[ SECRET POST #2616 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2616 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 063 secrets from Secret Submission Post #374.
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

[fauxkaren]

I just.... I cannot understand this kind of thinking at all.

Like you have to COMPLETELY ignore all these characters characterizations to the point that they're NOT ACTUALLY THE SAME CHARACTERS ANYMORE to make this work.

[(Anonymous)]

You're such a sourpuss

[fauxkaren]

[(Anonymous)]

A+ response. wtf even is the insult "sourpuss", did anyone ever call a dude that.

[(Anonymous)]

Don't tell me you're going to make it a gender thing

[(Anonymous)]

"sourpuss" is a classic putdown for a woman who is less than chipper.

[gondremark]

Sourpuss is a classic putdown for anyone who rains on a parade or is a wet blanket. I've never seen it used as a gendered insult, ever.

[(Anonymous)]

Maybe in the 1950s or something? I have never, ever seen it used as a gendered insult today.

[gondremark]

It's actually a pretty new word (and so hasn't had time to change drastically or pick up much baggage), and is about as far from a gendered insult as you can get. The "puss" isn't even the puss of pussy cat with its connotations of lady parts. It just means face/mouth/expression.

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=sourpuss&allowed_in_frame=0

[(Anonymous)]

Yeahhhh. I'd like a source for this one.

[(Anonymous)]

"Sourpuss" is usually used for grumpy children of any gender.

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not sure what gender Porky Pig's cat was, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't a gendered insult even back then.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes. Frequently, actually.

[(Anonymous)]

This. I can understand being interested in a story where two guys and their adopted daughter go on a muder spree together, even if that isn't for me. But if Hannibal is being nice and fluffy and/or Will is willingly killing, then it is a story of original characters, not a story of the characters I enjoy. I like AUs, but only when the characters are still recognizably the characters. I don't understand this kind of story. I guess people just appreciate it as original fic or something?

[dreemyweird]

Kind of, yes.

But then I'm quite narrow-minded in this regard. I can hardly understand any happy fluff involving villains or villain-y antagonists. Hell, I don't even get people's liking villains (as people, I mean, not as characters)... It confuses me.

[(Anonymous)]

Haha I'm kind of similar.

I like villains AS villains, I don't get the urge to fluffify or woobify or normalise, except in the service of lulz.

[iggy]

This is me to a tee.

[dancing_serpent]

I think "fluffify" is my new favourite word. *g*

I like my villains as villains, too, although I do get a kick out of a really good redemption fic. Not that I've found anything like that in Hannibal fandom, of course.

[making_excuses]

I've read at least one Will is a killer fic that actually stayed pretty well in character, so not necessarily.

And really even if it is really out of character it can still be something enjoyable, people like what people like and as long as no one is running around saying that it is completely canon or in character what is the problem?

[gondremark]

This is me agreeing with you wholeheartedly.

[(Anonymous)]

Yep.

I just do not understand the murder!family thing. At that point you're dealing with a completely different story & characters.

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you, I was waiting for someone to say that. I was starting to think I was going crazy.

[(Anonymous)]

Curiosity question: Can you think of any characters for which this would work? Surely there must be villains out there in the media who are horrible ruthless killers but who cheerfully dote on their families? (The closest I can think of is, like... Gomez and Morticia Addams, and they're not really horrible or ruthless at all).

OP

[(Anonymous)]

I did acknowledge that it represents a complete loss of my characterization standards, didn't I?

Under any other circumstances, I'd agree with you (I've said much the same things about characters in other fandoms), which is why I'm ashamed of myself for liking it so much.

/shrugs