Nimona
question
What is the relationship between Ballister and Ambrosius?
I thought it was really obvious that they were in love. First of all, Ambrosius reaches out to hold Ballister's hand when they go out for a drink. That already made me suspicious that they were previously in a relationship. Then the Director tells Ambrosius, "I know what the nature of your relationship was. I made it clear at the time that I disapproved." The Director also says that Ambrosius has a "fixation" on Ballister and Ambrosius blushes. Since the Director has already spoken about Ballister and Ambrosius being friends, I don't think there's any way you can interpret that as not being a reference to romantic entanglement. WHY WOULD HE BLUSH IF THEY WERE JUST FRIENDS?
Ambrosius also talks about how Ballister and him were "together". I don't know about you, but when people say that they are "together" I never think of friendship.
And finally, what about when Ambrosius says, "Ballister, wait- if I don't make it out, I need to tell you-" I get that he could be just telling him that he loves him as a friend, but given all the hints beforehand I think that was going to be a declaration of romantic love.
What's more, the author has stated that they are in love and were in a relationship. So, no, I don't think it's ambiguous.
Ambrosius also talks about how Ballister and him were "together". I don't know about you, but when people say that they are "together" I never think of friendship.
And finally, what about when Ambrosius says, "Ballister, wait- if I don't make it out, I need to tell you-" I get that he could be just telling him that he loves him as a friend, but given all the hints beforehand I think that was going to be a declaration of romantic love.
What's more, the author has stated that they are in love and were in a relationship. So, no, I don't think it's ambiguous.
deleted member
May 07, 2016 08:11PM
1 vote
I thought lovers until the "accident", personally. But I agree with Bill that it was probably deliberately ambiguous.
They are in love guys just accept it it makes life easier.
THEY'RE IN LOVE THEY'RE GAY GET OVER IT IT'S AWESOME STOP DENYING IT
I'm pretty sure it's intentionally ambiguous. They seem to have had a friendly rivalry until the joust. Was there a romantic element to their relationship before that? It's implied but not stated directly.
I think I read somewhere (I don't remember where) that ND Stevenson had intended for them to be in love with one another, but was afraid to make it obvious at the time because he was still new to the comics scene and wasn't sure how it would be received. He said he would make it more obvious if he had the chance to go back and rewrite it, and that's a driving force behind why he includes so much obvious queer representation in Lumberjanes.
Edit: Changed author's name and pronouns to reflect current identity. :)
Edit: Changed author's name and pronouns to reflect current identity. :)
@petra wtf.
They are gay and that is pretty obvious. In the movie, it is shown clearly and beautifully. you're a hater and homophobe, and let the character SEXUALITY RUIN THE WHOLE SERIES?!? that shows that you are not a true book nerd. you suck
They are gay and that is pretty obvious. In the movie, it is shown clearly and beautifully. you're a hater and homophobe, and let the character SEXUALITY RUIN THE WHOLE SERIES?!? that shows that you are not a true book nerd. you suck
Feb 07, 2021 08:05AM · flag