[ SECRET POST #2490 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2490 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 048 secrets from Secret Submission Post #356.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 1 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

Do you prefer to ignore them, apply fix-fic to them, pretend they don't exist, or come up with a more plausible in-universe reason for them than what was shown in canon?

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

I ignore the shit out of them.

I have no problems at all with selective canon in general tbqh

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

We all have our OOC moments, I'm sure. I just attribute it to being human.

Though I do occasionally have fun coming up with in-universe reasons. If I could write fic I might do that.

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[elaminator]

+1

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

Depends on how bad they are, and how much I trust the source material. Some canons I trust to provide a reasonable explanation eventually. Mostly I try to come up with a better rationalization than provided or a fix-it. There are a few OOC situations which are so WTF I can't do anything but ignore them.

Which causes problems when I'm discussing things with someone using said outrageous situation to justify their own take on characterization...

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

Ignore them. Sometimes they come up in meta and I ignore them then too, but I'm mostly involved with fandom as a fic writer, so I generally just step around them.

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[queerwolf]

Depends on how bad, but I usually ignore them.

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

Usually try to come up with a plausible headcanon explanation that wouldn't require any outright contradicting/ignoring of canon.

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

I can ignore them happily if no good excuse can be made, but if there's an opportunity for an excuse, I have a lot more fun coming up with them. They can range from something as vague as "she was acting like a dick as a joke, not genuinely" to something as specific as "Doyle lost page 8 of Watson's manuscript and re-wrote it really shittily."

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

I love explaining away errors like that, too! My favorite aspect has got to be justifying changes made between a pilot and the series proper.

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

One of the (many) things that I loved about Narbonic was the recurring Sunday feature where the author would get a couple of her friends to try to explain away whatever plot inconsistencies had come up, and then illustrate them.

Those were always a lot of fun.

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

I actively ignore them.

(I actively ignore half of Voyager.)

Re: What's your approach to OOC moments in canon?

[cassandraoftroy]

Depends on the moment, and if I can find a plausible in-universe reason; usually I'll just break the fourth wall and blame the writers, and then sort of just blur over the event in canon. Sort of a, "something happened, but let's not look too hard at it."