Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
Hades is a very interesting case on how changing societies can change the interpretation of a figure. Hades was feared in the past but by modern standard he emerges as about the only Olympian who wasn't a monster. And he's certainly the only one who has a chance to survive the #Metoo era.
He abducted a woman by force, so not unscathed.
Apollo and Hestia (of he Olympians) probably come out of #MeToo almight. All the rest-- Zeus, Poseidon, Hades, Hera, Demeter, Artemis, Hephaestus, Ares, Athena, Hermes and DEFINITELY Dionysus don't.
Isn't Apollo a serial harasser who inflict horrible fates on girls when they aren't into him?
If he did, I wasn't aware of that. Though come to think of it he did murder quite a few innocents.
Maybe Hestia was the only halfway decent Olympian.
Its the backstory of the famed Cassandra. When she rejected Apollo he cursed her with the ability to see the future but the curse of no one ever believing her predictions. I'm not 100% sure on this but I think he also turned a girl into a tree and murdered one of his male lovers.
Actually, the situation with Persephone is one of those "depending on the author" types of things. As in, whether he abducted her by force, or if she was basically like "Oh, no, I'm being kidnapped, heeelp" while letting him abduct her.
Indeed. It's complicated, or at least there are variations of the myth. In some, Persephone is abducted because her mother (Demeter) refused to let her go to the underworld more than because Persephone herself didn't want to go.
One might also point out that compared to a lot of other divine marriages in Greek myth (e.g. Zeus-Hera, Hepahaestos-Aphrodite), it seems to have been a mutually happy and respectful one.
True, but the forced abduction version is a lot more common-- Pamphos, pseudo-Apolloduros, Diodoros Siculos, Orphica, among others. Including the Homeric hymn, which is pretty much the most extensive account we have.
The state of Indiana banned bus lanes...but only for it's capital city
I just rewatched book 1 and your knowledge of the entire story is colouring your recollection. Zuko is definitely the villain initially.
He's a villain we know early on is very likely going to be redeemed - there's just too much drama the show invests in him - but yeah, he's the driving antagonistic force. That is until that other lower general guy kinda takes over near the end of Season 1. And eventhough Season 2 de-vilifies him almost entirely he still chooses to go full villain near the end to show he's not quite there yet. That betrayal is pretty much the most evil shit he does.
I was 14 when the show was released. I followed it from the beginning. I remember personally watching the first episode when it aired and thinking Zuko was going to be a good guy. He says he's fighting for his honor, accompanied by a kindly uncle who tries to dissuade him from hunting the avatar in his first appearance. The hints are plentiful from the start.
That other general guy tells Zuko he is taking over the hunt for the Avatar in episode 3. Zuko gets one encounter with Aang before the actual antagonist of season 1 is introduced, to immediately fight Zuko, who is established by the words of Iroh to be the honorable representative of the Fire Nation in contrast to Zhao.
Episode 13, relatively in the middle of book 1, Zuko rescues Aang from Zhao, which to go way off on a tangent is the most infuriating directorial decision of the entire Last Airbender movie, in my opinion. Worse than the crappy earthbending, worse than mispronouncing the names, worse than rewriting the canon in ways that would make the other 2 hypothetical movies almost impossible. After Zuko rescues Aang, and then Aang rescues Zuko, there is a scene in a forest where Aang speaks to Zuko as he regains consciousness. Aang talks about his friend from the fire nation, and wonders if he and Zuko could have been friends too if the met under different circumstances. So now Aang knows Zuko saved him, Zuko knows Aang knows that, Zuko knows Aang saved him back, we know Aang wants to be friends with Zuko, Zuko knows Aang would rather be friends with him... a lot is established by that brief scene, and then Zuko attacks Aang who runs away and it takes many episodes before the friendship comes to fruition. In the live action movie, they recreated this forest scene beautifully, like they definitely put money into getting the setting just right, had Aang sit over Zuko in just the same way, and then he says nothing and leaves before Zuko wakes up. Like, what the crap! Aang doesn't tell the audience what he's thinking, and from Zuko's perspective, he got knocked out in battle and then woke up alone in a forest without context. Why put all that effort into building that scene and then cut all of the character building? What were they thinking!?
And so did most kids and teens in America. You're not special for it. He was still a villain for most of the series and the betrayal in Season 2 still happened.
I know, cause the show is really well written. Everyone can see he's a good guy, him joining the team was always obvious, so much so that his betrayal at the end of book 2 is the twist.
That's about the only credit you'll ever get, so enjoy it. And even then, some of us able to figure out he wasn't going to change into a full good guy until the third season. The evidence was already there within the second season. Too soon and especially with his sister running around. I remember some of my friends being shocked, but I already saw it coming back then.
I feel like you're forgetting all the casual terrible things he does early. He's shown as a spiteful, angry child, scorned. Horrible to his kindly uncle constantly, more than happy to order the torch to any civilian settlements which defy him.
Does he have an arc, and move beyond that? Absolutely. But he still sits squarely in the villain square through book one.
Does he have an arc, and move beyond that? Absolutely. But he still sits squarely in the villain square through book one.
I'm kinda with tstorm on this one. He's an /antagonist/ in the first book (since he unequivocally battles against the protagonists and for the 'wrong' side) but he's not really a /villain/-- they're not always interchangeable, and this is a good example.