57020 réponses à ce sujet

[River5]

SurelyForth wrote...

ipgd wrote...

The amount of people outside this thread who fundamentally misunderstand practically every aspect of Anders's character is absolutely staggering and I think this personal mission I have undertaken to enlighten each and every one of them is going to be the death of me.

This is why I don't venture out much. I get legitimately ragey about it and...that's not good, right?

I felt much better after having put a copy of my manifesto out there on the "Campaign Quests and Story" forum ( social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/304/index/7749447 )...  But still, it's really hard to restrain myself from jumping into every single argument regarding Anders' character and motivations...

I take great pride in him being the most discussed character of DA2 though!    Lol!



"We are told to remember the idea, not the man, because a man can fail.
He can be caught, he can be killed and forgotten, but 400 years later,
an idea can still change the world. I've witnessed first hand the power
of ideas, I've seen people kill in the name of them, and die defending
them... but you cannot kiss an idea, cannot touch it, or hold it...
ideas do not bleed, they do not feel pain, they do not love... And it is
not an idea that I miss, it is a man..." - V for Vendetta

Modifié par River5, 03 juillet 2011 - 02:56 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

The thing that gets me is when people call Anders selfish.

He isn't. When he joined with Justice he made basically the most selfless decision ever: to give up his personality, his life, and his very existence in exchange for a chance to make a difference for future generations.

I wish this was said more literally and explicitly, earlier in the game. He tells you he'll hurt you, and tells you that there will be more violence, but he doesn't explicitly say why, and kids today have been trained to think that such warnings are idle. Later on he'll say things like "I am the cause of mages, there is nothing else inside me." and "I'm a liar, I'm a monster, I never said I'd do anything but hurt you," but that's only after it's too late.

I just wish Hawke could press him more early on.

"Why are you so certain you'll hurt me?"
"Because while I am a man... I have this thing inside me. And I promised it we would work together to free mages. Someday I may have to do something you cannot forgive me for in pursuit of that aim. If you can still want me... despite that, then I have no resistance left."

[beckaliz]

@legbamel

I dunno, that conversation comes across to me as a bit fake. Not as in, out of place and fake from the part of the writing, but I just get the feeling that Anders himself is pretending. If he's made up his mind already on what he's going to do (and the "potion" quest comes up pretty quickly), then it could just be that he has a moment where he can be more relaxed, feeling like he has certainty about his future.

Now, they're not talking about Meredith there, and by the banter Hi-C quoted obviously he doesnt think the subject of HER is funny. But he is being nostalgic about a different time in his life, with the Warden. When he still had some sense of self. He could very well be taking stock of his life. Like giving the pillow. He's giving Varric some of his old self, perhaps? I dunno. Probably not consciously, at least.

It can be a big relief to finally decide to take a big leap and do something drastic to resolve a situation.

[highcastle]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

The thing that gets me is when people call Anders selfish.

He isn't. When he joined with Justice he made basically the most selfless decision ever: to give up his personality, his life, and his very existence in exchange for a chance to make a difference for future generations.

I wish this was said more literally and explicitly, earlier in the game. He tells you he'll hurt you, and tells you that there will be more violence, but he doesn't explicitly say why, and kids today have been trained to think that such warnings are idle. Later on he'll say things like "I am the cause of mages, there is nothing else inside me." and "I'm a liar, I'm a monster, I never said I'd do anything but hurt you," but that's only after it's too late.

I just wish Hawke could press him more early on.

"Why are you so certain you'll hurt me?"
"Because while I am a man... I have this thing inside me. And I promised it we would work together to free mages. Someday I may have to do something you cannot forgive me for in pursuit of that aim. If you can still want me... despite that, then I have no resistance left."

Anders pre-Justice has selfish tendencies. He has to in order to break free of the Tower so many times knowing the templars will be placing restrictions on and disciplining the other apprentices on account of his actions. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's the reason why he stops to help others when he's outside the Tower: guilt over his other actions. The way I look at him is somebody who wants to be a good person and do the right thing, but also wants his own freedom more than anything else. So you have his selfishness and his altruisim at war with each other, and the result is someone who's very conflicted.

This is also the impression I get in DAA when he has that banter with Justice. Justice asks why he doesn't do more to help other mages, and Anders says it sounds difficult and he doesn't want to die for his cause. He also claims to have no obligation to help other mages. Given his actions in DA2, it's clear he doesn't entirely believe this. But there is some part of him that does. Call it selfishness, call it self-preservation, whatever. This is the part of himself that Anders gives up and overcomes when he enters into the merger with Justice.

[upsettingshorts]

He is selfish because he decides for every mage in Kirkwall Thedas that death is preferable than the status quo.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:11 .

[upsettingshorts]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

The mages in Thedas revolted on their own accord.

After Anders decided to fling a lit match into a puddle of gasoline.

That many mages might, given the change in circumstances, ultimately come to agree with him is irrelevant anyway. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:15 .

[highcastle]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

He is selfish because he decides for every mage in Kirkwall Thedas that death is preferable than the status quo.

Except I don't think he counts on every mage dying. He seems a little shocked that the carnage gets out of control so quickly. I think expects to launch a war, and that casualties will surely be unavoidable. But in the long-term, he sees freedom from the Chantry for all mages as a worthy enough goal for those sacrifices. And let's not forget that the only death he absolutely counts on and intends is his own.

I understand where you're coming from. Who gave Anders the right to speak for all mages? But as I staunchly believe in freedom over security, I have a hard time seeing him as wrong or selfish. Misguided and naive, sure. Of course, these are my own personal biases coming into play.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

He is selfish because he decides for every mage in Kirkwall Thedas that death is preferable than the status quo.

I have to run and won't be back until tomorrow... but until we have more info on the uprising, I disagree with this. Varric (and yes, I know he is unreliable) makes it sound more like the event was an inspiration for other mages that caused them to rise up, rather than that the start of a war that made it necessary for htem to defend themselves.

He also didn't cause the right of annulment. The Templars could have proven their own sanity by simply executing him rather than calling for it... they did not. If they had, it would have proven there was no need for war. If Cullen had said "you know what? No, Meredith. No." there would have been no war.

I don't think he decided for all mages. He rather created an event that showed what the situation truly was: the Chantry was corrupt enough to allow someone as insane as Meredith to remain in power, and then to execute clearly innocent people for crimes they did not commit.

[upsettingshorts]

highcastle wrote...

Except I don't think he counts on every mage dying.

I don't know if he could have possibly been any clearer on the whole "death > this" position.

highcastle wrote...

But in the long-term, he sees freedom from the Chantry for all mages as a worthy enough goal for those sacrifices. And let's not forget that the only death he absolutely counts on and intends is his own.

That's a conveniently conditional rationalization of Anders' through process.  He's thinking about what's best for all mages, but only prepared to accept the consequences for himself?  It does not follow.

Anders knew what he was doing.  His plan is to force Meredith into declaring war by invoking the Rite.  The idea that Anders hasn't already considered that many mages will die and determined that their deaths are acceptable for them is the basis of my argument.

highcastle wrote...

I understand where you're coming from. Who gave Anders the right to speak for all mages?

No-one.  And its not as if the mages lack recognized authorities themselves anyway.

highcastle wrote...

But as I staunchly believe in freedom over security, I have a hard time seeing him as wrong or selfish. Misguided and naive, sure. Of course, these are my own personal biases coming into play.

You don't have to live in that world and fight for your life for that freedom, it's easy to have that position when it is literally not life or death for you.  Anders decided for everyone that it would be. 

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

the event was an inspiration for other mages that caused them to rise up, rather than that the start of a war that made it necessary for htem to defend themselves.

Irrelevant to my position.  Unless they were in on it from the start, it is, in my view by definition selfish by default.  He lacked the authority and popular mandate to do what he did.  That they came around to his point of view afterwords is something I acknowledge, but don't think changes the nature of his thought process and action.

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

He also didn't cause the right of annulment.

He was counting on it.  The game cannot really make this more clear.

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

I don't think he decided for all mages.

He decided it for all mages in Kirkwall to be sure.  There is no question, given that his plan relied on Meredith invoking the rite.  He hoped Kirkwall would serve as an example to Thedas, either if the mages won their revolt or all died horribly.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:30 .

[upsettingshorts]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Which doesn't change the fact that they decided on their own that they wanted to fight. The will to revolt was already there. If it wasn't, the war wouldn't have happened.

That's not my argument.

My counter-argument to your statement is I simply don't believe that it's relevant to the issue. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:30 .

[highcastle]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

highcastle wrote...

Except I don't think he counts on every mage dying.

I don't know if he could have possibility been any clearer on the whole "death > this" position.

highcastle wrote...

But in the long-term, he sees freedom from the Chantry for all mages as a worthy enough goal for those sacrifices. And let's not forget that the only death he absolutely counts on and intends is his own.

That's a conveniently conditional rationalization of Anders' through process.  He's thinking about what's best for all mages, but only prepared to accept the consequences for himself?  It does not follow.

Anders knew what he was doing.  His plan is to force Meredith into declaring war by invoking the Rite.  The idea that Anders hasn't already considered that many mages will die and determined that their deaths are acceptable for them is the basis of my argument.

highcastle wrote...

I understand where you're coming from. Who gave Anders the right to speak for all mages?

No-one.  And its not as if the mages lack recognized authorities themselves anyway.

highcastle wrote...

But as I staunchly believe in freedom over security, I have a hard time seeing him as wrong or selfish. Misguided and naive, sure. Of course, these are my own personal biases coming into play.

You don't have to live in that world and fight for your life for that freedom, it's easy to have that position when it is literally not life or death for you.  Anders decided for everyone that it would be. 

Like I said, I don't fully disagree with you here. But I think there's a devil's advocate arguement to be had. Anders "freedom is worth the cost" view seems to be mostly internalized. That's where his "there are some things more important than my life" comes into play. He is absolutely willing to die for his cause. I just don't think he expects all mages to die for it. That would be redundant. There'd be no freedom to fight for; they'd all be dead. I think he expects some will die, but the rest will earn their freedom and be happier for it.

And my question of who made Anders in charge was rhetorical. Obviously no one did, that was my point. Anders did this all by himself and appointed himself de facto leader of the mages. There is something a bit narcissitic about that choice. But I don't fully disagree with his cause. And all of the "recognized" authorities of the mages are also in the Chantry's pocket. Which does make them a bit harder to trust.

I think the comparisons of Anders to V are the most accurate. You can definitely make a case for V being selfish--he wants the government to topple no matter who gets hurt. And you can do the same thing for Anders--he wants mage freedom no matter who gets hurt (except, maybe, romanced Hawke). But to say he thinks it's acceptable for every mage to die is a bit of a stretch.

[upsettingshorts]

highcastle wrote...

And my question of who made Anders in charge was rhetorical. Obviously no one did, that was my point. Anders did this all by himself and appointed himself de facto leader of the mages. There is something a bit narcissitic about that choice. But I don't fully disagree with his cause. And all of the "recognized" authorities of the mages are also in the Chantry's pocket. Which does make them a bit harder to trust.

Yet these same leaders, as has been pointed out, eventually came around to the whole rebellion thing. 

Just going to point out that I don't believe Anders is right or wrong, per se, only that I don't believe the interpretation of his destruction of the Chantry as selfless holds up under scrutiny.  That's before we consider that Justice - as a personification of concept - is inherently selfish because he is incapable of comprehending nuance, compromise, or different perspectives from his own.

highcastle wrote...

But to say he thinks it's acceptable for every mage to die is a bit of a stretch.

It doesn't rely on interpreting his own statements as rhetorical or the result of internalized acceptance of simply his own fate, it simply relies on him taking his matter-of-fact declaration (you know, the staff-slamming scene) at face value.  I mean, considering he probably planned that whole speech and even considered responses to the likely objections makes me take what he says there very seriously.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:39 .

[ipgd]

Anders is selfless in that he sacrifices the well-being and interests of his own person for the sake of others, and selfish in that he has transplanted his sense of self onto those other people. He believes he is all mages, in a sense.

It's not just an "is he or isn't he" thing, I think.

[upsettingshorts]

ipgd wrote...

Anders is selfless in that he sacrifices the well-being and interests of his own person for the sake of others

He does?  Maybe if romanced, perhaps - otherwise I don't see much on his list of interests other than "free mages."   Cats? 

I'd say that his initial decision to merge with Justice was selfless.  After that?  I don't think it's possible to separate his intense self-interest in satisfying his new conscience and internal rage over injustice from his character. Perhaps on the Rival path its possible.

All that said, nothing Anders did physically or even magically required the presence of Justice.  His presence in Anders' conscience however proved decisive, because it made him more focused and determined, at the cost of being more narrow minded and intractable. 

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:43 .

[ipgd]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

ipgd wrote...

Anders is selfless in that he sacrifices the well-being and interests of his own person for the sake of others

He does?  Maybe if romanced, perhaps - otherwise I don't see much on his list of interests other than "free mages."   Cats? 

His personal safety and health? The mage cause did effectively supplant all of the other interests he had prior.

It's sort of a Selfish Gene situation. He is altruistically motivated to further the collective "mage species", to the benefit of individuals outside his person, but as a member of that group, also in a way self-interested. Everything he does is to benefit not necessarily himself, but the group he is a part of.

Modifié par ipgd, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:44 .

[highcastle]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

highcastle wrote...

And my question of who made Anders in charge was rhetorical. Obviously no one did, that was my point. Anders did this all by himself and appointed himself de facto leader of the mages. There is something a bit narcissitic about that choice. But I don't fully disagree with his cause. And all of the "recognized" authorities of the mages are also in the Chantry's pocket. Which does make them a bit harder to trust.

Yet these same leaders, as has been pointed out, eventually came around to the whole rebellion thing. 

Just going to point out that I don't believe Anders is right or wrong, per se, only that I don't believe the interpretation of his destruction of the Chantry as selfless holds up under scrutiny.  That's before we consider that Justice - as a spirit of Concept - is inherently selfish because he is incapable of comprehending nuance, compromise, or different perspectives from his own.

highcastle wrote...

But to say he thinks it's acceptable for every mage to die is a bit of a stretch.

It doesn't rely on interpreting his own statements as rhetorical or the result of internalized acceptance of simply his own fate, it simply relies on him taking his matter-of-fact declaration (you know, the staff-slamming scene) at face value.  I mean, considering he probably planned that whole speech and even considered responses to the likely objections makes me take what he says there very seriously.

I definitely don't think the Chantry Jenga is a purely selfless act. Anders has plenty of personal motivations for doing it, not least among them being the personal abuses he suffered at the hands of the templars. He, like everyone, is a product of his own experiences, and these color his world-view and his actions. But he's also not doing it entirely for himself. He knows he likely won't live in the world he wants to create, and an equally large part of his motivation is to give future mages a better shot than he had. That is selfless.

In this, as in most things, Anders is a walking contradiction. He wants vengeance for the evils he suffered. Selfish. He wants others to live in a world free of prejudice and oppression even if he himself doesn't deserve or get to live in that world. Selfless. 

As for his staff-slamming speech. He says:

"I will not stand by and watch you treat all mages as criminals while those who would lead us bow to their templar leaders. The Circle has failed us, Orsino! Even you should be able to see that! The time has come to act. There can be no half-measures. There can be no peace."

It's a clear declaration of war. It's obvious he doesn't expect everyone to survive, not with the "no peace" line. But neither does he expect everyone to die. Again, freedom is useless if everyone you fought for is too dead to enjoy it.

Modifié par highcastle, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:46 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

How is it not relevant? Anders may have decided that death was preferrable to the status quo for the mages in Kirkwall, and forced them to fight to the death by provoking a Right of Annulment.
 

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Which doesn't change the fact that they decided on their own that they wanted to fight.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:46 .

[upsettingshorts]

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

How is it not relevant?

Because of this:

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Anders may have decided that death was preferrable to the status quo for the mages in Kirkwall, and forced them to fight to the death by provoking a Right of Annulment.

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

He certainly hoped that the rest of the mages in Thedas would be inspired by Kirkwall to start a rebellion, which they did. They didn't have to.

Did he ask them first?

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

Saying that Anders decided it for them is simply not correct.

...yes it is.  It's kind of why Orsino flips the hell out.  He decided to remove the "I'm fine with the status quo" option for the mages.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I don't think "selfish" is a right word, primarily because I don't think Anders is a "self" by the end of the game. I don't think he is a person anymore, so to speak. Nor a spirit / demon.

I think it's more appropriate to say he, whatever he is, is obsessed, not with an impartial view of justice, but by his hatred and anger, thus creating the partial vengeance. Just my opinion and interpretation of course.

[upsettingshorts]

highcastle wrote...

 He knows he likely won't live in the world he wants to create, and an equally large part of his motivation is to give future mages a better shot than he had. That is selfless.

As long as the number of mages who were just fine with the status quo and had no part in the decision to blow up the Chantry is greater than zero, I don't think it can be.   I imagine the number is much, much higher.  Especially outside of Kirkwall.  Orsino may have had a great deal to hide, but he tried to negotiate with Meredith till the end. 

highcastle wrote...

It's a clear declaration of war. It's obvious he doesn't expect everyone to survive, not with the "no peace" line. But neither does he expect everyone to die. Again, freedom is useless if everyone you fought for is too dead to enjoy it.

The issue is, at least from where I'm coming from, is that he doesn't have the authority to declare war - and that he does so anyway because his conscience demands it is inherently selfish.

I don't see how it's conceptually any different from someone bombing an abortion clinic.  Or a federal building housing agencies whose actions are deemed oppressive.

Even the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor had a great deal more legitimacy, as the decision to take the whole country in to war was made by those with the authority to make that call.

Queen-Of-Stuff wrote...

The first part refers to the magesin Kirkwall, the latter refers to the mages outside of Kirkwall. Two different cases, those.

If they would have rebelled on their own anyway, the events of Dragon Age 2 are irrelevant and no-one should care about anything Anders or the Champion did at all.

The fact Cassandra has a different impression establishes that Thedas very much considers Anders' actions as the catalyst for larger events, it is even explicitly described as "the beginning."

They are not different cases.  Anders clearly succeeded.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:58 .