fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #4839 ]

[ SECRET POST #4839 ]

⌈ Secret Post #4839 ⌋

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

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 39 secrets from Secret Submission Post #693.
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.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I meant to watch the show months ago when it seemed to be everywhere, then kind of forgot about it, and just came across a discussion on Reddit about whether the main characters were a couple or not (the usual "it's obvious, they're totally in love!" vs. "omg they're just friends, why does everyone have to be gay?!" argument) and wanted to get the opinions of people here because I feel like I can trust you guys on fandom-related things more than Reddit.

So what do you guys think? I haven't read the book or looked too much into the show because I don't want spoilers about specifics, but is this just another instance of slash fans getting their hopes up just to be disappointed in the end, or is there actually something to the "it's totally canon!" argument for once? I'm still disappointed by/sad at another show's recent no homo-ness and really don't want to get invested in a m/m ship just to be let down by another queerbaiting situation.

It's definitely not explicitly queer. If you demand textual proof of gayness, it will not satisfy you. Interpreting the characters as queer is probably the most straightforward reading and I don't think "queerbaiting" is an accurate description but it's not textual.

Yep. It's never stated explicitly (though at one point Anathema does think to herself something along the lines of, "Oh she had nothing to worry about about taking a ride from these two particular male strangers").

It's equally valid to just read it as a very deep and very long lasting non-romantic loving relationship, but to me it reads as a queer romantic relationship.

DA

Yeah, it's more about how OP defines what they're looking for. If it's a sense of queerness, it's all over the place. The characters are definitely not cishet dudes. If OP is looking for gayness, there isn't anything explicit.

Re: Question about Good Omens show

(Anonymous) - 2020-04-06 06:54 (UTC) - Expand

Ambiguity/open to interpretation is fine with me, what I'm trying to avoid is "spend the entire show illustrating that they're the most important people to each other and then throw in a random woman as a love interest at the end". So as long as that doesn't happen, I'm good.

The relationship isn't romantic or sexual in the show, but if it would have ended that way there would have been enough build up to make it believable. To me, both interpretations of their relationship are equally valid. There's a lot of shipping fodder.

If you're looking for explicit confirmation of the ship in canon then it's not for you, imo.

This. I see it, and I get why people didn't.

Nah, I don't care about explicit confirmation, just not a "spend the entire show seeming to lead up to something, then make it clear that anyone who interpreted it that way is an idiot" kind of thing. I'm fine with 'open to interpretation as long', I'm just trying to avoid "let's act like they have feelings for each other, then throw in a 'THEY'RE TOTALLY STRAIGHT, YOU'RE AN IDIOT FOR EVER THINKING OTHERWISE' at the end" situation, and it doesn't sound like that happens here.

SA/OP

Okay, that 'as long' shouldn't be there, should just say 'open to interpretation'.

You can honestly read it as both, but I don’t think there’s explicit confirmation of their relationship being romantic in nature. I did read it as romantic and it didn’t seem like it was queerbaiting. Honestly, their relationship was the only good thing about the show (to me anyway).

They are both definitely something other than cishet straight. That doesn't mean they're gay, though. It's the easiest to say they're queer but queer in that they're just not human and don't do any sexuality and romance in any human way.

Each one does care about the other a lot, arguably more than anyone else, but you can interpret that as romance or friendship.

I've only watched the show but definitely got vibes that this was something way beyond a deep and meaningful friendship but in what way they love one another is definitely open to interpretation. There's also the fact they're an angel and a demon so human situation don't even apply to them....that too allows you to just go with what you prefer because why would they be bothered about human definitions?

I've only watched the show but definitely got vibes that this was something way beyond a deep and meaningful friendship but in what way they love one another is definitely open to interpretation.

That seems to be the general consensus! I just wanted something that didn't contradict a romantic interpretation. Thanks!

IMO, it can be interpreted either way but it's not as gay as some people seem to think. People's opinions are heavily influenced by the book fandom and the fact that the two main characters are the juggernaut ship. I wouldn't call it queerbaiting, it's just not explicit at all.

you can interpret them as gay as the show doesn't give either of them a random love-interest, but it's not explicitly in the text and imo i think Tennant and Sheen are doing the bulk of the legwork for all the 'gay' readings of the show, the text calls them best friends multiple times and very clearly frames their relationship as more a platonic life-long partnership.

that being said it is a goldmine for shipping fodder so if you don't care that it's not unquestionably canon then you might still enjoy it and their relationship.

you can interpret them as gay as the show doesn't give either of them a random love-interest

Okay, thanks. That's mainly what I was worried about. I don't know why I didn't mention that in my original comment (gonna blame sleep deprivation!) but I'm fine with ambiguous, I just don't want a shoehorned-in love interest that makes no sense, just to prove that "they're totally straight!"

They're definitely a couple and demonstrate love for each other. Both the book and the series end with Aziraphale and Crowley realizing that they're more important to each other than their previous relationships with Heaven/Hell.

Whether that's "gay" in Eurocentric shipping terms is a religious question about a work that lampoons religion. My vote is canonically no, but I ship it regardless.

Yes, this. It is undeniably, explicitly, a love story. It's not a kissing story. (But there's a lot of room for kissing behind the scenes.)

Re: Question about Good Omens show

(Anonymous) - 2020-04-06 06:39 (UTC) - Expand

Alright, thanks. Everybody here seems to agree that it's open to interpretation and I'm good with that, I just didn't want something that specifically rules out a queer interpretation.

Whether that's "gay" in Eurocentric shipping terms is a religious question about a work that lampoons religion. My vote is canonically no

Hmm. Maybe I'm just dumb, but what exactly do you mean?

Re: Question about Good Omens show

(Anonymous) - 2020-04-06 13:01 (UTC) - Expand

If by chance you're referring to "The Untamed" as being disappointing and queerbaiting, then Good Omens definitely will not satisfy you at all with the supposed m/m.

To be clear, I don't think either show is queerbaiting, for different reasons. But if the former wasn't gay enough for you, the latter will absolutely not be.

If by chance you're referring to "The Untamed" as being disappointing and queerbaiting

Nope, I've never even heard of it.

I was mostly worried about randomly throwing in female love interests at the last minute to prove they're TOTALLY NOT GAY, and it seems like that doesn't happen...I'm fine with vagueness or open-endedness.

It's not explicitly canon but there's no "no homo" at all.

I wouldn't call it queerbaiting, it's just very easily interpreted as queer with nothing to counter that interpretation.

Also note that the miniseries is based on a one-off novel from 30 years ago, one of the co-authors is now dead, and the show does the entire book. So, while occasionally people talk of a Season 2, I think it's highly unlikely there will be one. That means there's nothing to bait anyone over.

It's not explicitly canon but there's no "no homo" at all.

I wouldn't call it queerbaiting, it's just very easily interpreted as queer with nothing to counter that interpretation.

Okay, good to know. I'm fine with no explicit confirmation as long as there's nothing to contradict that sort of interpretation.

And I kept hearing about a season 2 and thought there was going to be one, so thanks for letting me know about that too! If it ends without throwing in any "but they're totally straight!" BS I'm happy.

Re: Question about Good Omens show

(Anonymous) - 2020-04-06 23:05 (UTC) - Expand

It's not explicitly queer. It's canon that the two characters love each other very much. It's not canon that it's in a romantic/sexual way and I feel like trying to pare it down to whether their love is romantic and/or sexual does a disservice to the nature of their relationship in general.

They are, without a doubt, each other's Most Important People. Does it really matter whether or not they want to bone?

They are, without a doubt, each other's Most Important People. Does it really matter whether or not they want to bone?

Nah, I don't even care about that. I just wanted to avoid a "spending the entire show showing how much they love each other and clearly will choose each other over anyone else, but we have to shoehorn in women as love interests to prove that they're obviously not GAY or anything" type thing, and it sounds like that doesn't happen.

Thank you for responding!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only