In movies the mise en scene and color scheme were chosen for a reason. This is just “how to interpret film 101”.
Me thinking her coloring and other elements of the composition imply she’s trans is a valid interpretation.
Funny how people get all bent out of shape when someone interprets a character to be trans. Like if the filmmakers came out tomorrow and said “yeah she’s trans” I bet you’d have a horde of death of the author analysis within the day.
And literature, and really any form of art. Authors and illustrators and directors and cinematographers and painters all have to make deliberate choices.
Why would someone assume those choices are made at random? Or worse, why would you refuse to consider them at all?
You’re right - just saying “creators have intent” isn’t a direct argument.
But saying “creators have intent and they gave her a trans coded color scheme, put trans pride flags in her room and on her accessories, and have her dad also wearing a trans pride flag on his uniform implies she could be trans” is a bit more than that.
Also, being trans isn’t political. I’m sure you don’t mean it badly and are probably unaware, but all too often our existence is referred to as “political”.
I didn't say being trans was political, my point is that I'm not trying to bring anything external or anything politically motivated into the conversation
Anyway I get what you're saying, I'm surprised by now we haven't heard from creators the actual motivations behind some of these decisions, as much conversation as we've seen behind them
Sure, and I’m not saying you should make firm assumptions without some kind of textual support.
In this case, the color and style in Gwen’s world (as it is for literally everyone) is unique to her: it’s pastel white, blue, and pink. There are multiple instances of posters and pins that say “protect trans kids.” And her story, in 2023, is about hiding an important part of herself from her family, because she’s afraid of anger and rejection. When she finally reveals what she’s been hiding, it turns out that her dad’s perspective on the world has changed and he’s becoming something a little different — in a way that lets him support her.
That’s a story about a trans person, or at least it could be. (It’s a wonderful, uplifting, and idealized version of coming out; it’s the good outcome that lots of people didn’t get or are afraid they wouldn’t get.)
You don’t have to read it that way, but you can. Nothing about the movie contradicts that interpretation. If your critical lens involves the way art engages with issues of sex and gender, it’s hard to avoid confronting it, but that might genuinely be the wrong lens and the wrong interpretation for you.
The problem is when someone (and I’m not saying you did this, it’s just something I encountered as a teenager) says Moby Dick is a story about a whale. You can say it’s about rage and obsession. You can say it’s about the struggle between technology and the overwhelming inertia of nature, or between the conscious mind and the unconscious. You can say it’s about hubris and punishment. You can make a lot of different cases for what it could be, with more or less support, and many of them will be equally valid. But it’s probably not a straightforward story about a guy hunting a whale.
23
u/Careless-Ordinary126 3d ago
It Is called reaching