Are you a TV Fanatic?
Sign up for our daily newsletter to receive personalized television news for free!
@First Aid Kit - I stopped believing in these writers a long time ago to be honest. I don't really take heed of any of their comments as I believe all ships aside they are ruining what was once a great show. The core dynamics of this show have fundamentally changed - regardless of who is with who romantically. I am not asking anyone to Ship Chair - I didn't come here to do that - I have my preference you have yours.
@ Ivee - If you choose to believe the writers in one instance and then not in the other that is your choice , I find this to be inconsistent , but it's your choice .
The writers' words were just used to back up what i saw on the show. I already thought Dan was just getting himself out of that insane situation before the writers confirmed my belief on twitter. Anyway, I've already written way too many words on why it's clear Dan wasn't trying to come between CB and my interpretation of the last CD scene. I already know Chair shippers started to hate Dan when he wasn't being a CB cheerleader prior to the wedding when it's been clear that his one and only ship has been Blair/Happiness and sending that video (even though I hate the stupid plot) is still consistent with that. I mean, even Blair herself told Chuck "that it wasn't that simple" meaning he was wrong about things. And frankly speaking, I don't even blame Chuck for arriving at that conclusion since Blair's actions were unfair to him. It doesn't change the fact that Dan wasn't the reason they weren't together.
Anyway, we'll interpret things as we see fit and I can't remember the exact quote but I think norbuck said something about shippers making up fairytales in their heads. LOL. How true is that and all ships are guilty of it.
Again my point was about people believing what the writers say in some instances and not others - it wasn't to start a ship war
@GGFan76: I would agree with you, if it weren't for the nature of the events (and the circumstanes surrounding them) that the writers found themselves having to explain.
The glass window incident resulted in Blair getting hurt. It was immediatly followed by a frazzled Nate who yelled at Chuck, telling him that what he and Blair had 'wasn't normal'. And on Blair's end, we saw her frantically try to cover up her scar in front of an inquisitive Sophie, the next day.
All of the surrounding circumstances pointed to an explanation that what had happened was wrong. It wasn't just a case of 'Blair went up there on her own'. That act was an isolated act of violence, meant to illustrate the dysfunctional nature of their relationship. And it did. It wasn't abuse. I agree with the writers there. Chuck may be emotionally abusive, but he is not physically abusive. For one to be phsyically abusive, the abuse has to be a 'pattern of behaviour'.
But there's a whole lot of grey area in between healthy and abusive. Just because the writers said that Chuck isn't abusive, isn't reason to dance and jump for joy.
With Dan's 'confession', it contradicted what we have been shown this past season. He admitted to having isolated Blair, when his actions have shown anything but. Claiming that he tried to separate CB is ridiculous. Its like 5x10 and all of season 4 and 3 never happened, where some are concerned. I think people asked for clarification, because his confession contradicted what we were being shown. Whereas, with the Chuck hitting the window, it was sort of an expected point along the trajectory that is Chuck and Blair-ness. And some were quite shocked that the writers went there, the way that they did.
Just to clarify though, I never claimed that Chuck is physically abusive, and I didn't need the writers clarification regarding Dan's confession either. I already knew because I watch the show, and I watch the patterns of behaviour and the interactions between Dan and Blair, and Chuck and Blair.
A little clarification on my above post
Chuck window thing: Not phsyically abusive. But it is an act of violence, and probably can be thought of as an assault.
I am not in any way excusing his behaviour though.