[ SECRET POST #3745 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3745 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.







Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 14 secrets from Secret Submission Post #534.
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)]

do you not understand context

[(Anonymous)]

People do what people do. Even the fictional ones.

[(Anonymous)]

That doesn't mean that we have to be totally blind to the narrative and social context of a work. I find it hard to believe that the writing of the character Irene Adler was motivated by a serious concern with realism, which makes appealing to realism a weird excuse. and I think the narrative structure of having her fall in love with the main character specifically is fucked and bad writing in a way that other examples might not be. Of course that's not any comment on either people in real life, or better-written examples in fiction.

[(Anonymous)]

Regardless of what the writers' motives were, Irene and Sherlock had amazing chemistry together. That's not het goggles, it's fantastic casting.

[(Anonymous)]

The actors were fine but it was still bad writing and a bad creative decision

[(Anonymous)]

no, it wasn't. only if your *only* perspective on media is the educational message it sends. And I hate that attitude because while it's fair to criticeize general problematic trends in media, scolding individual works for failing to conform to "the right message", and in "the right way", no less, is not in the interest of art, and thus not in the interest of humans. We had enough of that stuff in the eastern part of my country 30 years ago thank you very much.

I happened to like it for precisely the reason that I saw my own situation there, i.e. being *so gay* but having that sudden weird passionate emotional and physical thing with that ONE guy.

[(Anonymous)]

They made her a lesbian simply to show him overcoming her sexuality,people are allowed to disagree that without you all screeching about political correctness.

[(Anonymous)]

It was excellent casting. Sherlock/Irene is as much fun as Sherlock /John.

[(Anonymous)]

I guess chemistry is indeed subjective because I thought they had no chemistry whatsoever

[(Anonymous)]

a reptile cannot have chemistry with a mammal

[(Anonymous)]

Righty-O. You don't like it so it's bad writing. Gotcha.

[(Anonymous)]

What in hell do you want me to say? I thought it was shitty, and I thought it was bad writing for the character. I'm not even the one who brought it up - someone else brought it up as a good example of a specific thing, and I don't agree with that judgment.

[(Anonymous)]

I suspect that they wanted what you just said. That YOU think it was shitty, and YOU thought it was shitty writing for the character.

You know, rather than treating it like an absolute fact.

[(Anonymous)]

This.

[(Anonymous)]

I find it hard to believe that the writing of the character Irene Adler was motivated by a serious concern with realism, which makes appealing to realism a weird excuse. and I think the narrative structure of having her fall in love with the main character specifically is fucked and bad writing in a way that other examples might not be.

That's literally what I fucking said. "I find it hard to believe" and "I think".

So, what are you talking about

[(Anonymous)]

Your adamancy of opinion doesn't make you correct. It only makes you adamant in the face of others who disagree with you.

[(Anonymous)]

I think that's how opinions work in general. I think anytime someone offers an opinion, it's with the understand that it's their belief. There's nothing that really needs pointing out about that. I said that I find it hard to believe that Moffat was writing the character in a realistic way - because she's an unrealistic character - and I said that I thought it was bad writing. It seems to me that's just a question of offering my opinion.

[(Anonymous)]

Now you sound reasonable. (Although I disagree with you completely.) Before you came off as obnoxious. Maybe using less strident language might be a way forward in future if you want legitimate discussions.

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt- you're the one sounding obnoxious and condescending as fuck lmao

[(Anonymous)]

That episode was embarrassing in the same way a fourteen-year-old's self-insert fic is. Except at least the teenager has the excuse of being a beginning writer.

I think both Sherlock and the Eleventh Doctor have suffered for being Moffat's self-insert characters. He's been too invested in how awesome they are to let them make any serious mistakes.