Talk:Gus Fring

Category error

I added that category because it is heavily implied that Gus was involved in the murder of Tomas Cantillo, an 11 year old boy. It's thought that he did this as a loyalty test and to tie up loose ends, even if it's made clear he didn't initially know that the two "Rival Dealers" working for him were using a child to sling meth and kill people.

He did say that Jesse "should have let him deal with them", but he later goes on to threaten Walter White's two children, a teenager and an infant.

Sorry for the error. It's just that the article had that category in the past, and it seemed accurate.

Titanoboa Constrictor (talk) 08:52, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

The category in question is "Fictional murderers of children". "Heavily implied" is not the same as "was" involved in Tomas' murder. To me, when Gus said Jesse "should have let me handle them", it is heavily implied that he had no advance knowledge of the dealers' plan to murder Tomas. I don't think it's an appropriate category at all. _signed, Willondon (talk) 14:25, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Yeah my bad. Thanks for the correction. Titanoboa Constrictor (talk) 20:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Gus' sexuality, implicit, explicit, orientation, active lifestyle

I see Gus' sexuality in his description has become a point of differing opinion again. I hope not to rehash what's been said already in the first archive (Gus' sexuality, Gus being gay, Gus being queer). I agree with characterizing Gus as homosexual, or likely homosexual, but I don't agree with referring to Max Arciniega as his boyfriend, etc.

• Gus' activity as a homosexual is never made explicit; his orientation is only hinted at. Given Gus' personality, it's possible that he is extremely cautious and either never fully acknowedged his orientation with action, or was cautiously reluctant to act on his sexual desires at all, and wine bar David is the closest we see him coming to that. Gus may have cherished Max as a friend and business partner along with having homosexual feelings that were not expressed.
• I give very little weight to comments from cartel members. When used as a homophobic insult, it may come from a suspicion based on as much as the viewer has seen, too; but in the end, those slurs are just insults meant to denigrate, and are not infrequently levied without the slightest shred of evidence of a person's actual orientation.
• In my view, comments by the writers and producers outside the work itself are not canon. The wise artistic choice to make it ambiguous in the story is what defines Gus. They had a choice to make it explicit, and didn't. So meta-fiction statements can't help to define the character; they had their chance.

Not wishing to rehash the previous discussions, I would say Gus being queer is the most pertinent conversation to review if we're to pick it up again. So again, I think the material in the work of fiction itself makes it fairly clear that Gus' sexual orientation is homosexual, but it's not clear at all that Gus was a practicing homosexual, and much less clear that Max Arciniega was a romantic partner. My two cents. _signed, Willondon (talk) 18:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)