

15.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 081 secrets from Secret Submission Post #434.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

You have to understand that loving a person's WORK does not mean you love their character.

For example:
tw: rape, ephebophilia

I LOVE LOVE LOVE Pan's Labyrinth with my entire being. It's a beautiful story. But I also have to reconcile that that beautiful story -- which is, incidentally, told from the perspective of a preteen girl -- is directed by a man that supports a fellow director who drugged, raped, and sodomized a preteen girl (Roman Polanski).

No one is perfect. Literally NO ONE is perfect.

You know Ghandi? The dude was a racist and also slept with young women to "test" himself. And yet he did INCREDIBLE and BEAUTIFUL things for humanity.

You can still admire the man's work and his accomplishments without venerating the individual. Please remember that.

He slept next to young women without having sex with them*, not with them

Kinda important

Err, Pan's Labyrinth is directed by Guillermo Del Toro, not Roman Polanski.

Gandhi anon from above

This whole comment is a mess

They even spelled his name wrong

I never said Gandhi had sex with them. YOU assumed that. I said he slept with them to test himself. Which is literally what he did.

Apologies for the spelling though.

Dude when you say 'slept with young women' sex is implied, that's how slang works

Well, I figured from the contexting of saying that he slept with to test himself it would be clear that he was literally JUST sleeping with them in order to test his restraint. Sorry for the confusion though.

I know. Guillermo Del Toro supports Polanski. Signed the petition in support of him -- that's what I was referring to. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

Sorry, didn't read that too well.

I know very well that no one is perfect, which is precisely the reason I included the first paragraph. There are things I can accept as normal human flaws, and then there are things that make me not want to associate myself with the person who did them. It's the same IRL. There IS a line, and I think that "consciously hurting your own children who just lost their mother" is pretty far beyond that line for me.

And again, that is not how my relationship with the Sherlock Holmes canon works. A great part of my love for many Holmes stories is directly based on what they say about their author's character. I've never been simply a Holmesian, but a Holmesian and a Conan Doyle fan.

What we're trying to say is that enjoying someone's work =/= associating with the author.

Look, Bob Marley's widow has said that he raped her. John Lennon was an abusive asshole. Carl Sagan was an entitled, pompous asshat who bought into his celebrity (and was a terrible teacher as well).

But that doesn't mean you can't enjoy their work.

We're advising you to dissociate your love of Sherlock from Holmes himself and to recognize that people are deeply, deeply flawed. Also, it may be that later in his, he came to regret his actions and tried to make amends for them. Or that there were extenuating circumstances. We can never know the complete truth and the devil's in the details.

Yes, it's heartbreaking to have someone we love turn out to be deeply, deeply flawed, but you have to learn to live with the things you can't change. For you, that might mean abandoning him and his works entirely, but I think you would be better served in simply admiring the work for what it is.

Death of the Author is, to me, an important concept not just because it allows readers to come to their own conclusions without the authority of the author hanging over them but also because it lets a work stand on its own, without the author's flaws and imperfections hanging over it.

I know LGBT people, for example, who still love Ender's Game despite how awful Orson Scott Card is.

DA

And what Dreemyweird seems to be saying is that they are/were as much a fan of the author as they were of the work.

Death of the author isn't really relevant to that.

[ SECRET POST #3035 ]

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)

Re: f!s, I need some perspective :( (Arthur Conan Doyle drama)