Not everything is alive though. Only his servants and I think those in the castle at the time got turned into objects. So it’s unlikely the furniture he destroyed was alive.
Right. The idea is sound enough, Beast could have destroyed furniture that was inhabited by one of the servants. I mean, imagine being a kid who was just turned into a monster and all of a sudden your dresser drawers start screaming at you (because becoming aware of having been turned into a dresser drawer was probably more frightening tbh) … Yeah… I’d probably break stuff too.
But the theory just starts off on the wrong assumption. Every servant became an object but not every object in the castle became sentient. Beast didn’t have a 1-to-1 ratio of servants to inanimate objects.
At least I hope so. Because man, imagine waking up as the toilet. 🙁
Comments for Bizarre ‘Beauty and the Beast’ Theory Proves Beast Was Actually a MURDERER
Drew
Not everything is alive though. Only his servants and I think those in the castle at the time got turned into objects. So it’s unlikely the furniture he destroyed was alive.
JustJessee
Right. The idea is sound enough, Beast could have destroyed furniture that was inhabited by one of the servants. I mean, imagine being a kid who was just turned into a monster and all of a sudden your dresser drawers start screaming at you (because becoming aware of having been turned into a dresser drawer was probably more frightening tbh) … Yeah… I’d probably break stuff too.
But the theory just starts off on the wrong assumption. Every servant became an object but not every object in the castle became sentient. Beast didn’t have a 1-to-1 ratio of servants to inanimate objects.
At least I hope so. Because man, imagine waking up as the toilet. 🙁
Comments are closed.