I thought that she was treating prostitutes as tauntauns?
I thought that she was treating prostitutes as tauntauns?
what is tauntauns?Originally Posted by LegalLoliLover
Spoiler:
Wandering on internet
Reminder that Achilles (to stick to a single character) only fought for his own glory, and that unless TM went full "Troy", Briseis wasn't exactly a willing consort.
Never watched The Empire Strikes Back?
Well you'll see it soon but spoiler
And who says that what Achilles did was good? The only reason why he's seen as a Hero and not a killer is simple, he's not of our time. He's literally a person from the past where his actions were seen as the right thing to do in his time, for their own values of honor and morality. The same goes for people like Iskandar, Vlad, and Gilgamesh. When summoned, why would they feel bad for actions that to them was righteous because the people of the time they were summoned in find it not. And despite that, many do reflect on their actions and adapt to the modern era as much as there are those that stick to there old ways. I would think Achilles would be one of those seeing how he acts.
Also about Briseis, from the parts of the Illiad that I read wasn't she sad and downtrodden that she was being taken from Achilles tent? Of course that has to do with the values of the people writing but still, and going by how in TM with Achilles saying he only fought for the sake of his parents, best friend, and the women he loved. I'd say in Fate the feelings are reciprocal. Call it whitewashing if you want, but at he same token I'm trying to keep myself in the context of Fate and not IRL regardless.
"Only in my company, will you not be a monster"
anywhere than here
He's Greek Cu, bringing it full circle
Localizationing stuff
never watched star wars
Spoiler:
Wandering on internet
Iceblade, you're missing the point. I'm not talking about in-character morals and values, I'm talking about how the narrative is presented to the presumed audience of modern-day readers / spectators, and again I ask: in a cast full of killers and worse, at what point should a victimised child be deemed "damaged beyond repair"? And if that wasn't the point of the scene, it could have and should have been done differently.
On a lighter topic: those exploding arrows fired by Chiron after he recites something which seems like a short prayer, were they only aesthetic flourishes by the anime, or were they bona fide magecraft?
Spoony, the narrative presents them as condemned evil ghosts with a sad backstory, they're not deemed damaged beyond repair, they just can't be saved due to the nature of their current existence and thats what the show presents them as.
I understand that your point is about how if that's the case then the presentation is conveying a wrong impression to the audience, but considering I really can't see it and that you're the first person I've ever seen talking like that about Jack erasure, I think your interpretation of the scene was just really different instead of the narrative actually presenting these aspects you're talking about.
All of those are deliberate decisions on the part of the writer, though. The writer chose to portray the amalgamation of the anger and suffering of children victimised by society as a being which was beyond saving. The exorcism wasn't portrayed as "laying the souls of the dead to rest", which I would have no qualms with, but as complete obliteration of the children who compose Jack the Ripper - NOT of the existence "Jack the Ripper", mind, which - again - I would have no qualms with, but of the children who compose said existence (something which can be seen directly in the episode, by the way).
But the thing is that you can't seperate the amalgamation from Jack the Ripper, because literally they are Jack the Ripper. They rose up into existence because of the anger and loneliness, and started murdering people. That's why there evil spirits to begin with. You can't paint them any other way even in taking in account on what they are, because there still Jack the Ripper. It's not the spirits of children victimized that is beyond saving, it's the the spirits of children victimized that is Jack the Ripper that is. Because once that step is taken, you can't change that.
"Only in my company, will you not be a monster"
anywhere than here
Higashide is hitting the center of Araya's conflict with "how do you save people who have not and cannot been saved"
the answer being, "even if you're someone that's deemed a saint, you can't. All you can do is mourn for it and move forward, that is why heroic spirit exists." Which is the answer Sieg and Jeanne reach to combat Amakusa.
the answer presented in GO is "even if you can't save someone who cannot be saved, by allowing them to live the life that they should have lived with people similar to them, that too is a type of salvation." from Nursery, Jack, Bunyan, and Chibi-Assassin's relationships.
Last edited by You; April 24th, 2018 at 10:35 PM.
Though abandoned, forgotten, and scorned as out-of-date dolls, they continue to carry out their mission, unchanged from the time they were designed.
Machines do not lose their worth when a newer model appears.
Their worth (life) ends when humans can no longer bear that purity.
Apocrypha Jeanne is just a constant reminder that the light has no place in my heart (which was originally shown to me by Kingdom Hearts).
Is it possible for you to make posts that don’t sound like they’re written by someone in a high school anime club
I'm just saying that these narrative decisions are not portraying that sad children are beyond saving and it's okay to kill them, which seems to be what you're taking issue with. Those are not real children, they are hateful grudges, the ghostly remains of children who once suffered, and also a sadistic serial killer.
This particular, fantastical, evil and sad existence cannot be saved and the only choice available is to end it. I honestly don't understand why this is bothering you so much.
The kids got screwed in the 1880s, there's nothing you can do now to fix what happened to them. What's done is done, move along.
Last edited by Zork Knight; April 24th, 2018 at 11:30 PM.
Iirc Iceblade told me it's just arrows super packed with magic energy.
Something
I already talked about how you shouldn't just draw a parallel to real-life issues and then divorce yourself entirely from those parallels whenever you want. But let me put forward a hypothetical example: imagine I write a novel in which a bunch of characters are stripped of all pretenses of civilisation and revert to a more animalistic mindset - basically "Lord of the Flies", but with adults.
Now imagine all those characters are black.
- - - Updated - - -
I get that, I do. I'm just questioning the particular implications of the particular way this theme is applied to this particular character.
Reply With Quote
