[ SECRET POST #5085 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5085 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 33 secrets from Secret Submission Post #728.
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)]

I can relate OP, both to this situation and similar situations where the characters are just generally way OOC and made into the most standard copy-paste fanfic character, but the fic is praised for being so in-character. What?! My current fandom has a lot of bad fic, and I understand some fans are young, but plenty are adults doing this... and they tend to get praised for it the most because they may struggle less with SPAG issues than younger fans, but fail just as much with characterization.

I've been seeing this praise over and over lately, to the point where I'd almost say it's becoming a problem in fandom overall that readers (if they're kind enough to comment) default to saying anything they like is "so funny and in-character omg" even if the fic portrays a dour 50 year old man as a high schooler who makes sassy comebacks, and that... really has nothing to do with the character. Generously, I guess that they mean it seems like it... would be in character? But that's not really the same as BEING in character, and most of the time I disagree that it even "would be."

[(Anonymous)]

I think that's a case where people don't have a firm grasp on the character in the first place, and/or they don't really understand what it means to be "in character". They liked it, and they know that saying something is "in-character" is good and it's praise so they're praising the thing they like, using a label that is incorrect.

nayrt

[(Anonymous)]

Right... just having character is not necessarily the same as being IN character. To use ayrt's example, a middle-aged man acting like a high schooler is certainly interesting, but it doesn't make it correct.