57020 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Sialater wrote...

GailRana wrote...

Sialater wrote...

*snip*

And the parting of the Amaranthine Sea.

lol, maybe in the DLC

Knight Commander, let my people go!

LOL.

10 commandments of the Magi?

[Silfren]

Ryzaki wrote...

Hell that gives the Chantry justification for locking up the mages because look what the free ones do! 

Wow, the threads took a serious turn.  Anyway, while I know you're making a general point--an accurate one, unfortunately-- and not supporting that position, I have to comment on it.

This is precisely what a lot of pro-templar people are saying, when they talk about reaching the end of the game and finding it very difficult to side with the mages.  And yes, I can see the Chantry saying exactly that: "See what that crazy apostate just did?  And you WONDER why we lock them in Circles?  Seriously?!"

There's a major flaw in the cause-and-effect logic going on there, and anyone who'd just sit down and think about it for a moment or two could see the inherent dishonesty.  Anders did what he did because of the Chantry's systematic imprisonment and dehumanization of mages.  He didn't start out life as an apostate--first he was a Circle mage who spent most of his tenure at the Ferelden Circle trying to escape and stay escaped.  He wanted his freedom badly enough that he never, ever gave up, no matter how many times he was dragged back.  It was seeing the Chantry's insistence on the system of the Circle that pushed him into joining with Justice in order to achieve freedom for mages.  Anders' action doesn't justify the Chantry's laws; the Chantry's laws created Anders!

[Patriciachr34]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

In terms of the ultimate motivation, sure. But that's never the basis upon which I end up comparing them. That people do - often clumsily - isn't something I can really answer for.

I've been in and out of this thread and others on the topic before, and all I ever really try to say is that the act is a textbook example of terrorism.   Whether or not he is or isn't specifically like al-Qaeda or Sayyid Qutb or the Provisional IRA or whoever isn't ultimately the point I try to make.

There are better examples, but I've hesitated to use them because they have their supporters and making a list labeled, "Terrorists and terrorist organizations comparable to Anders" and then listing a bunch is a good way to start a flamewar.

I know there is a case to be made for Anders the terrorist, but it is my impression that Anders was not trying to terrorize and intimidiate a population.  Nor was he trying to destroy and rebuild all of the moires of a society.  He was trying to escalate a conflict by removing the one thing that was keeping "the lid on the pot", that being Althena and the Chantry (the Chantry being a symbol of opression for mages).  In essence, he was trying bring about change for one group of people within a society and not destroy that society as a whole.  I beleive that this distinction is important here.

That being said, I am no expert on violent factions, revolutionaries, and terrorist orgnaizations.  So I could be wrong.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Silfren wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Hell that gives the Chantry justification for locking up the mages because look what the free ones do! 

Wow, the threads took a serious turn.  Anyway, while I know you're making a general point--an accurate one, unfortunately-- and not supporting that position, I have to comment on it.

This is precisely what a lot of pro-templar people are saying, when they talk about reaching the end of the game and finding it very difficult to side with the mages.  And yes, I can see the Chantry saying exactly that: "See what that crazy apostate just did?  And you WONDER why we lock them in Circles?  Seriously?!"

There's a major flaw in the cause-and-effect logic going on there, and anyone who'd just sit down and think about it for a moment or two could see the inherent dishonesty.  Anders did what he did because of the Chantry's systematic imprisonment and dehumanization of mages.  He didn't start out life as an apostate--first he was a Circle mage who spent most of his tenure at the Ferelden Circle trying to escape and stay escaped.  He wanted his freedom badly enough that he never, ever gave up, no matter how many times he was dragged back.  It was seeing the Chantry's insistence on the system of the Circle that pushed him into joining with Justice in order to achieve freedom for mages.  Anders' action doesn't justify the Chantry's laws; the Chantry's laws created Anders!

I hate this vicious cycle.
Chantry controls mages with an iron fist > Mages try to reclaim freedom > Oppression increases > Rebelion increases > repeat until the whole thing explodes.

Chantry: "Can you see why mages must be controled!?"
Mages; "Can you see what extree measures the Chantry has pushed us to?"

As for Anders... well... Anders himself was never a fighter as such. "I run away from my oppression, there's a difference."

By merging with Justice I suppose his sense of morality and his determination for freedom was strengthened to the point where he fought for the freedom of all mages.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

I hate this vicious cycle.
Chantry controls mages with an iron fist > Mages try to reclaim freedom > Oppression increases > Rebelion increases > repeat until the whole thing explodes.

Chantry: "Can you see why mages must be controled!?"
Mages; "Can you see what extree measures the Chantry has pushed us to?"

As for Anders... well... Anders himself was never a fighter as such. "I run away from my oppression, there's a difference."

By merging with Justice I suppose his sense of morality and his determination for freedom was strengthened to the point where he fought for the freedom of all mages.

He had to agree to let Justice in, and though he was also trying to save Justice, I'm sure after his ordeal with the Wardens, he was ready for some sweet vengeance.

[Ryzaki]

Silfren wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Hell that gives the Chantry justification for locking up the mages because look what the free ones do! 

Wow, the threads took a serious turn.  Anyway, while I know you're making a general point--an accurate one, unfortunately-- and not supporting that position, I have to comment on it.

This is precisely what a lot of pro-templar people are saying, when they talk about reaching the end of the game and finding it very difficult to side with the mages.  And yes, I can see the Chantry saying exactly that: "See what that crazy apostate just did?  And you WONDER why we lock them in Circles?  Seriously?!"

There's a major flaw in the cause-and-effect logic going on there, and anyone who'd just sit down and think about it for a moment or two could see the inherent dishonesty.  Anders did what he did because of the Chantry's systematic imprisonment and dehumanization of mages.  He didn't start out life as an apostate--first he was a Circle mage who spent most of his tenure at the Ferelden Circle trying to escape and stay escaped.  He wanted his freedom badly enough that he never, ever gave up, no matter how many times he was dragged back.  It was seeing the Chantry's insistence on the system of the Circle that pushed him into joining with Justice in order to achieve freedom for mages.  Anders' action doesn't justify the Chantry's laws; the Chantry's laws created Anders!

The issue with that of course is the average person in Thedas isn't going to sit and go "oh well Anders blew up the Chantry because he was oppressed." they're going to go "A rogue apostate blew up the Chantry." Mix that in with the populace's normal fear of magic and chances are that's not going to be seen as the chantries fault. 

Also that freedom thing doesn't really hold weight when he roamsn around Kirkwall freely for 7 years. No matter how much he says the templars are hunting him they never actually do anything to give his words weight (other than that isolated event with his recruitment). (which was a weakness in the narrative frankly). 

And I dislike placing blame for someone's actions on something else. No matter how oppressed Anders was at the end of the day it was his choice (unless Justice hijacks him) to blow up the Chantry. No one forced him (unless Justice hijacks him) to do so. 

[nekhbet]

Oh gods, I get my computer back and return to terrorist discussion. Should have known!

And I'm gonna add my piece anyway. Was just discussing this with my partner earlier (yeah, we too *shameface*) after reading Osama's letter from 2002 with reasons for attacking civilian targets... Just can't see Anders doing that, no matter how hard you (passive you) wanna compare him to Osama. The Chantry is as much civilian as the White House is.

Anyway, that's just some random thought I had to get out.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Dreaming-in-Shadow wrote...

I hate this vicious cycle.
Chantry controls mages with an iron fist > Mages try to reclaim freedom > Oppression increases > Rebelion increases > repeat until the whole thing explodes.

Chantry: "Can you see why mages must be controled!?"
Mages; "Can you see what extree measures the Chantry has pushed us to?"

As for Anders... well... Anders himself was never a fighter as such. "I run away from my oppression, there's a difference."

By merging with Justice I suppose his sense of morality and his determination for freedom was strengthened to the point where he fought for the freedom of all mages.

He had to agree to let Justice in, and though he was also trying to save Justice, I'm sure after his ordeal with the Wardens, he was ready for some sweet vengeance.

A bit of persuasion, helping out a friend, and getting to screw with the templars in the meantime.
(Still, Fade Spirits don't belong in the Physical realm, I just wish they'd tried a method of sending Justice back to the Fade instead of the "merging route".)

It's just a pity it cost Anders the Wardens and the safety from the Chantry it (should have) provided*, in my canon playthrough I got the "Wardens = Family" ending. 
*What the hell happened there?
And damnit, who took his cat!?

[Rinji the Bearded]

Ryzaki wrote...

And I dislike placing blame for someone's actions on something else. No matter how oppressed Anders was at the end of the day it was his choice (unless Justice hijacks him) to blow up the Chantry. No one forced him (unless Justice hijacks him) to do so. 

Justice always has a hand in it, Anders willing or no.

[nekhbet]

RinjiRenee wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

And I dislike placing blame for someone's actions on something else. No matter how oppressed Anders was at the end of the day it was his choice (unless Justice hijacks him) to blow up the Chantry. No one forced him (unless Justice hijacks him) to do so. 

Justice always has a hand in it, Anders willing or no.

I think he's more willing participant on the friendship path.

[Rinji the Bearded]

nekhbet wrote...

RinjiRenee wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

And I dislike placing blame for someone's actions on something else. No matter how oppressed Anders was at the end of the day it was his choice (unless Justice hijacks him) to blow up the Chantry. No one forced him (unless Justice hijacks him) to do so. 

Justice always has a hand in it, Anders willing or no.

I think he's more willing participant on the friendship path.

He is in harmony with Justice and less manic-depressive, yes.

[upsettingshorts]

On the Rivalpath Anders is still to blame. For joining with Justice in the first place.

[Rinji the Bearded]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

On the Rivalpath Anders is still to blame. For joining with Justice in the first place.

And he's quite willing to accept that and asks you to kill him for it.

[thebrute7]

Ryzaki wrote...

Silfren wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Hell that gives the Chantry justification for locking up the mages because look what the free ones do! 

Wow, the threads took a serious turn.  Anyway, while I know you're making a general point--an accurate one, unfortunately-- and not supporting that position, I have to comment on it.

This is precisely what a lot of pro-templar people are saying, when they talk about reaching the end of the game and finding it very difficult to side with the mages.  And yes, I can see the Chantry saying exactly that: "See what that crazy apostate just did?  And you WONDER why we lock them in Circles?  Seriously?!"

There's a major flaw in the cause-and-effect logic going on there, and anyone who'd just sit down and think about it for a moment or two could see the inherent dishonesty.  Anders did what he did because of the Chantry's systematic imprisonment and dehumanization of mages.  He didn't start out life as an apostate--first he was a Circle mage who spent most of his tenure at the Ferelden Circle trying to escape and stay escaped.  He wanted his freedom badly enough that he never, ever gave up, no matter how many times he was dragged back.  It was seeing the Chantry's insistence on the system of the Circle that pushed him into joining with Justice in order to achieve freedom for mages.  Anders' action doesn't justify the Chantry's laws; the Chantry's laws created Anders!

The issue with that of course is the average person in Thedas isn't going to sit and go "oh well Anders blew up the Chantry because he was oppressed." they're going to go "A rogue apostate blew up the Chantry." Mix that in with the populace's normal fear of magic and chances are that's not going to be seen as the chantries fault. 

Also that freedom thing doesn't really hold weight when he roamsn around Kirkwall freely for 7 years. No matter how much he says the templars are hunting him they never actually do anything to give his words weight (other than that isolated event with his recruitment). (which was a weakness in the narrative frankly). 

And I dislike placing blame for someone's actions on something else. No matter how oppressed Anders was at the end of the day it was his choice (unless Justice hijacks him) to blow up the Chantry. No one forced him (unless Justice hijacks him) to do so. 

it's important to realize that while WE can look at the situation from an objective standpoint and see; X caused Y which causes Z which returns to X, the people of Thedas won't.  Some of them will see it as being caused by the oppresion of mages (mage's families, some others),  Most of them are just going to see that : That apostate blew up a center of our faith, let's make sure the mages STAY locked up.

Of course from an objective standpoint there is a clear cause-and-effect line leading up to the explosion,  However, that chain does not take away the responsibility of the individual parties from their choice.  It only provides reason for their choice.  If they choose to do something morally reprehensible, it is still their choice and they will bear the consequences, regardless of the circumstances which only mitigate our decision of what those consequences should be.

[Ryzaki]

thebrute7 wrote...
it's important to realize that while WE can look at the situation from an objective standpoint and see; X caused Y which causes Z which returns to X, the people of Thedas won't.  Some of them will see it as being caused by the oppresion of mages (mage's families, some others),  Most of them are just going to see that : That apostate blew up a center of our faith, let's make sure the mages STAY locked up.

Of course from an objective standpoint there is a clear cause-and-effect line leading up to the explosion,  However, that chain does not take away the responsibility of the individual parties from their choice.  It only provides reason for their choice.  If they choose to do something morally reprehensible, it is still their choice and they will bear the consequences, regardless of the circumstances which only mitigate our decision of what those consequences should be.

 

Yeah that's pretty much what I was trying to say in my usual rambling and incoherent way.  Thanks thebrute7. 

[upsettingshorts]

Patriciachr34 wrote...

I know there is a case to be made for Anders the terrorist, but it is my impression that Anders was not trying to terrorize and intimidiate a population.  Nor was he trying to destroy and rebuild all of the moires of a society.  He was trying to escalate a conflict by removing the one thing that was keeping "the lid on the pot", that being Althena and the Chantry (the Chantry being a symbol of opression for mages).  In essence, he was trying bring about change for one group of people within a society and not destroy that society as a whole.  I beleive that this distinction is important here.

I believe that the distinction, as far as the label "terrorist" goes isn't relevant.  They'd both qualify anyway. 

That's why the comparisons using al-Qaeda, even though I do defend them, are ultimately problematic if they're taken too literally.  

There are other ones, such as the Provisional IRA, or the Okahoma City federal building bombing, or even the Sons of Liberty that all fit better.  But none of them need to be perfect in order to demonstrate that what Anders did was terrorism.  They all share elements with Anders that are enough to establish the basic facts, which is all I ever try to do.

But I don't buy for a second that he wasn't trying to terrorize or intimidate.  He knew exactly what he was doing, he even explained it during his stick-slamming speech.  What he wasn't prepared for was the immediate consequences.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 05 mai 2011 - 05:18 .

[nekhbet]

Just to think from a different perspective and on a different scale for a while, about choice and repercussions: Osama's reasoning for killing American civilians was that they elected the government that oppressed "his" people via oil in Iraq and support for Israeli occupation etc. They chose the government and approved its actions.

Not starting a debate on this or anything, it's just... something to think about when debating these things.

Modifié par nekhbet, 05 mai 2011 - 05:24 .

[Rinji the Bearded]

thebrute7 wrote...

it's important to realize that while WE can look at the situation from an objective standpoint and see; X caused Y which causes Z which returns to X, the people of Thedas won't.  Some of them will see it as being caused by the oppresion of mages (mage's families, some others),  Most of them are just going to see that : That apostate blew up a center of our faith, let's make sure the mages STAY locked up.

Of course from an objective standpoint there is a clear cause-and-effect line leading up to the explosion,  However, that chain does not take away the responsibility of the individual parties from their choice.  It only provides reason for their choice.  If they choose to do something morally reprehensible, it is still their choice and they will bear the consequences, regardless of the circumstances which only mitigate our decision of what those consequences should be.

I don't know if many mages are going to care one inkling what the average Chant-thumping bumpkin is going to believe after all this.  You also have to consider that there is a third party who is sanctioned by the Chantry who are fighting for a more reasonable solution, and that not every person in Thedas cares one bit about the Chantry -- all of them are just trying to survive from day to day.  Look at Isabela for example.  They'll mostly just want to stay out of the crossfire, I think.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

At the root of the issue, there are several people to blame:

Anders
Justice
Hawke - Through encouragement or grating on Justice's nerves.
Nathaniel - for giving them that bloody stupid idea.
The Warden - Caused their meeting
Elthina - Through inaction
Meredith - Through her own extreme actions.
The bastard who took Pounce away

I may have forgotten some.

And, right at the very heart of the matter:
The Chantry/Circle and the Tevinter Imperium mess (or so we're lead to believe).

Modifié par Dreaming-in-Shadow, 05 mai 2011 - 05:34 .

[upsettingshorts]

Hawke gets thrown in on the blame game during the Friendpath, through active encouragement and perhaps even as an accomplice, especially if he/she helps Anders infiltrate the Chantry.

[Dreaming-in-Shadow]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Hawke gets thrown in on the blame game during the Friendpath, through active encouragement and perhaps even as an accomplice, especially if he/she helps Anders infiltrate the Chantry.

I'd imagine even a rivalmanced Hawke who sides with mages is under suspition by most people (or if Cassandra's comments are anything to go by, Hawke will be considered a part of the plan full-stop.)

Modifié par Dreaming-in-Shadow, 05 mai 2011 - 05:31 .

[Ryzaki]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Hawke gets thrown in on the blame game during the Friendpath, through active encouragement and perhaps even as an accomplice, especially if he/she helps Anders infiltrate the Chantry.

Wouldn't rivalry Hawke be guilty of the same thing then? The infiltration bit not he encouragement. 

[Rinji the Bearded]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Hawke gets thrown in on the blame game during the Friendpath, through active encouragement and perhaps even as an accomplice, especially if he/she helps Anders infiltrate the Chantry.

I think Hawke is thrown into the blame game no matter what, considering what Cassandra had to say about him/her at first.

[upsettingshorts]

I just mean from the point of view as "who is directly responsible for Anders up to the point where he blows up the Chantry." After that, in terms of public perception, I think it simply matters which side he/she took and perhaps the life/death of Anders.