[ SECRET POST #5543 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #5543 ⌋

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


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.



__________________________________________________



08.



__________________________________________________



09.



__________________________________________________



10.









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 11 secrets from Secret Submission Post #793.
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)]

Do you have a spectific example in mind? I don't mind different takes on character that are complex and thus could both, for instance be seen as cynical in some aspects but very soft in other (or anything where "opposite" traits coexist in one character), but the issue, like you said, is when fans deny that those aspects of the character are there in the first place and berates fans who prefer to concentrate on those aspects of the character. My personal example would be Castiel from Supernatural, especially because his physics change a lot from his early seasons to the latter ones (so yes, both his description as someone who's on the slender side, pale and with almost black hair and his description as someone who's muscular, tanned and brown-haired, are valid and happened in canon). A lot is up for interpretation, but not all id. The thing is to be careful about what is and isn't. Saying that I'm also peeved by some fans who aren't able to admit that something is indeed a matter of interpretation and insist their takes are "the correct ones". Anyway, sorry you haven't yet met fans to discuss the character you like instead of fans who only love a twisted version of this character.

[(Anonymous)]

Nayrt, but the Les Mis fandom is INFAMOUS for doing this to most of its preferred characters, especially Grantaire, who is canonically a loud, brash, alcoholic, u-mad-trollface type dudebro who dropped out of art school because he was too much of all the above to actually bother doing the work. But he also canonically has what can very easily be interpreted as an (unreciprocated) romantic fixation on Enjolras (don't get me started on what they do with his canonical character), so the fandom loves to pretend that the G man is actually a soft smol uwu bean with deep artistique feelings and hoo boy do they get MAD if anyone says anything to the contrary

[(Anonymous)]

Don't forget he's canonically described as "frightfully ugly." Because the fandom sure does! (Though to be fair so does every stage and movie adaptation so I guess that's not entirely on the fandom.)

same anon

[(Anonymous)]

Probably worth mentioning that Les Mis is the only fandom I've ever been in where I've seen people openly state that they don't like the actual canon and think it's stupid and old-fashioned and wrong

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT: Some big ones for me are Aziraphale and Crowley from Good Omens. Absolutely undeniable that they are complex characters and there's room for interpretation with both of them, but I find they get distorted, flattened, and flanderized to a ridiculous extent by a very large swathe of the fandom.

I've written and rewritten several detailed comparisons between popular fanon and canon for these characters, but it keeps ending up turning into a massive essay. I can still post that if you really care to see my thoughts on it, but I suspect a lot of people would just think of it as a lot of tl;dr. The very briefest thesis statement I can come up with is: making Aziraphale a sword-happy, traditionally-masculine, perfect killing machine goes directly counter to the entire point of his character, and if Crowley really was the delicate, waify woobie incapable of functioning without Aziraphale that everyone wants him to be, he wouldn't have survived to the 21st century.