fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #269 ]

[ SECRET POST #269 ]

⌈ Secret Post #269 ⌋

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

1.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

37.

38.

Notes:

1. The F!S Friending Meme! Go do it! I am totally open to friending. (:
2. Have some emopuppy in a fish tank!
3. BECAUSE I CAN: TAKE THIS POLL ~~BUTTMUNCHERS FTW~~

Secrets Left to Post: 07 pages, 168 secrets from Secret Submission Post #039.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 ] broken link, 0 not!secrets, [ 1 2 ] not!fandom, [ 1 ] repeat.
Next Secret Post: Tomorrow, Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007.
Current Secret Submission Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Oh no, I'm him. I'm not on my normal computer and don't remember my LJ password, hence the anonymous. I certainly wouldn't consider myself a BNF under any stretch of the term, though.

The evidence is that she calls him brother (and I don't get where the fuck you're pulling "heavily ironic" from) not once, but on two separate and unrelated occasions in front of Phoenix Wright. While not outright saying "brother," she considers him a Von Karma and says as much in 2-4. That is the solid and concrete evidence that would be pretty conclusive on its own if you suddenly decided to ignore EVERYTHING ELSE about it, like the way they interact, the fact that they were raised together, et cetera.

There are MANY things in this series that I will leave up to interpretation regarding character relationships. My views in these cases are not canon, I will not patronize anybody else over these interpretations.

This. Is not. One of them.

Oh my. God. Is it time to. Break out. The dramatic. Periods for. Emphasis?

As a writer? I think. Yes.

Thank you for contributing absolutely nothing to the discussion at hand. I applaud your efforts.

Oh, such scathing wit. I guess that's why you call yourself a writer!

No, I'm just sick, exhausted, and don't have the patience for someone contributing absolutely nothing to the discussion whose only purpose seems to be to irritate for absolutely no reason.

Awwww, you're sick? Go back to bed, snookums :3

I'm still not entirely clear on exactly what I did to you to make you so interested in trolling me, but... meh.

This isn't trolling, actually. This is just me openly calling you a patronizing fanbrat without bothering to sugarcoat it or play your little game of pretension.

Here's a hint: no one actually cares about your secret beyond "iawtc" or "idawtc." The only reason you're getting backlash is because a)you phrased it in a way that is guaranteed that no one here will take you seriously, b)you insisted on arguing with anyone who dares disagree with your oh-so-extensive "canon" knowledge, and c) then made a comment calling attention to the fact that you obviously think you are on a higher plane of fandom than everyone else.

In short, you're the reason people are being jerks to you.

I'm blunt, I'm fully aware of this. I made this post because, as people pointed out, the way I phrased the secret I originally submitted didn't get my point across at all. And I apologize for using that phrasing, but how the hell was I supposed to know about it? It's not in the rules and I'm not exactly an old-timer in this comm. I understand that now, though, and won't use that phrase in any other secrets I submit.

And I hardly see what's wrong with arguing with something I strongly disagree with.

As to the third comment? Uh... that's... very, very incorrect. I certainly don't think that by any stretch of the matter.

It's okay, son, you'll get it one day! :)

I'm guilty of phrasing something wrong (that I didn't KNOW was unaccepted here in the comm, and I've acknowledged that) and being a bit blunt and abrasive in my arguing style.

Everything else you've said is wrong, and just as patronizing and elitist as you're accusing me of being.

"Everything else you've said is wrong, and just as patronizing and elitist as you're accusing me of being."

So do you get it now?

Get what? That you're accusing me of being something I'm not and doing so in a patronizing and elitist manner that ironically makes you seem more like what you're accusing me of?

...my sincerest apologies if that last sentence made no sense, I believe my flu medicine just kicked in X_x

So you don't get it.

I calls 'em like I sees 'em, and you're a BNF.

Calling someone "little brother" is by definition ironic, under the circumstances that she is clearly younger than and also not actually related to him. Whether she considers him to be her brother or not, it is still an ironic phrase.

But you know what? We're at a total impasse here, and I'm done arguing with you.

Except it's not ironic the way she uses it, because she actually SEES him as her little brother. That's just the way she IS. She believes he needs her guidance (which is what she came to do in PW2), hence the 'little' part. It's not ironic the way she uses it; it's the nature of their relationship (hell, in 3-5 after the earthquake, she IS acting like an older sister).

I honestly can't see what more you want to have it be canon. They were raised together. She calls him brother, and sees him as a Von Karma. These are facts that we know. Taken into conjunction with how they ACT, I can honestly not see how it's anything BUT canon.

This is one of the few things I'm this adamant over; and I almost always make at least an effort to see things from another point of view. I can truthfully not see another viable "interpretation" here--it's crystalline to me that Takumi wrote them as siblings.

And for the record, I thought of them as defined canon siblings in 2-4 before I ever thought of shipping Adrian/Franziska. I wasn't even IN fandom at the moment >_>

I said I'm done and I'm done. I'm not arguing with someone who says that it's okay to patronize people just because "I'M RIGHT AND THEY'RE WRONG!!!1"

And I don't do that, 99% of the time. If something is genuinely up for interpretation, then sure, go for it.

But there are times when I don't things ARE up for interpretation. Like if someone said that Adrian Andrews' character was all about being a "do-it-yourself female who can make it on her own in a man's world." That's... wrong, that's NOT her character (and I've actually seen people argue this).

The only thing is, I haven't actually seen any EVIDENCE against what I'm arguing. I've said "This is right, because of A and B evidence which are supported by C and D in the text." And yet, through all of this, the counter argument seems to just be "No, you're wrong," without any evidence to the contrary.

I've asked multiple times and haven't yet gotten an answer; this is actually something I really would like to know the answer to--what MORE do you want? To me, everything I've laid out and ennumerated gives a crystal-clear picture in my mind that this is canon. There is very little in this series I feel so strongly about (despite my support for, say, A/F, I recognize that it's completely nowhere near canon, that IS just my interpretation of it). What more would there have to be to solidify it in canon in your eyes? Please, don't take this as being patronizing, I genuinely want to know.

This has nothing to do with Adrian Andrews, which is why I dropped it after the first comment, as it was kind of a rude thing for me to say and - you were correct - completely unrelated.

Okay. Because you've asked multiple times, I will clarify. What I'd wanted was solid, explicit, canon evidence, in which their sibling relationship is openly referred to as such. All you've given me is the "little brother" thing, and because the little brother thing is somewhat dubious, I can't accept it as solid canon. You have been unable to provide anything but interpretation and extrapolation. Thus, I accept it as a valid theory, and I enjoy it as a relationship, but I do not consider it canon, because frankly... it isn't. Similarly, I don't feel the need to solidly prove to you that they aren't siblings, because that's not canon, either.

This is my stance, and - as someone who has played the same games that you have - I don't think you're going to pull out some miraculous new fact that'll change it. Likewise, I'm getting weary of banging my head into the wall. We're done here.

Right, the Adrian thing has nothing to do with the argument at hand, I just brought it up as an example of times where I think we can both agree an interpretation is incorrect. Adrian ISN'T an example of a "do-it-yourself woman who can make it on her own in a man's world."

...but they DO openly refer to their relationship as a sibling relationship. Not ONLY with the "brother" comments but also Franziska SAYING she sees him as a Von Karma. How is that NOT solid, explicit, and canon evidence? :/

Ugh, time for class.

Anyway, I guess it comes down to the fact that I see the lines we've been arguing over as that "solid, explicit, canon" evidence. As far as the text goes, it's right there--and since there's no voice acting or whatever, there's no indication that they're meant to be sarcastic or ironic, or anything other than simply true. Looking for another meaning into her calling him "brother" is 'reading between the lines,' as you accused me of.

How they act and behave towards one another... yes, you're right, this is up for interpretation and if THIS was all there were, it certainly wouldn't be canon. But the fact remains that she DOES refer to him as a brother in plain and simple terms, and everything about their interaction (and the fact that they were raised together) corroborates this.

If that's not good enough for you, then you're right--there's nothing else I can say to convince you. However... explicit and canon textual reference combined with what we can infer (yes, infer, it IS up for interpretation) about their relationship and how they act... is certainly good enough for me to see it as cemented iron canon. And I don't think we're going to budge from these positions.

When does it explicitly state that they were raised together?

It doesn't!

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #269 ]

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...

Re: 21 OP here...