case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2020-01-15 06:38 pm

[ SECRET POST #4758 ]


⌈ 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.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-16 12:49 am (UTC)(link)
DA I agree that he's not putting on an act to trick people. Mostly because he doesn't bother putting on an act at all. He doesn't act erotically, as in with erotic intentions. He literally just physically forces what he wants from people. He appears beside Mina's bed, says he'll bash her husband's brains out if she makes a sound, and drinks from her. Then he forcefully turns her, which, yes, I can see being erotic from an audience perspective if you're into that kind of thing, but neither he nor Mina are doing it for erotic reasons. He's doing it to hurt her and everyone around her, and she has zero choice in the matter. The eroticism isn't an act because, from an in-character perspective, there is no eroticism. Dracula himself has no erotic intentions whatsoever, and Mina sure as hell is not having erotic reactions.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-16 02:14 am (UTC)(link)
I'm the above anon, and YES, exactly! I completely agree with this. I feel like people are confusing the Doylist eroticism the reader may or may not perceive, with Watsonian eroticism present for the characters.

(Anonymous) 2020-01-16 02:35 am (UTC)(link)
I don't think it necessarily makes sense to focus on, let alone insist on, the primacy of a Watsonian point of view