I don't mean to imply it's acceptable to others here in real life, I just don't find it attractive even in fiction. I don't know.
I admit I am not quite sure if I understand correctly. However, to the last bit at least: I am not so sure about the intention of the writers. I do not believe they try to wipe away negative traits of character, like close-mindedness and discrimination, or especially try to write a controversial character (at least not regarding Solas; concerning other characters I am not so sure). I think the issue here is rather that they try to build him up:
First we only see the fable of the dread wolf, no clear picture. Everything is negative and bad about him, he is evil incarnate. Now they want to show us a broken character who struggles with how he is perceived while at the same time his pride makes him disregard it (emotional dilemma). I am not sure where they will go, maybe this is a reverse approach and they will end up showing us what he used to be like, before something twisted how he is interpreted (as this "dreadful wolf"); i.e. maybe they started off by showing us a "bad" character and now try to explain, in small steps, how it came to be. Basically open our eyes to see how nothing is so simply good or bad. They do like this. Think of Saren in ME1, who we got to know as the big bad and in the end we had to understand that he was just so helpless. Similar approach with TIM in ME2/ME3.
I fear, and of course I might be wrong, that the issues that arise from this approach, are mostly due to two factors, which are budget and time between games. They scratch the surface with a few short cut scenes and additionally expect from the player to keep it all in mind and to keep an open mind until they reveal the next bit 5 years later. I felt this way about Flemythal, too. First she was a fable, the Witch from the Wilds, then she was a nice old lady, then she was a monstrous soul eater, then she was this monstrous soul eater in awesome clothing, then we didn't actually know what she was anymore. And in the end? In the end is she Mythal, a prototypical mother figure, a divine incarnation that represents (how close) love (is related to punishment).
Ok, I am beginning to lose the thread here. Sorry.
TLTR:
I think the intentions and what is transported probably diverge at this point. But I don't believe the authors try to excuse something. I don't even think they thought some people would interpret it as "racism". Maybe they thought everybody would just see this broken, lonely wolf that starts to snap at everyone around in the face of his own helplessness. I could be wrong, but I think the authors have to struggle with so much discrimination and bashing every day, I don't want to believe they would be so tactless.
This is, however, completely unrelated from people interpreting it all as racism and excusing it. Which I dislike, in fiction or reality.





Retour en haut










