I see you keep saying this is about your anger. Fine, you admitted it yourself. But admitting anger does not turn your words into facts.
You keep repeating that Genya was safe because of the trial, but that is just a convenient way to erase what actually happened. That trial was a farce. The king was guilty of rapes and should have been punished with the full weight of the law. Instead Nikolai and Zoya allowed him to retire, fully aware that he could continue doing the same thing. They knew, and they chose to protect the crown and spare the court from scandal. Saying that Genya was “safe” because a trial existed changes nothing about who enabled that abuse. If your anger is genuine, then it should also be directed at those who had the power to stop the king and deliberately chose not to.
You also insist that Aleksander “sent” Genya, when in reality she herself asked for the transfer and the queen requested her. That matters. It was not as simple as him offering her up. The context of power and the chain of command cannot be erased just because it makes the story less convenient for your version.
You also wrote that Aleksander “did nothing” to protect Genya, but that again is a selective reading. For centuries he fought to give Grisha protection, rights and power in a country that treated them as expendable. He built the Second Army, he trained them, he gave them a place where they were not just servants but soldiers and people with a purpose. To dismiss all of that because of one case is not only unfair, it is historically inaccurate within the world of Ravka.
The reality is that Aleksander was not able to protect every single Grisha from every cruelty, because he was working in a court and a kingdom ruled by corrupt monarchs. He had to compromise, and sometimes those compromises were brutal. That does not erase the fact that his entire life’s work was directed toward the survival and strength of Grisha. Without him, people like Genya would never have had a place at court or an army standing behind them at all.
The claim that he had romantic intentions toward thirteen-year-old Zoya is another example of projecting what you want to see rather than what is in the text. The books show him recognising potential in her and flattering her ambition, the same way he did with other talented Grisha. To turn a scene of mentorship into a romance is unfair and unsupported. If you want to stand by this idea, then show the lines in the books that prove it. If you cannot, then admit it is only your interpretation.
And with Alina, your shifting of her age between 16 and 17 does not make your case stronger, it only shows how much this fandom loves to move the goalposts. But acknowledging the age gap is one thing. Reducing their whole relationship to a single label while ignoring the political, tragic and emotional dimensions is another. It was not written as a story of a man preying on a child. It was written as two people bound by fate, by power, by loneliness, and by impossible circumstances. You might dislike it, but misrepresenting it is not analysis.
Finally, it is telling that you say it does not matter what LB herself says about her own work. She has said shipping Darklina is fine. If she had intended the story to be read as straightforward predation, she would not be encouraging people to ship it. You may disagree with her, but dismissing her own clarification while insisting your view is the only truth simply exposes how much this is about your determination to hate, not about the text.
Aleksander is not innocent. He is morally grey, ruthless, and capable of cruelty. That is a fair critique. I love him for that. But making him into a one-note predator without evidence is not critique, it is just condemnation. If you want to argue seriously, then show the text. If you only want to condemn, then at least admit it instead of disguising anger as careful reading.
I'll leave you with a quote that Ben said about him last month, love:
"Because I think the Darkling is thoughtful, he can't be completely psychotic, he has a reason for doing the things he's doing, and therefore in my eyes you have to make him potentially redeemable." - Ben Barnes at Tampa Bay Comic Convention 2025
