[ SECRET POST #3238 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3238 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #463.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt

And that's also based on the wobbly assumption that Holmes and Watson's relationship "seemed gay" to the audience of that time period. I don't think it did, actually, so there was no need to make it seem "less gay".

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT There's no evidence that they would have or did, true enough. But when even the actual dates are wrong it gets even more silly.

[deird1]

No more than Poirot and Hastings seemed gay - and those stories were 50 years later.

Contemporary ideas of what fictional gay relationships look like are rather... contemporary.

[(Anonymous)]

NAYRT Yeah, I love my slash goggles and will happily adopt many a slashy theory for my headcanon. But the vast majority of the things a lot of people claim are objectively, canonically slashy just seem like tremendous reaching to me.

People like to talk about slashy subtext. Now Xena and Gabrielle had (fem)slashy subtext. Perhaps Will and Hannibal had a twisted kind of slashy subtext. But IMO what "subtext" mostly is, is slash goggles and fanon.

[(Anonymous)]

IIRC, the creators of Xena were well aware of fans and fan speculation about the subtext and deliberately chose to play with that as the series went on. But for the most part, you can't really claim the same thing for historical fandoms.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, exactly, it was deliberately put into the story by the writers. I don't know if Xena/Gabrielle was always on the agenda, or whether it got put onto the agenda as the writers because to see what the fans were seeing, but either way, in time it became apparent that the Xena/Gabrielle subtext was actually there.

Personally, I don't consider it "subtext" if there was never any intention on the part of the writers or actors to make subtext. Yeah, yeah, the author is dead, and literary criticism encourages us to unpack the text in any way we can conceivably construct and argument to support. Call me old fashions, but I care about the intent of the creator(s).

[(Anonymous)]

*the writers because began to see what the fans were seeing

Lol, how the fuck did I get "because" from "began"?