fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3923 ]

[ SECRET POST #3923 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3923 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Close Your Eyes]

__________________________________________________

03.

[Brooklyn 99]

__________________________________________________

04.

[Daredevil, Vanessa Marianna/Wilson Fisk]

__________________________________________________

05.

[Good Omens, by Neil Gaiman]

__________________________________________________

06.

[A Wrinkle In Time, the forthcoming film]

__________________________________________________

07.

[FullMetal Alchemist]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 42 secrets from Secret Submission Post #562.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

05. https://i.imgur.com/bLITxqm.png
[Good Omens, by Neil Gaiman]

Ouch. This is why I'll never ever stand up at a con to ask my favorite authors a question. I know I'd get so nervous and fangirly that I'd blow it or say something really dumb.

Same. I tend to babble when I get nervous.

what an assholish answer

How so? I thought Gaiman was pretty nice about it, actually.

How is he an asshole for responding to a question in a direct and concise way? I cannot think of any way in which he could be more polite about it. Is he supposed to spend a paragraph assuaging their feelings first or something? Cause that seems rather rude and presumptuous.

I don't get how that excerpt shows that his family name is Wensleydale. It just says that he was supposedly named Jeremy but no one uses the name. His parents called him Youngster. His last name or the last name of his parents isn't mentioned.

Yes, this, I had to reread the excerpt to see if I missed it somehow but it's not there?

I mean, I can see where you can read it that way? As in, "he was christened Jeremy, but he was born middle-aged so everyone calls him by his last name like he's a middle-manager from the 50s."

However, that's 1. implied, not stated in the text, and 2. undermined by the fact that Wensleydale's a fucking cheese.

Wow, it's getting late in my timezone and I'm starting to mix up sentences as I read them.
Why would Wensleydale fuck a cheese..?
Oh. Right. Wrong words order.
Time to go to bed, I guess.

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-10-01 00:21 (UTC) - Expand

YES! I don't think Neil Gaiman's answer was assholish, but I don't see how the excerpt explains that Wensleydale was his last name. Just that no one called him by his first name. When I read the book, I assumed "Wensleydale" was a nickname, especially because at least one other character in the group used a nickname, and because as someone mentioned above, it's a cheese.

OK but that was legitimately a shitty answer.

Nowhere is it stated to be the family name, I had to read the quoted passage three times to catch the implication.

For Gaiman to act as if it was just soo obvious was a pretty dick move.

It was a legitimate question about a poorly communicated plot point.

This.

I had to reread AND tilt my head to get the implication. And I still went, "Uuuuh, I guess it's his family name..."

It's still kinda unclear.

Also, kinda rude there OP.

Christ, his writing is cringy.

Good Omens is not the right book to make assumptions about Gaiman's writing.

There's no way of knowing if he even wrote that part.

Nah, this one's on Neil Gaiman. That excerpt does not in any way imply the family name is Wensleydale taken out of context. ('Out of context' because maybe it does in context... but definitely not just in this excerpt)

Actually, it does, if you're British and born before 1990. In other words, it's so intuitively obvious to Mr. Gaiman that he can't imagine there being any confusion. This is one of those times we should all remember that what is obvious to us is not necessarily so to others.

Agreed.

I think the implication would be a lot clearer if the child's surname weren't a food item. I have no trouble reading it the way that Mr. Gaiman intended, but would have assumed that the child had picked a ridiculous and slightly pretentious-sounding nickname for himself.

I'm British and was born in 1977. I've read GO countless times and had no idea that was their surname. I thought it was a nickname, just like literally everyone I know who has read the book.

by Neil Gaiman AND TERRY PRATCHETT you mean.

I think you're projecting here. The person asking the question clearly just misread the passage, which doesn't actually say that it's his surname. And Gaiman clarified. Nothing to read nastiness into.

I think you're misreading? Gaiman quoted the passage in the book, not the kid asking the question. He basically told them they were interrogating the text from the wrong perspective and then cited that passage as an example. No nastiness, but Gaiman's answer is either hilariously pretentious (which is kind of Gaiman's schtick), or he's fucking with them, which is a little mean considering the probable age of the asker.

(no subject)

arcadiaego - 2017-10-02 12:19 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

(Anonymous) - 2017-10-02 19:40 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only