[ SECRET POST #4758 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4758 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[The Witcher]


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.
[Mass Effect Trilogy]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Emma (2020)]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Saiyuki]














Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 14 secrets from Secret Submission Post #681.
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

[philstar22]

Blood lust. You missed the first word there. He lusts for blood. Not for bodies. He's not experiencing sexual attraction. And yes, the eroticism is an act in the sense that he doesn't feel sexual attraction but uses the games of sexual attraction and eroticism to get other characters on the path he wants them on. He's not acting on his own sexual attraction. He's acting using the moves of sexual attraction as he's seen in others and playing out the steps. He's seducing the other characters into his web. He enjoys it, yes. It is fun for him as a murderous, monstrous being to get other characters to willingly do what he wants. That's blood lust, not sexual lust. Those aren't the same thing.

I read it recently for the record. You seem to think that your interpretation is the only one that exists. It isn't.

[(Anonymous)]

And I'm telling you, it's not two separate things. The symbolism of blood, eroticisim and repressed sexuality is maybe THE main theme in the novel. You've over simplified it so much you've missed one of the major points. It's like reading Moby Dick and arguing that it's all about the fishing.

[philstar22]

Okay, whatever, going to have to agree to disagree. We just interpret it differently Not sure why that's so hard to understand. Although, symbolism is not the same thing as a character actually having sexuality. Dracula's murder being a symbol of represssed sex doesn't mean he's actually a sexual being.

[(Anonymous)]

And I never said he was.

[philstar22]

Then what exactly have you been disagreeing with me about? All I've been saying is that Dracula isn't sexual.

[(Anonymous)]

Literally the entire point of vampires is the carnal, primal lust ensconced in imagery of savage bloodshed, dude. That's... It was literally ALWAYS about sexuality once they stopped being Just Zombies. Their point was the forbidden pleasures without making it about actual sex. Learn to fucking metaphor.

[philstar22]

I know what a metaphor is. The metaphor is there, but doesn't make Dracula actually sexual. There is a difference between a Watsonian vs. a Doylist perspective of a text. A metaphor is a Doylist perspective of a text. Discussing a characters sexuality is a Watsonian perspective. Those are two very different things.