57020 réponses à ce sujet

[berelinde]

Addai67 wrote...

ademska wrote...

Addai67 wrote...
The reason I stressed "grown up relationships" is because to my ears this is a teenage mentality.  A grown up should know that you do not get romantically involved with  the unemployed drug addict (or whatever RL correlation for an unstable guy in deep sh*t you'd like to draw) simply because he has redeeming qualities.  You're not going to fix him, and chances are good he's going to drag you down with him.

once again you have the caveat of 'grown-up relationship' and the implication that we're looking for success, when a lot of the point is that it's a doomed tragedy and a deconstruction of romance stories

like, absolute best case scenario, hawke is equally revolutionary/crazy and they go fight wars and blow stuff up and have a bad romance (ra ra ah ah ah) together.  this is not a particularly happy ending, and it's not supposed to be.

the appeal isn't in some illusion of eternal idyllic happiness for anders, it's in the exact opposite.

Okay, I can accept that.  That sort of over-the-top melodrama doesn't do it for me, that's all.

The game is made of over-the-top melodrama. Or at least excess. Everybody in the game is a charicature, an exaggeration of one sort or another. With Isabela, I find myself saying "You like sex. I get it. Can we talk about something else now?" With Fenris, it's "Yes, your former master was a terrible person. Time to move on." With Merrill, it's "You know, Merrill, some things are lost for a reason." With Anders, it's "This whole 'powder-keg ready to blow' thing? Not helping."

Choosing a lover boils down to finding the one whose faults you find endearing (or that you can ignore) rather than finding one who will never annoy you.

Edit: Darn, that would get ToP.

by Chung-Lang

Modifié par berelinde, 11 juin 2011 - 09:57 .

[ademska]

BlueMew wrote...

ademska wrote...
once again you have the caveat of 'grown-up relationship' and the implication that we're looking for success, when a lot of the point is that it's a doomed tragedy and a deconstruction of romance stories

like, absolute best case scenario, hawke is equally revolutionary/crazy and they go fight wars and blow stuff up and have a bad romance (ra ra ah ah ah) together.  this is not a particularly happy ending, and it's not supposed to be.

the appeal isn't in some illusion of eternal idyllic happiness for anders, it's in the exact opposite.

Hm, in my book "is not supposed to be" is treading on tricky ground. 

i should clarify, and in doing so probably agree with CGG, that i use "is not supposed to be" within the confines of a traditional romance paradigm, wherein the couple in some form continues a healthy, lasting relationship with minimal internal drama

it's more subjective than that, though, and i know i personally would find a conclusion where they go both off and be crazy mage-supporter war-wagers incredibly satisfying and "happy". KoP would hate this noise, because he has fundamental differences in opinion with me (and so many others <3), but for my perspective on mage issue blah blah and my deep enjoyment of damaged characters, i love it.

so yeah, what i'm saying is that the ending isn't a traditional definition of "good" for anders, but that precludes personal definitions of awesome

[KnightofPhoenix]

SurelyForth wrote...
From my perspective, the Right of Annulment and an Exalted March are no more humane than what Anders does. As a matter of fact, until we get hard numbers on how many people died in the Chantry explosion, my guess is that there were far fewer innocents killed than would be in an Exalted March. Doesn't Leliana indicate that the Justinia wouldn't hesitate to raze Kirkwall?

But how is what Anders is doing trying to avoid that? If anything, he is trying to provoke it, or is very likely to provoke it.

Also, and this is so very petty, but how is what Anders does to Hawke in Act 3 that much different from what Morrigan does to the Warden? She uses his/her kindness to kill Flemeth/get her Grimoire and then manipulates and/or emotionally blackmails him/her to do something that has the potential to be pretty ****ing terrible for  the world in the long run. And, if the Warden says no, she bails at the most crucial point of the whole campaign.

Not much difference if we want to look at it superficially, except Morrigan is mentally stable and I can trust her to know what she is doing (can't say the same for Anders). And when coming up with the DR, she is point blank about it and doesn't try to hide or embellish it. She tells you that it's going to be an OGB. Anders tells you that he is trying to cure himself, but blows the Chantry up. Difference. 

And I see no emotional blackmail at all. She says she is leaving either way. And she doesn't bring up once love or emotions in the equation. And there was no manipulation. If Morrigan really wanted to manipualte the Warden, she would have kept syaign that she loved him throughout the game. She doesn't, and she does the exact opposite even by warning us not to love her. Infact if Morrigan is supposed to be a manipulator, then she is a  pretty poor one. If someone fell for that out of manipulation, then frankly they deserve it. I didn't agree to the DR because of manipulation at all. I knew exactly what I was doing.

As for blackmailing the Warden in regards to her leaving before the battle. She's honest aobut it, she doesn't care about Ferelden and if what she wants  cannot be attained, she has no reason to risk her life. If you want to call that blackmail, then sure. But I see it more as Morrigan saying she has little reason to risk her life without the DR.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 juin 2011 - 10:02 .

[Sarielle]

ipgd wrote...
I really sort of hate Anders's entire archetype, really. The reason I like him as a character so much is because that archetype is thoroughly deconstructed and it completely blows up in his face; his obsessions and creepy devotion are presented as is, but as the romance progresses it shows the very undesirable sides of that that most cheesy romance novel protagonists glaze over or glorify. And that's mainly what Anders's romance represents for me: a deconstruction of cheesy romance novels.

Yes, yes, and yes. I managed to wade my way through the (Rifftrax version of) Twilight, and ... just wow. Stalker behavior is glorified, he keeps telling her he'll hurt her but he doesn't ever actually do it, etc. I think I read a convo here on that topic, actually.

Anders presents a much more realistic glimpse into what it would be like to have the affection of someone with obsessive tendencies and fanatical devotions to a cause. For a little while, it can be nice being somebody's sun and moon and stars and sliced bread all at once...but that's gonna get old.


Aaaand I'm like hours late, because I'm working and the thread keeps growing, lol.

I have a question that I'm sure you guys have discussed but that I haven't seen the discussion on. What conclusions do you guys draw from what happens to Anders when he enters the Fade (ie, we see only Justice, albeit in Anders' body)?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Well Bhelen is not there either, I can't put everyone I like!

Lies! And even if not, Anora is not only an excellent politician, she's also a beautiful leggy blonde woman who you can also marry. The same can't be said of Bhelen. Makers nipple, get your priorities straight, man!

Ok. Here's the reason.

Notice how I have only one female on my sigs?
Yea, I'm that loyal to her.

[Addai]

ipgd wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Okay, I can accept that.  That sort of over-the-top melodrama doesn't do it for me, that's all.

The melodrama is sort of purposefully ironic. The entire thing is basically a takedown of romance novel character tropes.

I know this is your view, but others seem to read it more straightforwardly, and I would prefer to understand it as straightforward, too.  The alternative is too postmodern.  If that's what is really going on, then I just have to hate it (the story, that is, and not just Anders' but the game story).  I pretty much do hate it, but out of nostalgia for the game world keep wondering if I'm missing something that would make me like it.  Or at least dislike it less.

[ipgd]

kromify wrote...

who hasn't ever manipulated in their lives?
he avoided it until he was backed into a corner. it's bad, and he should have found another route, but it's not easy to think under pressure or handle people correctly

My statements that he is manipulative aren't really a criticism. I like that about his character.

Sarielle wrote...

Yes, yes, and yes. I managed to wade my way through the (Rifftrax version of) Twilight, and ... just wow. Stalker behavior is glorified, he keeps telling her he'll hurt her but he doesn't ever actually do it, etc. I think I read a convo here on that topic, actually.

Anders presents a much more realistic glimpse into what it would be like to have the affection of someone with obsessive tendencies and fanatical devotions to a cause. For a little while, it can be nice being somebody's sun and moon and stars and sliced bread all at once...but that's gonna get old.

I've written about the Twilight comparisons here before and it mostly boils down to the fact Meyer is completely unaware of the negative implications of the things she writes. I'd probably unironically enjoy Twilight if it explored those dynamics with a critical eye, but instead they are glorified in a way that is incredibly unsettling, and also rather telling about how her mind works.

I am of the opinion that any trope can be used well in the hands of someone who isn't braindead.

Addai67 wrote...

I know this is your view, but others seem to read it more straightforwardly, and I would prefer to understand it as straightforward, too.&nbsp; The alternative is too postmodern.&nbsp; If that's what is really going on, then I just have to hate it (the story, that is, and not just Anders' but the game story).&nbsp; I pretty much do hate it, but out of nostalgia for the game world keep wondering if I'm missing something that would make me like it.&nbsp; Or at least dislike it less.

If you want to hate it there's nothing I could say to you that would make any difference.

Modifié par ipgd, 11 juin 2011 - 10:06 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

ipgd wrote...

SurelyForth wrote...

Also, and this is so very petty, but how is what Anders does to Hawke in Act 3 that much different from what Morrigan does to the Warden? She uses his/her kindness to kill Flemeth/get her Grimoire and then manipulates and/or emotionally blackmails him/her to do something that has the potential to be pretty ****ing terrible for  the world in the long run. And, if the Warden says no, she bails at the most crucial point of the whole campaign.

It's not. Really, Morrigan's romance can easily be interpreted as her purposefully manipulating the Warden into having a romantic relationship with her in order to ensure he'll go through with the Dark Ritual (and it backfiring when she develops actual feelings later, yada yada).

Which is also why I like Morrigan's romance.

This is not accurate. She doesn't really try to have a romantic relationship with the Warden (just a sexual one at first), she kept warning him against it. Furthermore, if the Warden is a female, then common sense would dictate that Morrigan had to manipulate Alisair for that. She does the exact opposite.

Really, if Morrigan is supposed to be manipulative, then she's really really bad at it.

[BlueMew]

Addai67 wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Okay, I can accept that.  That sort of over-the-top melodrama doesn't do it for me, that's all.

The melodrama is sort of purposefully ironic. The entire thing is basically a takedown of romance novel character tropes.

I know this is your view, but others seem to read it more straightforwardly, and I would prefer to understand it as straightforward, too.  The alternative is too postmodern.  If that's what is really going on, then I just have to hate it (the story, that is, and not just Anders' but the game story).  I pretty much do hate it, but out of nostalgia for the game world keep wondering if I'm missing something that would make me like it.  Or at least dislike it less.

And you're free to do so, of course. But calling everyone without the same mentality immature just doesn't sit well with me.

[kromify]

ipgd wrote...

kromify wrote...

who hasn't ever manipulated in their lives?
he avoided it until he was backed into a corner. it's bad, and he should have found another route, but it's not easy to think under pressure or handle people correctly

My statements that he is manipulative aren't really a criticism. I like that about his character.

i know   
you like his terrosrism too... how could i think manipulation would fare any worse?

[highcastle]

Addai67 wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Okay, I can accept that.  That sort of over-the-top melodrama doesn't do it for me, that's all.

The melodrama is sort of purposefully ironic. The entire thing is basically a takedown of romance novel character tropes.

I know this is your view, but others seem to read it more straightforwardly, and I would prefer to understand it as straightforward, too.  The alternative is too postmodern.  If that's what is really going on, then I just have to hate it (the story, that is, and not just Anders' but the game story).  I pretty much do hate it, but out of nostalgia for the game world keep wondering if I'm missing something that would make me like it.  Or at least dislike it less.

Don't be hating on postmodernism. Them's fighting words.

Seriously, though, I don't think the game consciously draws your attention to Anders-as-deconstruction the way it would if it were truly postmodern (and let's admit it: the pomo elements in this game aren't particularly subtle; I'm looking at you Talkative Man). That being said, I think it's possible to look at his romance as more realistic examination of what happens when you get involved with a co-dependent, obsessed, paranoid person. It doesn't always end well.

Of course, I said earlier, I personally prefer to RP characters who are just as messed up. So in that regards, Anders and my Hawke really are a perfect match. They both possess equal amounts of crazy that compliment each other quite nicely (or terribly, depending on your view of things).

I just really like how the game doesn't shy away from showing you the negative, darker aspects of their relationship. I may not want it in real life, but it makes for exquisite drama in fiction. But I already wrote a post about this earlier today, so I'll shut up now.

[ipgd]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Furthermore, if the Warden is a female, then common sense would dictate that Morrigan had to manipulate Alisair for that. She does the exact opposite.

She hates Alistair. She doesn't have to be that dedicated to it

[Collider]

Almost everyone in the party is nuts. Hawke included, imo.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Ok. Here's the reason.

Notice how I have only one female on my sigs?
Yea, I'm that loyal to her.

*Sigh* Men.

I know. So fixated on loyalty and conversation in lieu of bed activity. We're hopeless.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Addai67 wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Okay, I can accept that.  That sort of over-the-top melodrama doesn't do it for me, that's all.

The melodrama is sort of purposefully ironic. The entire thing is basically a takedown of romance novel character tropes.

I know this is your view, but others seem to read it more straightforwardly, and I would prefer to understand it as straightforward, too.  The alternative is too postmodern.  If that's what is really going on, then I just have to hate it (the story, that is, and not just Anders' but the game story).  I pretty much do hate it, but out of nostalgia for the game world keep wondering if I'm missing something that would make me like it.  Or at least dislike it less.

One thing I feel probably colors your interpretation is this: you seem to view Vengeance as entirely, simply, and purely a demon, at least by the end of Act 3. And I believe that this view is far too simplistic. If you think of Anders as simply a man with a demon inside him, it's nigh impossible to understand what it is about him that makes the lady cats scream, as Nanny Ogg would say.

You seem to be viewing the relationship through this lense:
"How can you love someone who you are losing to his demons?"

Wheras, if you don't see Vengeance as a demon, or a good spirit, but as something else entirely, the question you ask is this: 
"How can you love someone whose heart is already devoted to a cause, and can never belong entirely to you?"

Whether the cause is good or bad, whether his methods are wise or not doesn't matter. That isn't the point. The thing that consumes him could be good, or bad, or neutral. The question is this: does your ego allow you to connect with someone who won't always put you first, or can you only exist in a relationship where the sole light of the other person's devotion is upon you?

If you're looking for the sincere question behind the deconstruction, there it is.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 11 juin 2011 - 10:16 .

[kromify]

Collider wrote...

Almost everyone in the party is nuts. Hawke included, imo.

i read that as nude... 

[ademska]

Addai67 wrote...

I know this is your view, but others seem to read it more straightforwardly, and I would prefer to understand it as straightforward, too.  The alternative is too postmodern.  If that's what is really going on, then I just have to hate it (the story, that is, and not just Anders' but the game story).  I pretty much do hate it, but out of nostalgia for the game world keep wondering if I'm missing something that would make me like it.  Or at least dislike it less.

now that's a bit silly. the game isn't postmodern about it at all, it's just subtle. people of the dumber or perhaps just less analytically-inclined persuasion may take the romance path or his character in general at face value, but that applies to anything and everything ever.

why is a straightforward (and thus clunky) interpretation of the narrative more appealing to you?

[kromify]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...


Ok. Here's the reason.

Notice how I have only one female on my sigs?
Yea, I'm that loyal to her.

*Sigh* Men.

I know. So fixated on loyalty and conversation in lieu of bed activity. We're hopeless.

and eternal life...   

[Sarielle]

Awww, so nobody's biting on the Anders-in-the-Fade question? Boo. I was genuinely curious, not trying to change the subject.

Would Anders be a tranquil if Justice were somehow separated (I don't think that's actually possible, and really that's what I think the fact that Justice, not Anders, follows us into the Fade indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt -- they'll never be able to separate)? Does this mean Anders doesn't dream, only the Justice part of him can?

[ipgd]

Sarielle wrote...

Awww, so nobody's biting on the Anders-in-the-Fade question? Boo. I was genuinely curious, not trying to change the subject.

Would Anders be a tranquil if Justice were somehow separated (I don't think that's actually possible, and really that's what I think the fact that Justice, not Anders, follows us into the Fade indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt -- they'll never be able to separate)? Does this mean Anders doesn't dream, only the Justice part of him can?

I think we've discussed this before and it basically comes down to "idk, lol".

[ademska]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
Wheras, if you don't see Vengeance as a demon, or a good spirit, but as something else entirely, the question you ask is this: 
"How can you love someone whose heart is already devoted to a cause, and can never belong entirely to you?"

Whether the cause is good or bad, whether his methods are wise or not doesn't matter. That isn't the point. The thing that consumes him could be good, or bad, or neutral. The question is this: does your ego allow you to connect with someone who won't always put you first, or can you only exist in a relationship where the sole light of the other person's devotion is upon you?

If you're looking for the sincere question behind the deconstruction, there it is.

you are the smartest person, i just had to say this.

[Sarielle]

ipgd wrote...

Sarielle wrote...

Awww, so nobody's biting on the Anders-in-the-Fade question? Boo. I was genuinely curious, not trying to change the subject.

Would Anders be a tranquil if Justice were somehow separated (I don't think that's actually possible, and really that's what I think the fact that Justice, not Anders, follows us into the Fade indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt -- they'll never be able to separate)? Does this mean Anders doesn't dream, only the Justice part of him can?

I think we've discussed this before and it basically comes down to "idk, lol".

Well if anyone has links handy to the old convo I'd be interested to see them. Understandably (I hope), I'm not slumming through the entire thread looking for it, lol.

EDIT: Nor am I expecting anyone else to, of course. It just looks like some of you guys bookmark certain stuff, is all.

Modifié par Sarielle, 11 juin 2011 - 10:18 .

[ademska]

Sarielle wrote...

Awww, so nobody's biting on the Anders-in-the-Fade question? Boo. I was genuinely curious, not trying to change the subject.

Would Anders be a tranquil if Justice were somehow separated (I don't think that's actually possible, and really that's what I think the fact that Justice, not Anders, follows us into the Fade indicates beyond a shadow of a doubt -- they'll never be able to separate)? Does this mean Anders doesn't dream, only the Justice part of him can?

a resounding "idk, lol" except for the bit about the dreams. he's a warden, so he's got them.