#boston ofts

The narrative and writers didn't hate or punish Boston. His friends did. Monogamous cultural standards did. His father's prominent political position did. But the narrative never did. When a story's ending is thronged by a character's absence, to lift a phrase from Marilynne Robinson's final sentence in Housekeeping, the absence was not signifying condemnation. Interesting that the Dream On trailer uses Romeo and Juliet, because I had just been thinking about that play as an example to parallel with Only Friends where the characters deaths and absence at the end signify the wrong-headedness of everyone else. All this is to say, the bitch is back! Neo's appearance as Boston in the trailer tells us that yes it's gonna be messy but also that Boston is beloved (Jojo has stated as much explictly).

Only Friends was a commentary on the BL genre in relation to queer media genres. I won't go into the particulars of my theory about the allegories here, but Dream On is diving deeper into the commentary by being directly about the drama behind the scenes of BL dramas lol.

Only Friends did not depict or view committed partnership as a happily ever after. Dream On is about to give us a bunch of couples in messy established relationships rather than the original series arcs around coming together *wink wink*. The EarthMix casting is beyond exceptional, since they are the most highly rumored to be an actual couple. Then we get Ohm Pawat and Gawin who both have sorted through BL partners like few others in the business, and Ohm's especially have been associated with scandal and mess. If you think the ending of Only Friends with the three established couples opening their business was the writers' idea of a happy ending, the Dream On trailer is here to tell you that you're sorely mistaken. The mess continues well beyond saying let's be exclusive.

this is the moment that consolidated the notion in my head. he was genuinely confused–not disappointed, just confused–about nick wanting something from him that wasn't his body. "then what?", as in, "if you don't want to fuck me, then, what else is there?"

in relation to this tweet from Jojo, which I love - I’m amazed by the number of posts I’ve seen suggesting that Nick is an innocent victim of manipulation from Boston. no one is saying Boston isn’t messy as fuck, but he’s been so clear about his feelings and what he is/isn’t looking for. he’s told Nick multiple times that while their relationship might develop in the future, he is only interested in casual sex for now - and Nick has willingly agreed to this kind of casual, non-exclusive relationship. Boston has absolutely no obligation to be ‘faithful’ to Nick, or to tell him which of his friends he’s attracted to. Nick wanting things to be different doesn’t make it so.

violating privacy and boundaries is clearly a theme with Nick - he expresses interest in Boston by leaving suggestive photos on Boston’s phone, having already gone through (and jerked off to) Boston’s personal pictures. bugging his car takes it a step further.

(I think there’s something to be said about the way Boston’s promiscuity and open sexuality seems to make his right to privacy seem trivial or less important than that of someone more reserved - it’s fine that Nick jerked off to Boston’s personal photos, because Boston slept with him after; Nick only secretly recorded Boston having sex because Boston led him on; Boston’s a whore, so it doesn’t matter, he was asking for it… but that’s a post for another day)

[Submitted Reasons Under Cut]