Oh boy, thats not what I meant at all. Celene talks about it herself, she can't go easy on the elves because there is no legal bases to do so. There is no concept of modern universal rights in this setting. The elves, no matter their blight, are still subjects of the crown and what they are doing is a rebellion. The nobles are not going to accept parleying with rebels so Celene has no choice to but to put the rebellion down. Again, what else could she do? The elves were not going to give up with just a few arrest. Not to mention there was no way to arrest just a few since they had barricaded their part of the city and were preparing for a fight to the death. I think its naive to think there was some less bloody way to handle this situation.
And again, those elves were not just attacking guards and even if they were only attacking guards, the abuse the elves suffer is not an excuse to kill guards who are only guarding caravans. They may have let one merchant go but only because they need him to move the caravan. Otherwise it seems likely they'd have killed him as well since they were in the middle of beating the merchant until Thren stopped them.
Hmm, this is what I don't get. Celene gets vilified by some for doing exactly the same thing Gaspard would do in her place except Gaspard would not worry as much as Celene does about preventing her soilders from looting or killing too many elves. Her main concern is crushing the rebellion and then she quickly pulls her troops out before they can do anymore harm. So it was far from a reckless slaughter of elves. But somehow, Gaspard is the one that some find more likable? You mean the guy who told Celene to her face that his challenge for the crown is not about her gender but simply because she is not himself (talk about being full of yourself). I don't get it, I really don't.
I will say that Patrick Weekes needs to be given credit for making such interesting characters that have create such different views on the characters and events that take place in the book. It really is the best Dragon Age book so far.
I know where not supposed to discuss politics on these boards but I'm really curious as to how people's perspectives on the Halamshiral incident reflect their real life political views on similar topics. Maybe I'll ask a mod if I can make a thread about that as that seems a fascinating topic to discuss in and of itself.
I try to avoid making comparisons to modern politics and morality when I'm reading a period piece since the prevalent views on Morality and Politics has changed significantly and its more difficult to understand how characters act and think if your colored by our modern views. People don't seem to understand just how much the world has changed even in the last century. Democracy and universal rights are still very new concepts compared to most of human history.
I'll simply say that one has to realize that Celene does not have an absolute monarchy. She very much rules a feudal society where she has to take into account the views of her nobles or she won't be ruling for long.
My own personal view is that I despise monarchies in general but thats a discussion for another time. I did not see Celene act in a heavy handed or cruel matter. I'd say that if Anora or Alastir back in Freleden were faced with a similar situation they would do the same.
As others have pointed out, even Briala sees that what the city elves were doing was going to get them all killed because what ruler doesn't claim the right to put down rebellions. Even modern governments including USA claim that right.
Retour en haut
