[ SECRET POST #3207 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3207 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 020 secrets from Secret Submission Post #458.
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)]

Yeah, I kinda agree. I see many TV fans who want to analyze everything, but somehow have a lot of difficulty dealing with ambiguous scenes that let people draw their own conclusions, or stories that use symbolism or subtlety instead of spelling everything out. Everything has to have one DEFINITIVE meaning, or else it's not "good". It makes TV discussions very tedious sometimes.

[(Anonymous)]

YES YES YES.

[(Anonymous)]

Ambiguity is a crutch for writers whose editors divorced them. Leaving all of the conclusions to the audience is an excuse to avoid writing an ending, and it empowers an already ridiculously entitled population to treat whatever insane bullshit comes into their heads as the Word of God.

[sarillia]

I've gotten to the point where I'm just amused every time I see the word "entitled". There's usually a way to turn it around. Like here, I could say you're entitled for expecting them to create the kind of ending you like instead of the one they wanted to create. Is there anyone at all who wouldn't have a significant group of people calling them entitled these days?

[(Anonymous)]

You seem confused. The entitled people are the audience. Do I expect the audience to create the kind of ending I like? What a silly question.

[sarillia]

I wasn't confused before but I am now. I have no idea how you've interpreted my comment. Yes that is a silly question. It's also not one I asked. The comment I replied to said audiences are "entitled" if they want freedom to interpret the ending the way they want and claim it's canon. I think it's possible to turn that around and say the members of the audience who think this way, who want a completely unambiguous ending, could be called just as entitled for demanding that unambiguous ending and saying the creators are doing it wrong if they don't make it that way. Is that clearer?

[(Anonymous)]

You seem like one of those people that needs an A to Z Guide and annotated Cliff's Notes.

[a_potato]

It's not really an all or nothing thing, though. A writer can answer some, even most, questions, and provide some conclusions, while leaving some ambiguities and letting some issues stay unresolved. And I think doing that leads to a better ending than going to either of the extremes (i.e. total ambiguity or total resolution).

[(Anonymous)]

Exactly. I love ambiguity in texts. I feel like Shaskespeare was very good at this, but I don't think wanting clarity for some things is proof that you want to be spoonfed everything. Even moments of ambiguity need a strong context to work well.

I feel like sometimes fans tend to fall in these extremes like all ambiguity is proof of bad writing or all ambiguity must be deliberate otherwise it wouldn't be there and creators are infallible because they're the creator. Yes sometimes ambiguity is deliberate and is great and sometimes it can be just a reflection of something that is poorly developed and just plain not well done or vague and ill-defined and it's less a case of ambiguity and just poor writing.

And the fact that this can happen a fair bit in tv writing doesn't seem all that surprising to me since you often have multiple writers, guest writers, guest directors and so on and a show runner who may not be as on top of things as they could be.

But then again I see a lot of the flipside from OP's secret of fandom using any vagueness/ ambiguity in canon to justify any and all fanon and head canon as infallible which I think might actually more tedious than wanting canon to make some sense.

[ketita]

Ugh, yeah. I love when things have multiple interpretations and angles.

(on a shallow note, I don't understand why FFVII fans don't embrace the fact that both cloti and cleris can be considered canon. Everything is canon! Rejoice!)