Was I "happy" with Anders' decision... Oh boy, this is a trick question... Lol! Lol! Lol!
How could I possibly put it... First of all, after having been profoundly disgusted and horrified with the way mages were treated in DAO, my meeting with Anders in DA2 went a bit like this:
Anders: "Mages should be..."
Hawke: “FREE!!! YES!!! Chantry bad! Mages awesome! Magic good!!! Good
magic!!! 100% with you!!! Love you now!!! Can I help you with your manifesto?
Want me to start distributing copies? Nevermind that, want me to write the
whole darn thing for you? Want to leave Kirkwall so we can go petition all
other cities and rally them to our cause? What do you mean we can't leave
Kirkwall? What kind of stupid game is that? Wait, here's king Alistair... King
Alistair!!! You like mages too, right? How about transforming the Circles in
Ferelden into learning institutions, and letting the mages go back to their
families after class? What do you mean your had a Blight to fight and your
country isn't at its strongest? I helped you fight the darn... Ooops! Sorry!
Wrong life! So... You gonna help us? Pretty please? Did you know your mom was a
mage and an elf? What? You didn't read the book?”
Poor Anders was a bit overwhelmed, and had trouble to keep up!
And now, it has gotten to the point where I have become passionate enough about the character, and the cause he is fighting for, that I ended up writting my own "Manifesto of Anders", as apposed to "Anders' manifesto"... Lol!
And I swear, that thing tends to turn up everywhere!
So here goes...
Part 1, The Chantrys (white and black) in Thedas:
While playing DAO and DA2, my perception of the Chantrys (both of them)
has always been that they are a dangerous organization controlling people
through fear, trying to give the population a false sense of safety and control
in order to remain in power and justify their activities.
In most of Thedas, if you refuse to submit to the teachings and rules of
the Chantry, you are branded an apostate... If you help apostates, you can be
executed. Even Grand Cleric Elthina admitted that killing innocent lives has
never stopped the Chantry from going on Exalted Marches to defend "the
Faith" (when she asks you to go speak with Sister Nightingale).
In Tevinter, the Magisters
rule the Imperium THROUGH the Black Chantry. It’s also the Chantry in Tevinter that gives
the Magisters their social and political powers, not the other way around! They
have their own interpretation of the Chant of Light (especially the line:
“Magic exists to serve mankind, not to rule over him”), and use that to justify
their own activities.
Once again, the Magisters
have the “Maker given right” to rule the Imperium as they see fit, because
their actions are sanctioned by the Maker, and the general population that
believe in what their own Chantry is teaching them. The people in Tevinter
follow the teachings of Andraste, just like anywhere else. They are simply at
odds with how the Divine interprets those teachings, and refuse to accept her
authority.
Even Orana, though she is a
slave, didn’t realize there was anything wrong with her predicament. You tend
to accept the world in the way that it is presented to you. Believe that what
you have been taught is the natural order of things. Sometimes, people take a
step back to observe the situation in its ensemble, and realize that there’s
something wrong. Fenris eventually did in Tevinter… Anders also did in Thedas.
Children that are beaten
and mistreated sometimes still see their parents as being inherently good, and
doing what is best for them. They see them as protectors, even as they fear
what they can do.
And when they realize that
their parents aren’t the “gods” they were always lead to believe them to be…
That their rights and needs have been baffled, and that they didn’t deserve
(nor were responsible for) any of this… The main emotion that usually arises is
anger. And I think both Fenris and Anders have that in spades!
Whether it's the “Black Divine”, or the Divine from Orlais, both have
equally abusive practices. The Tevinter Imperium is not a good example of
"what mages would do if they were free"... It's a good example of
"how, once again, religious teachings can be twisted to serve the
powerful, and justify their actions".
Whether the mages are locked up in towers while the "good
folks" are allowed to control them; or the Magisters are at the head of
the Chantry and controlling the "good folks", ultimately, the
situation is the same... One group is enslaving another.
The Chantrys, both of them, must loose their hold on the world if Thedas
is ever to fairly and effectively regulate the use of magic, and find a way for
mages and "non-magical citizens" to coexist peacefully.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that either Chantrys are willing to relinquish
their hold on the world without a fight.
Part 2, The Circle of Magi:
The Circle of Magi was created on the assumption that mages' powers are,
by nature, abusive (a vision widely spread by the Chantry).
It's a bit like that whole situation in the X-men movies. People fear
those that are different, and naturally see them as potential threats. The
Chantry feeds on that fear and uses it as a mean of control for both the
general public, and the mages. The "security" they offer allows them
to remain in power.
But it's a false sense of security. I don't believe that the mages would
be any more dangerous if they were allowed to live within the general
population, with laws protecting both sides.
For example, when their powers manifest, young mages could be
immediately assigned as apprentices to a master that would teach them how to
use and control their powers.
Circles of Magi could be converted as a teaching institution, instead of
prisons.
Laws could be put in place to regulate the use of magic, and people
could be assigned to enforce them.
Most mages will turn to blood magic as an act of despair. Remove the
source of despair, and you prevent loosing so many mages to the dark side of
their powers.
If you allow them to live normal lives among people... To love, have
dreams and projects to fulfill, live with their families, etc. Would they need
any more reason to revolt?
Some will always do. Just like some non-magical people will turn to
crime. But do we have the right to punish the innocent because of what he
*might* become? It makes no sense to me.
Freedom for the mages does not mean them being allowed to do whatever
they want with their powers! And this isn’t what Anders is advocating for
either.
Freedom for the mages is basically allowing them to share the same
rights as any other individuals. People who don't have magic must also abide by
certain laws. It should be no different for them. After all, if it isn’t right
to kill a person using a spear, or control them through extortion, it shouldn’t
be any more right to do so through the use of magic.
I see no reasons why mages should be prevented to come and go as they
please. Making apprenticeship mandatory for all mages (and keeping records) is
one thing. But locking them up and taking their families/lives/minds/dreams
away from them is another entirely.
Also, the definition of what an apostate or maleficar is seems very
subjective, and is too open to interpretation.
As for people arguing that the Circles also protect mages from the
general population; if there were some severe laws against committing hate
crimes against mages, they would be protected from the population just as well.
Segregation doesn’t seem like a viable solution at all (talking about
segregation, I’d have plenty to say about alienages, and the way elves are
treated too! Lol!). Keeping people locked away from each other while allowing
the fear/hate to spread is definitely wrong.
Having mages become terrified of what “normal folks” could do to them…
While “normal folks” are petrified of those wielding magic is not helping
create a better world.
You just end up having two groups that are completely unable to come to
any understanding, and that will stop caring about what they do to each other.
Blood magic is fast, easy, and available. From my understanding, there
is no real need to learn the skill, only be willing to make deals with demons.
Perhaps if mages were taught to CARE about the world outside of the
tower, and felt some sense of connection, belonging to it, they wouldn’t be so
quick to give in to temptation to protect themselves. I remember Anders mentioning that the most
common way for mages to die is by their own hand.
If they stop caring about their own existence, then why should they care
about people that show them no sign of mercy? Who sit idly in their homes while
they are being made Tranquil, and allowed to suffer?
Not all mages are good people either. Some hunger for power, just like
any regular person could hunger for power. Some can be cruel, and vile. They
aren’t ALL innocents… But should innocents be allowed to suffer because of the
few? I don’t see it.
As for the risk of having abominations running free on the streets, and
mages automatically seizing power and wanting to control/destroy the world if
they weren’t controlled by Templars and Circles, that assumption seems a bit
ludicrous.
To quote a user named MathiasAmon
on the Dragon Age wiki: “The idea that all mages, freed from their fetters,
would attempt to take over the world, is also ridiculous. Mages are
individuals, not a hive-mind. Where one may want to make the mundanes cower in
terror and worship him while he shoots lightning out of his fingers, another
may want to use his gifts to better the lives of his fellow man. A third might
feel a moral obligation to use his powers to protect people from mages like the
first.”
And, look at that, the
Tevinter Imperium has no “abominations running amuck on the streets” problem.
How strange… They have Magisters competing with each others for power and
social status, and policies that allow slavery to exist on their lands, but the
Imperium hasn’t been overtaken by demons. How can it be? It goes against
everything that the white Chantry would like you to believe, doesn’t it?
It makes me sick that one
could condone treating sentient beings like "regulating a dangerous
substance" instead of what they are, PEOPLE.
People who have dreams,
emotions, needs, families, friends... Who love... People that have the
possibility to make right or wrong choices just like anyone else. People who
should share the same rights as the rest of their society.
Mages are stripped of all
rights, including the right of expression (those who oppose the Chantry too
strongly are made Tranquil), and their lives are stolen from them.
I can’t lose sight of that,
and start seeing them as “weapons” without feeling like I’d have to sacrifice
my own humanity in the process.
Part 3, The impact of Anders/Justice action:
Anders has never been seeking power for himself, nor trying to enslave
anyone. He's only trying to inspire people to stand up to the Chantry, and not
cower in fear. He's not an out of control abomination going around killing
thousands, and thousands of people. He blew up one Chantry (that was already
starting a slow genocide through their Templars) to ignite a (much needed)
revolution that will probably save thousands of lives in the long run.
The Chantry began a war long ago when they created the Circles, and went
on Exalted Marches (slaughtering thousands of innocent people refusing to
submit to them) in order to protect "the Faith". They are a
conquering military force, not a peaceful institution promoting free-will, and
voluntary adhesion to their beliefs.
“Peace” was, unfortunately, never an option. At least, not in Kirkwall
(there would have been hope in Ferelden, I think… Especially if Alistair was elected king, and
more so if the Warden happened to be a mage, and the Circle was granted its independence).
For negotiations to occur, both parties have to be willing to negotiate (i.e.
feel that there is something for them to gain by negotiating).
Thus, since the Chantry already holds absolute power in Kirkwall, and
have the "Maker given right" to silence anyone opposing them, I
wonder just how much "negotiating" they would have been willing to
consider.
The problem in Kirkwall is that there is no room for diplomacy, or
democracy. People are living under a totalitarian society where there is simply
no higher power to appeal to (since the Viscount is dead, and Meredith won't
let anyone who doesn't serve her interests replace him), and the people in the
city are taken hostage (helping apostates being a hanging offense).
A friend once wrote: "If any government ever violates your
inalienable individual rights to that degree, and leaves no way to change it
through "democracy", then it is morally right and just to resort to
violence to oppose it. It's on the government's head for forcing you into a
situation where that was the only way to regain your freedom again."
And sadly, that's pretty much the way I feel about Kirkwall. People
opposing what Meredith is doing have no real leverage. They can talk all they
want, she's not willing to listen, and besides Elthina (who refuses to act), no
one has the "power" to make her listen!
“Peaceful resistance” implies that you have to find a “non-violent way”
to put the oppressors in a situation where they are forced to negotiate in
order to protect their own interests.
The target of such non-violent resistance movement can be economical,
political, etc. But you ALWAYS need some
form of leverage.
What Anders did brought the Chantry on the brink of collapse, and made
them lose control not only over their Circles, but their Templars as well (one
of their main military orders, and perhaps the most influential one)!!!
They are now losing power, they know it, and thus are sending Seekers to
track down the only person (the Champion) that they believe have the influence
required to help them avoid to lose everything!
The Chantry is forced to listen now if they want to protect their
interests.
Since the end of the game, I have been racking my brain trying to find a
single “non-violent mean” that Anders could have taken in order to destabilize
the Chantry’s hold on the world hard enough so that they would have been given
no other choice than to capitulate.
Convince the dwarves to stop providing lyrium to the Templar Order until
the Chantry would be willing to renegotiate the terms under which mages are
living? Dwarves are merchants, they don’t
have mages among them, and most of them certainly don’t care what’s happening
with humans and elves topside. So no, that
wouldn’t work…
What else? It’s all good and well
to say that “Anders could have resorted to non-violent means”. But how?
Please tell me how. Perhaps if the Champion had decided to get more involved, but I'll get back on that later.
While Anders’ solution was both shocking and horrifying, the very moment
the Chantry exploded, in my mind, Anders ceased to be just “Anders”, but became
a symbol of every single person the Chantry has ever wronged… Every single life
they ever took away, or destroyed… Every single family they tore apart… Every
single freedom they have trampled with impunity… Even going as far as claiming
that they were righteous in doing so!
There’s a scene at the end of the movie “V for Vendetta” where Evey’s
character is asked “who” V was… And she answers:
“He was my father, and my mother; my brother, my friend; he was you, and
me; he was all of us…”
Anders embodies the countless Chantry’s victims that, until then, had
had no voices.
But Anders is still a man… Despite being possessed by Justice, he still
has a conscience… And therefore he will probably keep paying all of his life
for what he did, as I don’t believe that Anders could ever kill anyone without
being haunted by their memory. That is the “punishment” from which there is no
escape, the sacrifice he has made.
Still, that doesn’t mean that I fully agree with the MEANS he took to
achieve said revolution.
My approach to the problem would have been to LEAVE KIRKWALL (in the
very beginning of Act III) and use my influence as Champion to gather allies
all across Thedas to try to "peacefully" oppose the Chantry, and
force them to step down. By keeping Anders actively working towards the
liberation of mages, instead of simply patting him on the back saying “there
there, I understand” while atrocities keep being committed against his people
all around him, I have this theory that it might have helped him keep Justice
in check. Lol!
But no, I have to run around the city aimlessly, while my
spirit-possessed lover slowly looses it and begins showing tell-tale signs of
suicidal intent! Arrrg!
However, given the limitations of the gameplay, and the very little
support I was able to provide Anders, I thought that him going after the ROOT
of the problem (the Chantry’s control over the population) instead of attacking
the symptom (Meredith, the Templars, and/or the Circle) was the smartest thing
one could have done in an effort to bring some long lasting change to the
world.
Part 4, About letting Anders live, or becoming his executioner:
Fenris told me that he had slaughtered a whole clan of people that had
saved his life, and protected him from his former master… And I didn’t kill him
for his crimes. Sten killed an entire family of farmers because he had
misplaced his sword, and we still became friends… Zevran was an assassin (he
even admitted that sometimes, innocent people get in the way), and I’ve even
dated him! Leliana’s past as a bard also covers a lot of killing!
I don’t believe in the death penalty, and killing Anders made no sense
to me (especially within that context). This would be pure vengeance.
My rationale for letting him live and siding with him had more to do
with the fact that since he started this, he might as well face the
consequences, good and bad, or his actions; and be given a chance to learn and
evolve through these experiences.
He expected and even wanted to die, and I denied him the easy way out.
Not as a punishment, but because he should take responsibility for his actions.
Also, I can’t strike him down and deny him a shot at redemption… Especially not
after having been so forgiving to anyone else! Despite everything, I still
believe in Anders, and in what he stands for. He has so much potential, and is
probably one of the most gentle and compassionate characters of the Dragon Age
Universe.
I’m more worried about him losing himself to Justice though… Especially
after having watched him all but give up on himself. The way he keeps blaming
himself for what happened to Justice, and says that besides the cause of the
mages, there’s nothing left of him, broke my heart.
So yes, I actually *have* considered killing Anders for a minute there,
but only to free them both (thus, not using death as a “penalty”, but as an act
of mercy). What stopped me completely are the dialogue options (“You have to
pay for what you’ve done”), and the stabbing in the back sequence.
There is no “I love you, and I understand… As much as I don’t want to
lose you, I am willing to let you and Justice be free, if you believe there is
really no other way for you to learn to live with each other, and that is what
you would ask of me…” option, or something similar.
Sebastian’s reaction was also a factor in this… The Chantry and the
Templars started the war… Anders retaliated by igniting a revolution… The cycle
of violence and retribution has to stop somewhere. So I’m sorry Sebastian, but
I’m not going to give in, and kill Anders out of anger just to give you
satisfaction. Killing him is not justice, and Vengeance has done enough damage
as it is.
I’m a bit disappointed to see so many players claim that “Anders has to
die for what he did!”, and go on and on about how he has “betrayed their
trust”, and therefore, he has to pay!
It almost seems like the morally reprehensible choices that our
companions make are easier to accept when they are happening completely outside
of our control, or “authority”… Or then again, have happened in the past
(implying that the character has changed, evolved, seen the errors of his ways
and redeemed himself since then).
It’s as if we have gotten so used to being able to directly influence
our companions in any given situation that when one does something that
completely goes against our own goals/actions/intents, we are completely
shocked! Lol! And angry!
Had the destruction of the Chantry happened 2 years prior to meeting
Anders, and he’d casually told us about it in conversation, I bet most of us
would have gone “Don’t blame yourself Anders… I understand how hard it must be
for you to resist Justice… You didn’t really have a choice to ignore the
situation back then, things got pretty out of hand… Don’t worry, we’ll figure
this out together…”
So, as far as I’m concerned, not only will Anders live… But my Hawke
will spend the rest of his days helping him deal with his guilt, fight his
revolution (hopefully, through more diplomatic means than making every Chantry
go “boom”! Lol!), adapt to “life with a spirit within”, and being crazy in love
(or BFF, whenever he isn’t romanced!
Lol!) with his apostate!
And... That's it! Thoughts? Opinions? Insults? Lol! Basically, I'm not "happy" with what he did per say. But I'm rather pleased with the outcome so far (Chantry loosing power), and I agree with/support his overall intent...
Modifié par River5, 08 juin 2011 - 10:03 .
Retour en haut
