I will say only this. It seems to me that for a lot of people "whatever connection between two characters" = "romantic subtext". I think someone once said Fred/George was canon because they were so close! You don't say.
Of course there's subtext for ships: it's the subtext the reader bring in when their romantic ideals react to the text of the characters. But when you use subtext for "stuff put there by the author to be intentially ambiguous" (the "canon! canon!" claims) Harry hating Snape because Snape's a convenient scapegoat for Siriu's guilt isn't enough. Also, why gloss over Harry's need to cope with his internalised guilt this way?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-07-07 07:22 am (UTC)Of course there's subtext for ships: it's the subtext the reader bring in when their romantic ideals react to the text of the characters. But when you use subtext for "stuff put there by the author to be intentially ambiguous" (the "canon! canon!" claims) Harry hating Snape because Snape's a convenient scapegoat for Siriu's guilt isn't enough. Also, why gloss over Harry's need to cope with his internalised guilt this way?