Not βOnly my reading of canon is correctβ or βInterpretations are subjective and all validβ but a secret third thing, βMore than one interpretation can be valid but thereβs a reason your English teacher had you cite quotes and examples in your papers, you have to have a strong argument that your interpretation is actually supported by the text or it is just wrong and Iβm fine with telling you itβs wrong, actually.β
If the text says the curtains are blue you can argue about what that means; but if youβre going to claim theyβre actually yellow youβd better have a really good argument.
i know the curtains better than the author. thank you for coming to my ted talk
Fandom has such unresolved mommy/daddy issues about authors. If you apply a little reading comprehension skills to my original post youβll see I didnβt say anything at all about the author. You guys always make βinterpretationβ about your beef with the author. Youβre all obsessed with the author. This post is just about deciphering what is there in canon. Figuring out what is being communicated by the canon itself with all the words and images and basic formal elements that are there in canon. Thatβs all itβs about. It really doesnβt matter if the author intentionally put all those things there in a pattern that might support the idea that this one characterβs queer. Thatβs not what this is about. What matters is if you can compellingly argue thereβs a pattern of evidence there. Or not. Everyone is conspiring together to make me go insane still adding shit about authorial intent on my post.

















