case: ([ Etna; Hee. ])
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2007-10-01 04:59 pm
  • Add Memory
  • Share This Entry

[ SECRET POST #269 ]


⌈ Secret Post #269 ⌋

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

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

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
comic: An upside down arrow with dual colors on a red background with various details. (aw shucks pal)

Re: 21 OP here...

[personal profile] comic 2007-10-02 07:05 pm (UTC)(link)
I think the point you're missing is that you said INFER.

Inferring doesn't make it canon.

Re: 21 OP here...

(Anonymous) 2007-10-02 07:40 pm (UTC)(link)
Yes, I did say infer, but I said it in regards to the DETAILS of their childhood/growing up... which as I've said many times, is certainly open to interpretation. That's how I interpret it, and you're correct that THAT certainly isn't canon (i.e. how long they spent together, where they were raised, etc).

Re: 21 OP here...

(Anonymous) 2007-10-02 08:57 pm (UTC)(link)
Hardly. Here's what I said:

"So from that we can sort of infer that they either grew incredibly close incredibly quickly, or spent quite a bit of time together growing up."

Again, talking about the DETAILS of their childhood... which are completely open to interpretation and personal choice (as I've said a few times in this discussion)... is something that we have to infer from the text. That's what I was saying there.

The details of their childhood must be inferred, however, they are ultimately irrelevant to the canon and explicit relationship we see in the text. Franziska says that he's her brother--we don't have to infer that. Anything else about HOW they grew up? That's interpretation.

Re: 21 OP here...

[identity profile] very-verydanger.livejournal.com 2007-10-03 03:53 am (UTC)(link)
Were you not claiming earlier that they had to have spent x amount of years together? And that they clearly had to have been raised together in spite of what everyone else said?

My dear, that's a backpedal.
comic: An upside down arrow with dual colors on a red background with various details. (type type type type)

Re: 21 OP here...

[personal profile] comic 2007-10-02 08:24 pm (UTC)(link)
I'll say before I continue that I don't care for most pairings, in fact, I feel like most things that take a relationship further than you see in canon, that is to say, ON SCREEN, or is detailed on screen by another character, takes a step away from being a canon relationship. Some much larger than others.

That is not to say it is not in-character! If written well, if an interpretation is made in such a way that it is believable, it can still be entertaining. However, people view things differently. You may interpret the evidence as saying that they were raised together as siblings, and that may be true, but even then that doesn't guarantee they have a sibling bond. Good friends can often have closer relationships than siblings as well, and people who share circumstances even further.

The scene at the end of the second game could be interpreted as Franziska showing that she cares for Miles in a familial way, and that's not a bad interpretation. It could also be viewed that as she is entirely dependent on his view of her, as her father, her previous source of pride, is no longer around, that she has latched on to him, and since he is leaving her behind, is simple depression/loneliness or something else among those lines.

However, neither interpretation is strictly canon until the character canonly comments on it truthfully, whether to themselves or to another, on-screen. Both of them could said to be IN-CHARACTER. Just because something is in-character doesn't mean it is something that could happen in canon, however the reverse, anything a character does in canon is in-character, because canon determines what is in-character.

Man, I don't even know what my original point was now, but I felt the need to get this off my chest. Needless to say, only things concretely provided in canon are canon, which can be interpreted differently by different people, and all ways could be correct as long as they stick to all events in canon being true. Unless the creators say one way or the other, of course.

Re: 21 OP here...

(Anonymous) 2007-10-02 08:54 pm (UTC)(link)
You're completely right, and I agree with everything you said there.

However, Franziska DOES call him her brother. Twice, in completely unrelated situations. It's right there in the text. This isn't reading between the lines; reading between the lines would be trying to assign it a different meaning than what it blatantly and explicitly says--that she thinks of him as a brother.

If it weren't for that, then yes, it would be just an interpretation. As it is, though, it's an interpretation that's completely supported by an explicit reference in the text.
Flat | Top-Level Comments Only