day 130 of seeing the fandom say absolutely crazy shit about camilla. this is what happens when you consume media without any other lens except for this weird brand of uwu feminism where women can only be evil in a certain girlbossy way, never in a disgusting (and I mean TRULY disgusting, male-centric way), where they are only ever victims because of their “girlhood”. can you believe what I saw today? that apparently everyone in the group is a rapist because they raped her during the bacchanal! forget the fact that the entire group was high out of their minds, forget the fact that camilla is a smart enough girl to know what a bacchanal is and she’s strong enough to make her own decisions to participate (she would actually be more willing to participate in fucked up shit compared to charles!) i am just constantly disappointed and baffled by how they dumb her down in an attempt to make her seem more passive? pretending she’s above using her charm to manipulate the guys around her? apparently even bunny has done her wrong sexually because he didn’t “protect” her from charles’ incestous advances. why would he have?! it was consensual?????????? i am genuinely lost as to how the fandom has lost the plot with this one woman character. they keep claiming we’ll never know camilla because of richard. YOU ARE RICHARD! you are obsessed with victimizing her and then sexualizing this victimization! once I even saw someone claim JULIAN had victimized camilla?! they are obsessed with this narrative that every male who ever had contact with camilla raped her or sexually abused her and I’m beginning to think it’s because they can’t think of a fem character in any other way. she just HAS to be sexual or sexualized or a victim because she’s an uwu girl. no decision she takes is ever her own and no crime she commits is ever malicious because she’s ‘just a girl’ (and I hate this awful trend too). I’m sending this to you on anon because you’re the only one who won’t call me a misogynist rape apologizing male centrist (something I’ve been called before by this wonderful community for suggesting camilla was not the ‘ultimate’ victim. she is a victim don’t get me wrong but only of charles and ONLY after he’s blackout drunk.) anyway. I like your blog. I wish I’d found it before.
WHAT
aww thanku for the compliment
HOLD ON A MINUTE THOUGH. (cracks knuckles)
WHATTTT I AM SO GLAD I HAVENT SEEN THIS THOERY BECUASE WHAT DO YOU MEAAAN WHAT DO YOU MEAN THEYRE ALL RAPISTS!?!?!?!?!
OK wait let me chill Out for a sec and think abt this. My brainneeds to section things so I'll just make a list ok
GANG SA? i,m assumign theyre going with the SA thing bcs *she was a deer* and they all remembered chasing one...? THO idk how that translates into her being SA'd 🗿💔💔 i guess to each their own interpreatation.............Personally i think it’s so easy to get wrapped up in these weird ahh headcanons if u don't rlly gaf about the classical contextt behind the story...? Let me begin with the deer: UNRELATED TO BACCHUS -> Deer are sacred to Artemis and as we all know she is aka the huntress. Deer, hunt.......Deer, huntress.....possible allusion to the Goddess? PERHAPS. U kno...I have a crazy theory abt purrhaps this being a sign that they were led to 'hunt' the farmer. That's crazy. Anyway. RELATED TO BACCHUS -> wild animals lowkey depict wilderness and freedom and ecstasy for Bacchus and his folowers. The deer is not Dionysus' animal tho 💔 at least not from what i rember like its a panther or a tiger lowkey. HOWWWWWEVER DEER SKIN IS RELATED TO HIS FOLLOWERS!!!!!!!!!! DO YOU KNOW ABOUT "NEBRIS"? It means deer/fawn skin! And Bacchus' female followrs the maeneads use to wear this during the rituals! (And what is Camilla? A female follower in a bacchic ritual. Duh) Also Bacchic rituals dont even sacrific deer 😭😭 they sacrifc liek goats i think. It was either goats or rams but not deer. Also SA is literally never a part of Bacchic myths ew. Prersonally im my opinoin Donna used this imagery for classical reasons and not to depict fucking gan g rape. Bruh. Within a Bacchic fraework this probs js means she felt wild and animalistic in the ritual. ORRR LICHERALLY that she simply entered a trance-like state?? There is no textual or even contectual evidence that she was SAd.
CONSENSUAL INCEsT? The incest was consensual and i belueve this strongly. i think poeple just put it all on charles because he is easy to overlook and hate bcs of his abuse at the end but i dont think thats a fair analysis of anythng......Look. Incesy themes are considered gothic or whatevr and Donna Tartt mother of literature wrote everything very precisely. WHy I dont believe the incest was one sided is because Donna shows us a balance nd equalty b/w the sibs. - POWER IMBALANCE? Firsty they are literally twins so u take that age gap power imbalance away ok - CAMILLAS AGENCY? Secondy Ccamillas masculinity puts her on a somewhat equal footing WHEN IT COMES TO CHARLES (to Charles! Other men obv wouldnt see it this way) i wish i could explain it better but they are mirror images of one another.... Camillas masculinty is subtle and also a counterpoint to the vulnerable femininity people try to project onto her..She actualy isnt portrayed as meek or helpless by Donna EVEN in Richads's observation! She's emotionally controlled and calculated, ESPCIALLY compared to her fuckass brother who goes off the deep end at evey little thing. Camilla is not someone who doesn’t know how to say NO. She's not someon who bends over backwards to please ANY man around her please gie let her have some agency .... and we also kno Camilla is more capable of cold and brutal decisions when it comes down 2 it….I am not saying this makes it impssible for her to be a victim to him OFC but I just dont see her as having 0 say in what she and Charles do…….. - DONNA TARTT'S DEPICTION OF MORAL COLLAPSE Literally its just to show moral collpase. LMFAO. Donna wanted to shwo moral collapse and consensual incest is RIGHT UP THERE with MURDER! - NARRATUVE SILENCE IS FOR AMBIGUITYYYYY....NAWWTTT VICTIMHOOOD!!!! ALOT of pople say ohhh we didnt hear Camilla say shit she was such a victim. WHAT. Miss Donna's entire NOVEL is about ambiguity girlfriend we actually dont hear a lot of them say anything except Miss Richard! And she's a liar! - Black and white Charles? many let Charles’s eventual abusiveness color their entire view of the relationship, instead of recognizing that his behaviour at the end is not the behavior he has normally BUT a literal breakdown in response to losing emotional access to her. Sheleaves his ass when he starts drinking anf this drinking makes him abusive!!! HE LITERALLY BECAME AN ALCHOLOHIC AND YALL TALKNBG ABT "HE WAS ALWAYS LIKE THSI" LIKE WHaT????? - Projection of disgust obvi incest is fucking yuck because it is disturbing but disturbing doesnt mean nonconsensual. Morally wrong? Yes, but that doesnt automatically imply abuse.
Julian/Bnuy OH OH IVE SEEN THE JULIAN ONE! IDK WHAT IT MEANS. WHAT DID BRO DO (sorry nothing to addhere from my prepsective bcs i literally dont know what could have happened???) Maybe he asked her to read that poem once and she lowk has social anxity so he basically did a war crime (I am srs abt this tho profs who make u read shit out loud when they know u dont feel the vibe shoud be publicy executed kys) DONT EVEN GET ME FUCKING STARTED ON BUNNY??? TF HE DO??? Yes he sees two consenting adutls doing incest and freaks out and clams up abt it bcs he couldnt snitch on them b4 bcs like it would mess up their whole group and HENRY probably told him to shut up abt it. LOL/ LEAVE HIM ALONE HE GETS ENOUGH SHIT AS IT IS
ARE YOU SEXIST MISOGYNIST EVIL BATARD Im glad u asked. Answer is:
No
and llike, dont worry gurl, I been called that once too for uhh...for analyzing bnnuy's relaitosnhip with marion..........anything gets u titled anything over here its fine.
I have acutally been meaning to discuss the issue with Camilla and Charles' depiction in this fandom but I was lowkey scared so....thanku for this ask anon! I get your frustration!
Ur totally right that some takes reduce Camilla to a passive object and Charles to a 1 dimensional predator. In a literary space these r lowkey ahistorical (bcs they dont take gothic + classical tropes into consid), anti-literary (they assume everything is a modern social allegory), and Im ngl theyre often condescending toward Camilla, who I admit is literally one of the most emotionally intelligent characters in the book
And I do belive that theories and headcanons are, obvi, a to each their own kinda vibe. But if u take a theory that has no contextual evidence or smthn and start treatin it like canon u r bound to confuse and offend other readers maybe UBUT ALSO you will start getting offended when other readers dont take ur takes srsly. Bcs stuff like this is so charged (rape, incestual SA) that ppl just shut down and have visceral reactions (which is understabdale and normal). so i mean someone who believes in these theories might get mad at u for NOT believing in them or treating them as canon. At the end of the day bro we all jus gotta chill and ponder
