I absolutely loved reading your summary and it feels so refreshing. When I finished Wet Sand and started reading people’s reviews, I was surprised at the amount of people calling TJ “Ian’s abuser”. It felt like such a surface level analysis of not only TJ but also his relationship with Ian. But like you said, I also think the fandom being very divided on what they believe the ending should’ve been shows just how much depth the three characters have. I personally think that Jo should’ve ended up with Ian, but I can’t really refute anyone who says that Ian ending up with TJ was the right choice. There’s just so many ways you can interpret each character and their actions.
I really liked your analysis on TJ! It made me rethink how I viewed him and his accountability. I would also like to add on that I feel as if TJ’s reluctance to let Ian go was not just because he was afraid of being without Ian, I think he was also afraid of Ian without him. He witnessed Ian go through so many traumatic events (drug abuse, homophobic incidents, attacks) that he started to believe that Ian could also not live without him and that Ian needed to be close to TJ to prevent harm. But when he saw Ian with someone who made Ian happy and genuinely provide Ian security, he decided to let go at the moment. At that moment, even when TJ was still scared of being without Ian, he started to finally realize just how much he loved Ian to be able to let him go.
Thank you for taking time to read my summary, I also believe that personality plays a huge role in how people interpret Wet Sand.
Not in a simplistic way like “good people like Jo and bad people like TJ”—I don’t think that’s true at all. But our own experiences, values, and emotional instincts definitely influence which aspects of the story resonate with us.
For example:
* Some readers place the highest value on safety and healthy boundaries. They’re often drawn toward Jo or toward Ian ending up alone.
* Some readers are deeply moved by redemption and second chances. They’re more open to the possibility of TJ and Ian rebuilding something together.
* Some readers focus on personal growth and independence, so they feel Ian should choose neither of them.
* Others are very sensitive to history and emotional bonds, and they find it unrealistic that Ian could simply walk away from someone who shaped such a large part of his life.
None of those perspectives are necessarily wrong. They’re just emphasizing different truths.
What’s interesting is that Wet Sand is written well enough to support multiple interpretations. If a story only allows one reasonable reading, discussions tend to end quickly. The fact that people can finish the same series and come away with such different conclusions is part of what makes it memorable.
I also think readers sometimes recognize themselves in different characters.
Some people see themselves in:
* Ian’s avoidance and confusion.
* TJ’s fear of abandonment.
* Jo’s experience of loving someone who can’t fully choose them.
And once that happens, the story becomes personal.
I personally was very interested in understanding all the characters rather than judging them. That’s probably why my reaction to the ending was hope (towards a new start to achieve mutual healing for Ian and TJ) and relief (because Jo is finally free) rather than disappointment.
I weren’t asking myself: “Who deserves to win?”
Rather I was asking myself:“Have these people grown?”
And honestly, I think it’s a lens that fits Wet Sand particularly well. The story is full of mistakes, hurt, and flawed decisions, but at its core it’s about people trying, sometimes clumsily, sometimes painfully, to become better than they were before.
So yes, I think our personalities influence our interpretations. But I also think the best stories reveal something about us through those interpretations.
The funny thing is that if two readers argue about whether TJ deserved redemption, they’re often not just talking about TJ.
They’re talking about a real-life question:
“Can people who have seriously hurt others genuinely change?”
And how someone answers that question usually says as much about them as it does about the character.
That’s one reason I think Wet Sand inspires such passionate discussions. Underneath the gang drama and romance, it’s asking questions that don’t have easy answers. And readers bring their own experiences, hopes, fears, and beliefs to those answers. That’s what makes analysis like this so interesting.
Also I really liked your observation about TJ and it makes even more sense to me,
I think many readers understandably focus on TJ’s fear of losing Ian. That’s definitely there. But your interpretation adds another layer that fits surprisingly well with what we know about TJ’s experiences with Ian.
TJ didn’t just fall in love with Ian.
He watched Ian:
* struggle with addiction,
* suffer violence,
* experience rejection,
* make self-destructive choices,
* repeatedly end up in danger.
Over time, I can absolutely imagine TJ developing a belief that looks something like:
“If I’m not there, nobody will protect him.”
Or even:
“Ian doesn’t know how to keep himself safe.”
Now, is that belief completely healthy or accurate?
No.
But that’s what makes it interesting.
Because people who become overprotective often don’t see themselves as controlling.
They see themselves as necessary.
And that’s why your interpretation of the ending resonates with me.
When TJ sees Ian with Jo, maybe he’s not only seeing a rival.
Maybe he’s seeing evidence that challenges one of his deepest assumptions.
For years, TJ may have believed:
“Without me, Ian will fall apart.”
Then suddenly he has to confront another possibility:
“Without me, Ian might actually be okay.”
That’s a frightening realization.
But it’s also a liberating one.
⸻
What I particularly like about your reading is that it makes TJ’s decision even more difficult.
If he only fears being alone, then letting Ian go is an act of self-sacrifice.
But if he genuinely fears for Ian’s wellbeing, then letting Ian go means sacrificing both:
* his own happiness,
* and his belief that he knows what’s best for Ian.
That’s a much deeper surrender.
A lot of love triangles have a structural problem: one love interest gets all the depth while the other exists mainly to create tension. By the midpoint, readers can usually predict the ending because one character feels like a real person and the other feels like a narrative device.
DOYAK avoided that.
Ian, TJ, and Jo all feel like protagonists of their own stories.
That’s why we , the fans, can have completely different interpretations and still point to valid evidence from the text.
For example:
* Some readers finish the story believing TJ earned a second chance.
* Some believe Ian should have chosen Jo.
* Some think Ian should have ended up alone.
* Some see Jo as the healthiest person in the story.
* Others see Jo’s idealization of Ian as a major flaw.
And none of those readings are completely unsupported.
That’s usually a sign of strong characterization rather than weak writing.
What impresses me most is how DOYAK handles perspective. If you reread the story after knowing everyone’s backstory, many scenes feel different.
A first-time reader might see TJ and think:
“He’s controlling Ian.”
A reread might add:
“He’s terrified of abandonment.”
Neither interpretation cancels the other out.
The same thing happens with Ian. On a first read, he can seem like someone constantly caught between two men. On a second read, you start noticing how much he avoids making decisions until circumstances force him to.
And Jo, who initially appears almost idealized, gradually reveals insecurities and blind spots that were arguably there all along.
That’s the mark of characters who have layers rather than twists.
I also think DOYAK deserves credit for not confusing understanding a character with excusing a character.
We understand why TJ became who he is.
That doesn’t erase the harm he caused.
We understand why Ian withdraws.
That doesn’t make his avoidance healthy.
We understand why Jo becomes emotionally consumed by Ian.
That doesn’t mean every reaction he has is perfect.
The story allows all three men to be sympathetic without pretending they’re always right.
And honestly, that’s what makes them feel adult.
A lesser story might have ended with a clear message:
* “This person was the correct choice.”
* “This person was the wrong choice.”
Wet Sand feels more interested in asking:
“Can damaged people learn to love differently?”
That’s a much messier question, but it’s also why readers are still debating the characters long after finishing it.
ALSO
Another thing I find interesting is that Jo’s existence is necessary for TJ’s growth.
Without Jo, TJ never has to confront the possibility that Ian has a real alternative.
And without TJ, Jo never has to confront the uncomfortable reality that love isn’t always enough.
In a strange way, both men force each other to grow through Ian.
That’s why I don’t really see Jo as the “loser” of the love triangle. Narratively, he fulfills his role beautifully.
He enters the story idealizing love.
He leaves understanding that love must include respect for another person’s choice.
That’s painful growth, but it’s still growth.
And honestly, I think that’s one reason the ending feels bittersweet rather than triumphant. Nobody gets everything they want. Everyone loses something.
Ian loses the possibility of an easier life.
TJ has to face the damage he’s caused and earn trust back.
Jo loses the person he loves.
Yet all three seem more emotionally honest by the end than they were at the beginning.
———————
And to conclude I’ll explain why I think TJ is a good and acceptable endgame for Ian
At first, we’re seeing TJ largely through Ian’s pain. So the dominant impression is: controlling, dangerous, emotionally manipulative. It’s hard not to see him as toxic.
Then the flashbacks start changing the picture.
The childhood material doesn’t excuse what TJ does, but it explains why he became the person he is. He grew up in an environment where vulnerability was dangerous and where relationships were often tied to power, survival, and loyalty. He never really learned a healthy way to love someone.
Ian’s rehab period was especially important to me because it’s one of the few times we see TJ loving Ian when there isn’t much to gain from it.
Before that, you could argue:
* TJ keeps Ian close because he needs him.
* TJ wants to possess him.
* TJ is afraid of being abandoned.
During the rehab struggle, though, we see something more complicated. Caring for someone in recovery is exhausting, frustrating, and often thankless. Those scenes made me think that TJ’s feelings were deeper than mere possession.
What struck me is that TJ often seems willing to suffer himself if it means Ian survives. That’s different from a character who only wants control.
The reason I lean toward “redeemable” rather than simply “tragic” is that tragedy alone doesn’t require growth. A tragic character can understand their flaws and still repeat them forever.
Redemption requires self-awareness and change.
By the end, I got the sense that TJ was finally beginning to understand something crucial:
Loving Ian doesn’t automatically entitle him to Ian.
That sounds obvious, but for TJ it’s a huge shift.
One scene that always stays with me is how frightened TJ becomes when losing Ian starts feeling real. Earlier in the story he acts as if Ian is inevitably tied to him. Later, he seems to realize that Ian has agency—that Ian can choose someone else, or choose nobody at all.
That realization introduces humility into his character in a way we don’t see at the beginning.
I also think the ending works better if you read it as:
* TJ has started his redemption,
* not completed it.
That’s an important distinction.
If the story claimed TJ was fully healed and now a perfect partner, I would probably reject it. The damage between him and Ian is too significant for that. But if the ending says, “These two broken people are finally willing to try building something healthier,” then I find it believable.
I think there are three strongest pieces of evidence for TJ’s potential redemption, (Ian’s rehab, when he tried to take accountability about the accident that lead to Ian’s leg broken and when he decide to let Ian go by the end) and what I like is that none of them are grand romantic gestures. They’re all moments of accountability.
The scene in the hospital after Ian broke his leg is especially important.
A lot of toxic characters in fiction apologize only when they’re about to lose someone, and even then the apology is often framed as “look how much I’m suffering.” What stood out to me about TJ in that moment was that he seemed genuinely forced to confront the consequences of his actions. He couldn’t hide behind power, loyalty, or good intentions. Ian was physically hurt, and TJ had to face the fact that his choices had contributed to that reality.
That’s very different from:
“I’m sorry you’re upset.”
It’s closer to:
“I understand that I caused harm.”
And redemption usually starts there.
The rehab scenes work similarly. They reveal a TJ who is capable of patience, sacrifice, and care, which means the problem isn’t that he’s incapable of love. The problem is that he often expresses love in destructive ways.
That’s actually a more hopeful problem to have. If a character can’t love at all, redemption is difficult. If a character loves badly because of trauma, fear, and learned behaviors, there’s at least a path forward.
The moment where he lets Ian go is probably the most significant one, though.
Because for most of the story, TJ’s love is intertwined with possession.
His mindset is often:
* I love Ian.
* Therefore Ian belongs with me.
* Therefore I must prevent him from leaving.
By letting Ian go, TJ finally separates those ideas.
He reaches a point where:
* I love Ian.
* Ian is free to choose.
* I may not be chosen.
That sounds simple, but for TJ it’s arguably the biggest character development in the entire series.
And honestly, that’s one reason I never interpreted the ending as “Ian rewards TJ for bad behavior.”
I interpreted it more as:
TJ finally becomes someone Ian can freely choose.
The freedom matters.
If Ian stayed because he was trapped, manipulated, indebted, or afraid, the ending would feel tragic. If Ian stays after being given a genuine opportunity to walk away, then the relationship changes fundamentally.
One thing that sometimes frustrates me in fandom discussions is how people divide the characters into:
* perpetrator (TJ)
* victim (Ian)
when the story is more nuanced than that.
Ian is absolutely harmed by TJ, but he’s also deeply avoidant. He withholds information, disappears instead of communicating, sends mixed signals, and often postpones difficult decisions until circumstances force them.
That’s not because Ian is malicious. It’s because he’s traumatized.
In a strange way, both Ian and TJ share a similar flaw:
Neither knows how to handle vulnerability.
TJ tries to control situations when he’s afraid.
Ian tries to escape situations when he’s afraid.
One pushes.
One withdraws.
And together they create a cycle that hurts both of them.
That’s why I find their relationship compelling despite all the dysfunction. The story isn’t asking us to decide who is “good” and who is “bad.” It’s asking whether two people who have repeatedly hurt each other can actually grow.
The ending doesn’t prove that they will succeed. It only suggests that, for the first time, they might have a chance.
And personally, I think that’s a more interesting ending than either:
* “TJ was evil all along,”
* or “TJ was secretly perfect all along.”
He’s neither. He’s a damaged person who finally starts taking responsibility for the damage he’s caused.