local internet lurker

Call me Ace or Acetronaut, she/her lesbian | Not much original stuff here, just my collection of stuff I like, feel free to browse!

[bluestrawberry7]

I cannot be Stopped

(cr4 memes part 10 atp jeez)

[bluestrawberry7]

when will my husband return from the war (hiatus)

cr memes part 11

[onloisoh]

We need to talk about Thjazi Fang

This might be a long post, so buckle up.

Here's the thing I don't see a lot of people getting:

● Just because someone fights for a noble cause, it doesn't mean that the person themselves is noble.

This also means:

● Just because a person that advocates for a good cause is not-good/bad, it doesn't mean the cause itself is bad.

And since we are here, we might as well add:

● An actual rebellion/cause doesn't have one sole "leader". It may have one "representative" at a certain point, but you truly cannot say it has one "leader" or an actual "leader" (or are we supposed to say that theres just one "leader" to, lets say, the gay rights movement?) There's people leading the fight, but the Cause is only truly carried forward by the people (not just one person/leader).

-> Therefore, even if one of said "leaders" ends up being not-good/bad, there's still a lot of people that can back-up the cause as the good thing it actually is.

The "goodness" of one doesn't necessarily correlate to the other.

And I point this out, because I've seen some (including characters) justify Thjazi's "bad side" with the fact that he was a leader of the rebellion. That his plan at the Hallowed Round was a good cause, and therefore the rest of his actions can be overlooked/justified.

v v v

I've seen many people throwing flowers at Thjazi Fang left and right, defending him against most arguments against his "good nature", since the start of the campaign. I distrusted the way most characters (except for the 3 we know) portayed him in a good light. Out of principle I distrusted this, since in funerals people (sometimes) tend to talk about the deceased in a good light regardless of their behaviour (sometimes even overly exaggerating). However, at the start, I could agree that we might not have much to go off to determine weather Thjazi was good, bad, or in a gray area.

The more episodes we got, the more confirmation I got that my first instinct was not wrong, and that Thjazi is (at least) a grey character. I would even argue that he became a dark grey rather than a middle/light grey at the end of his life. (I'll talk more on this change later in his life, later)

I thought Brennan had made that much clear. He was an asshole, and not always in the "haha, funny" way. But apparently some people in the audience still try to justify some of the awful actions/decisions he took with the good cause he fought for or the good actions he took at some point in his life.

If you find yourself in this crowd, I ask you to sit down and think this through for a moment. Does the goodness of the cause he was pushing forward exempt him of being bad in other places? Do his good actions override the bad oned he took? Aren't people multifaceted?

See it as the "duality of man" if you want, but I don't believe it is fair, even to Thjazi himself, to reduce his character to one aspect. And yes, exempting him of responsibility for his actions this way does count as doing such thing.

Thjazi Fang fought for a good cause, yes. But some of the actions he took cannot be justified with just that.

I believe that, if Aranessa's words of him being a different man than the one she married are true, there might have been a shift in his character, his "moral compass", at some point. Going from light grey (or maybe even a good man) to the dark grey he was later on.

In other words, the objective of this post is to analyse weather, due to some of his actions towards others, Thjazi's character can be viewed as a good person (morally light grey) or if his character is in fact grey/dark grey. And if the latter is the case, was he always like that or did his moral compass darkened through his life?

Let's not focus on his actions towards Bolaire for a second, since I've seen there's been a whole other debate surrounding them both that would drive away from the point I'm trying to make. We can talk about that later.

Let's bring other examples:

[] List of segments in this post:

Example 1 : depersonalization/objectification

Example 2 a&b : the ends justify the means

Example 3: The removal of choice

Sub example (in Ex3): your suffering will be worth it in the end, trust the process-

Point of Observation: the falsity of "if bad why friend-shaped?"

Mask: it all culminates here, oddly enough

Who is he?: He's not the man you knew...

[]

Let me add one more thing before we start. I'll try my best to offer both arguments that support this essay, as well as arguments that may oppose it. This is in an attempt to remain as objective as I can while analysing Thjazi's character and moral compass. I'm attempting to show my appreciation for the work Brennan put into building this complex character, by analysing where he stands.

Now, let's begin:

Ex 1: Azune

I don't think you need to even be a parent to see how awful Azune's situation as a kid was. Raised in poverty, desperately pleading to a group of mercenaries to take him with them (to lighten-up the weight off his parents and give himself a chance to actually survive), and later abandoned by said group that had also taken his older sister in. Azune was left alone, without any family member nearby, and desperate on the streets. It's an awful situation for anyone (even more a kid) to be in.

We know Azune was still very young (12 years old) when he met Thjazi. So, what does Thjazi do when he sees a kid abandoned on the streets desperate to be useful to survive, to prove himself useful to avoid being abandoned again?

He takes him in... to eventually build a soldier out of him.

He doesn't do so inmedietly, no. But it is still something that needs to be pointed out, considering the way the relationship develops. From someone to taking a desperate kid in putting him to work as a delivery guy behind lines, to someone training a teenager to go fight on the front lines and later on spy on the Sundred Houses.

[ Brennan: "(...) Let me ask you a question here. Who of the Torn Banner took in a young Azune when he first started the Falconer's Rebellion in another mercenary company? Who was the person that got him or that was-- Azune: Collected me? Brennan: Collected you, essentially.Azune: It was Thjazi. (...) "] ( 1:10:00 - Ep19 )

Collected is a very specific term. Things are collected, not people. But maybe is just and odd way of phrasing it and not much else.

So let's see how the scene develops:

[ Brennan: "(...) You were still 12. You just see this handsome, swashbuckling, orcish, who's aged out of being the young, 19-year-old hero of the War of Axe and Vine and is now this sort of (world-weary sigh) mustier, seen more of the world, hero of the Falconer's Rebellion, looking down at you in the midst of this busy cross-section where different mercenary companies are saddling up with different groups. You know, someone's saying, "They'll be here on the morrow. The new company's coming," and you see him looking at you, going,

Thjazi: "Soldier, how old are you?"

Azune: "I'm old enough to use this." And I draw the sword that I have.

Brennan: He looks and goes,

Thjazi: "All right. Are you old enough to use this?"

Brennan: And you see he points over at a small hand cart.

Thjazi: "We got to get a bunch of sacks of potatoes back over to the wagons and they're stored in this granary over here."

Brennan: He puts a hand on your shoulder.

Thjazi: "I don't doubt your bravery at all. You should not be here." (...) ] ( 1:10:50 - Ep19 )

So far, Thjazi is not attempting to reclute a kid but rather trying to redirect the kid into something else other than being soldier. He is telling him to help them fill the wagon with food. Yes, he did called him soldier at the start. But that's all we had to go point something against Thjazi in that scene, at least up until this moment.

He even told Azune he shouldn't be there, so Thjazi does acknowledge that a kid shouldn't be amidst soldiers fighting in a war. That's great, it shows he is aware there are certain limits that should not be crossed.

Now what does Thjazi do when the kid, due to the desperate situation he is in, insists to be taken in with them?

[ Azune: "I have nowhere else to be."

Thjazi: "We need someone who can work quick and help out behind the lines, moving gear and equipment, food, all right? And if you need someone to help teach you how to use that thing,"

Brennan: and he gestures to the sword. (...) ] ( 1:12:09 - Ep19 )

Thjazi offers the kid to work as a delivery guy behind the lines, which is better than being at the front lines. But it is still inside the "batallion", still close enough to where the fight is happening for the kid to get hurt. Is better than being in the middle of it.

However Thjazi is still putting the kid in a dangerous situation.

He then offers Azune to teach him how to use the sword he carries.

And yes, we could argue that in both of these things Thjazi was protecting the kid in a way. Teaching him how to use a weapon while s war is going on to defend himself, putting him as far away from the fight as possible while keeping him near enough to be protected by them.

But there wouldn't be any need for that if he had asked someone else to take care of the kid, instead of trying to do so himself when he, as the head of the Falconers, is almost always going to be in the big important and most dangerous fights.

We could argue Thjazi took pity of Azune's situation, that he saw in Azune the 19 year-old Thjazi that was fighting in the war of Axe and Vine, and did what he deemed the best to protect the kid.

But putting the kid in danger is not the best decision to take.

Luis: How long since that company left?

Brennan: Probably you've been standing on this corner for a day and a half.

Azune: "I'll do whatever it takes."

Brennan: (Thjazi) Looks down.

Thjazi: "It's going to take a lot of us feeling that same way. Come on, we'll get you some food."

Azune: At that, my eyes get giant and I feel my stomach rumble and I follow him, and that all comes to me as I'm looking at this house. (...) " ] ( 1:12:36 - Ep19 )

Thjazi answers to Azune desperate plea with a comment one soldier would give to another. He redirects the sentiment towards the war/rebellion. Sure, he probably had that on his mind 24/7. Sure, now Azune has signed himself off to be a soldier of the rebellion. But he is still a kid. A kid that Thjazi himself admitted shouldn't be there and yet he still brings the kid with him to the battle grounds.

Now, we could all say that due to Thjazi being so young when he fought on the War of Axe and Vine, he thought it wasn't necessarily a bad thing to do. That Thjazi's perception got warped there, and therefore, he saw it as normal. But this is a cause, not a valid justification. And besides, Thjazi himself admits that a kid as young as Azune (12 year old) shouldn't even be there. So Thjazi himself disqualifies this argument because he shows he is aware enough of this fact, regardless of what happened to himself on the previous war.

We could all say that at a certain period in history (or in war zones) it might be the usual thing to have kids do some background work in the fights. It still doesn't make it a good thing nor right. Desperation is not a valid justification for such thing. It gives us a cause, an explanation, not a way to call it just or morally good.

We could say that it was all Thjazi was capable of doing to protect the kid. But is that the truth? Couldn't he had sent the kid to Halandil to take care of him (someone we know would be likely to try to help the kid)? Couldn't he had told an inn keeper to take the kid in? Done something other than sending the KID to war as if Azune was just another soldier?

We could all say that Thjazi needed more man for the rebellion, that the man was in a desperate situation himself. And from his comment, we could infer that. But would that really justify bringing a KID, who you don't even know, into a war?

We could all say that the mercenary company did it first, that they were the ones that "groomed" Azune into a weapon, that Azune was already taught that mindset before they met. And we could also say that the kid would have thrown himself into battle regardless of who took him due to that mindset he was taught. But even then, Thjazi still swooped in and took advantage of the situation. Either putting Azune in a position that could end with him becoming cannon-fodder (because lets be honest, a 15 year old in a war usually is perceived as not having many chances of surviving, not without severe or various wounds and scars, even less of successfully attacking and killing someone) or to build him into a useful soldier. Either way, is still a bad thing to do to a kid (yes, when we see Azune actually fight in the war he was 15 year old, but Thjazi took him in at 12, and regardless he still counts as someone way too young). That's NOT an action we can justify.

We can explain a possible CAUSE for it, but there's no actual justification for it (at least, from what we were shown). A cause is not the same as a justification.

-> Let's be clear, I'm not accusing Thjazi doing what he did out malice. And I'm not accusing Thjazi of being the sole reason Azune struggles with his perception of self as a person. But Thjazi did contribute to that crisis. As an adult (Thjazi was at least 28 years old when he met Azune, in the face of a 12 year old he was an grown adult), you simply shouldn't be putting kids in those situations.

Let's not forget that, at the bare minimum, Thjazi perpetuated the whole "you need to be a useful soldier/spy/weapon, etc." view that Azune already had of himself. Not only with how Azune saw himself but also how OTHERS saw Azune. So much so that Thimble just now (in episode 27) realised that, despite fighting alongside Azune and viewing him as a good ally/insider, she doesn't truly know anything about him. She doesn't know where Azune even lives. She doesn't know in which conditions he lives. She doesn't know how he goes to sleep or how he wakes up.

[ Brennan: "Thimble, I want-- I actually want everyone other than Azune and Murray to give me an insight check. Vaelus as well, I assume is hearing this conversation distantly. (...) And I'll say that, I'll say that, Thimble, you can roll here with advantage because of your history with Azune.

Thimble: (...) 18.

Vaelus: (...) 18.

Brennan: (...) I think, Vaelus, you hear that loud and clear, and I think, Thimble, on the 18, you hear that. The word that rings in your ear is "alone." You and Thaz had each other. You lived in this city. You've worked with Azune countless times before. Long years of living in Dol-Makjar, and Azune was your man on the inside. He was the person that Thjazi relied on to keep him apprised of what was going on with the Revolutionary Guard. And I think when Murray says, "You're not alone," you realize you have no idea where Azune lives in the city. You don't know who he sees at night. You don't know who he has dinner with. You don't know what he goes home to, at all. (...) " ] ( 2:14:23 & 2:16:39 - Ep27 )

No matter how much care/concern she might have expressed when Azune broke down crying he didn't want to keep lying, no matter how she tried to amicably lift him up and tell him "You can keep going!", the reality is she truly doesn't know him. Nor has she tried to (before that moment). At the end of the day, her display of concern was superficial when faced with the fact that she (unknowingly) kept treating Azune like the useful soldier/spy Thjazi introduced him as.

-> Viewing/treating someone as just a useful asset, in my opinion, counts as well as a form of dehumanization / depersonalization. At the bare minimum, Azune is displaying signs of such with the crisis of self perception he has.

I'm not saying Thjazi did this out of malice. Nor that he did it all the time. He has displayed care for Azune, at least enough to train him himself (as far as we've seen).

I truly think that Thjazi slowly changed (alongside his moral compass darkening) how he treated Azune, until he viewed and treated Azune as a useful asset. Maybe not always treating him like just an asset, but enough times and with enough frequency that Azune kept the same mindset he had when he was 12. With enough consistency that even others, like Thimble, (unknowingly) viewed and treated Azune in a similar manner.

Not treating him badly always is not the same as never doing it. This hot-and-cold dynamic, from being viewed as just a useful asset (dehumanising to a degree) to being treated with care (humanising), can easily drive someone into a crisis. Especially someone that's a young adult like Azune (he's around 24 years old, if I understood correctly) that has been experiencing this for a couple of years at bare minimum.

Again, I'm not saying Thjazi did it out of malice. But good actions don't override bad ones.

Besides, there's an even dark point of view to offer here. You can treat someone or view them as a useful asset (and use them) and still care if they are harmed or hurt. It may not come from a place of love or at least healthy love, but this duality can exist.

-> Thjazi has been portrayed as viewing others as pieces in a chess board. You might care if you loose your knight piece, and therefore protect it. But at the end of the day its still just a knight, you will care for it as the chess piece it is, not beyond that.

Thjazi has helped shape Azune since he was a kid into a useful soldier/spy.

You could argue it was the only way Thjazi knew how to care for a kid. You could even say that due to Thjazi himself being thrusted into a war so young (he 19 in the War of Axe and Vine), Thjazi viewed what he was doing as normal in "war times". As a necessity even. A means to rectify the wrongness happening.

But the ends don't justify the means.

Which leads to the second example:

Ex 2a: Vaelus

Now, while Vaelus' situation isn't the same as Azune's, it still shows how Thjazi treated (some) people.

The Stone of Nightsong was, at first glance, an important object of worship for the Sisters of Sylandri.

Later we learned that beyond cultural importance it also has another function: guiding the elves through their afterlife in the odd chance they died.

You could care as little as you want for those who worshipped the Shapers, afterall the Shapers were bad (at least the ones we were shown) and you could say those who still worship them are under the illusion they were not. Sure, there's an argument to be had there. And I'm not saying I disagree. However, the Stone of Nightsong still is an object that is of cultural importance and in that culture's possession.

So, having layed that out. Was Thjazi stealing the Stone something we can justify or view as a good thing?

Let's view at the context (at least, whay we know):

As far as we've seen:

The Sisters of Sylandri had the Stone of Nightsong under ther possession and protection. Thjazi (and Thimble) went to where the Stone was safekept and stole it, because Thjazi (and the Cloak) planned in using it to re-anchor the orcish afterlife.

And...that's about it. So the following question is, can we justify stealing the Stone, an object of great cultural importance, without attempting a conversation before? Can we justify using said stole relic in a ritual without their consent?

And most important of all, can we justify any of this without portraying Thjazi as a morally grey character?

Mara, when confronted with why they stole the Stone, tried to argue that a- It wasn't being used by the Sisters of Sylandri, b- It served a greater purpose with the Cloak's plan, and c- Said plan was good that it happened (it went great in the end) so it doesn't matter.

Let's unpack all of that because some of the arguments are... kinda childish. I'll spoil you a bit by telling you beforehand that I do agree with argument b-, but there's a context where it works an another where it does not.

Now, let's see:

a- It wasn't being used by the Sisters of Sylandri

It was an object of worship from their culture. It had a function for them. It doesn't matter if they aren't actively using it, the object was still theirs to choose what to do with it.

Or just because someone sees you aren't using that decoration on the shelf that reminds you of your mother then they have the right to steal it?

I'm not arguing against that, IF it wasn't being used for it's original purpose (at least from what we've seen that might be the case), then the plan of using the Stone of Nightsong for something else might be valid and could be proposed. But that's the key word, proposed.

Neither the Cloak nor Thjazi tried to TALK to the Sisters of Sylandri, they just stole the object that had a LOT of significance for them.

Instead of asking if they could use it for a ritual they made the decision for them.

It may have had a symbolic use for the Sisters of Sylandri, but it still was theirs to choose what to do with it.

Argument a- is not a good argument against stealing the Stone and using it without their knowledge.

b- It served a greater purpose with the Cloak's plan

The plan of freeing the souls imprisoned by Azgra is a good cause and a great purpose for an object to serve, yes.

But unless I'm missing something here, and do correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't the Stone of Nightsong created for another important purpose: aiding the elves through the path to their afterlife?

[Brennan: "The Stone of Nightsong was an artifact (...) created by a celestial (...) which was basically a celestial servant of Sylandri, which was basically a celestial servant of Sylandri, the shaper of the elves, the goddess of life in the woodland. (...) But for those elves that it did befall, she crafted a stone that their spirits would be brought to peace beyond in the Garden of the Spirit kept for her. But in traveling, there was a realm that they must pass. (...) That passing through the Tenebral Reaches, that there would be a brief night before bright dawn. That brief night, you know, is not very brief. That is the underworld, the realm of the dead. The Stone of Nightsong existed (so) that elves and their immortal spirits need not even touch those ghastly realms, but would be ferried by a spirit of song and night swiftly through the darkness to bright dawn. (...) even in catastrophe, the destruction of their bodies with their immortal souls never have to know hardship or pain. (...) "] ( 4:22:30 - Ep1 )

Are we to say that one afterlife can be sacrificed for the other?

Is what we would ask IF we didn't have some information beforehand:

As far as we know the Stone of Nightsong might have been unable to be used for its intended purpose after Sylandri died, since her afterlife must've been untethered just like the rest.

[ Brennan: "(...) Prior to the Shapers' War, the realm of death was as a shifting veil of shadow, a momentary darkness passed through on the way to the realms of final rest, the halls of the gods. The underworld used to be a metaphysical clearinghouse, a momentary place for souls to travel, and legends of the undead in ages of Aramán past were the stuff of myth and legend. (...) after the Shapers' War, what was a curtain expanded slightly. As the gods were destroyed, their realms of rest vanished. In the worst instances of catastrophe and doom-saying by the population, some believe that they were destroyed and all those eternal souls destroyed due to the hubris of the mortals that rose up against the gods. Others (...) the clerics that have come since that work in theoretical metaphysics (...), believe that the afterlives are still out there, just untethered from Aramán currently. (...) " ] ( 29:00 - Ep2 )

Brennan did say that all the afterlifes were untethered from Aramán, so the Stone of Nightsong maybe wasn't serving its original purpose. At least that's what I understood, if I missed something do correct me. The Stone just has cultural/religious purpose now. In that case, in this context of the Stone not working, argument b- is fair. It would be a question of whether a relic of religious importance has more weight than freeing trapped souls.

And Mara said, and I quote, "We got to do this shit seven times" , so we could guess that they will fix the issue with the elven afterlife as well. That's great!

However, I would guess the Cloak is trying to teather all the Afterlifes almost simultaneously, right? Otherwise... other species would have to wait for them to find all the pieces. Which would be kinda weird to do- But this is something to do with the Cloak as a whole and not mainly Thjazi.

So, back on the topic of Thjazi, why not talk to the elves about it then? If the purpose is much better and noble, why not try to at least talk to them? Convince them to give the Stone. Even if they refused, at least you would've tried something before stealing an object of great importance to their culture. And considering Vaelus' final choice in Ep 31, I don't believe ALL of them would have refused.

The Stone was of great use to free the trapped souls of Vokjan's revolution. I'm not saying they shouldn't have thought of using it, if the Stone was indeed unable to be used for its original purpose then yes, it servers a greater purpose this way. But while we cannot deny that, we shouldn't also deny that they (Thjazi and others) took the choice from the Sisters of Sylandri/elves to participate willingly in this ritual, by just stealing the Stone.

Had they spoken with the Sisters first and then received a refusal as an answer, THEN there would be an argument to be made that Thjazi had to steal the Stone. But neither of those two conditions were met (as far as we've seen).

Even if there was an obvious answer to choose, just like with Vaelus' choice in Ep 31, they do have the rights to have the chance to choose. Afterall, it was an object that reminded them of who they viewed as their mother (even with her wrongness). -> More on this on Ex 3...

I agree with argument b-, this is a justification.

However it's a justification for why they planned to USE the Stone. It still doesn't explain why Thjazi simply STOLE it , before trying out convincing the elves, nor does it invalidate any feelings of loss or hurt Vaelus (and other elves) might feel at such action.

● It's a valid justification for using the Stone, not for the cooldness of forcefully taking the relic and the choice away from them.

c- Said plan was good that it happened (it went great in the end), so it doesn't matter.

Here we'll go to the side B of this example...

Ex 2b: The Theatre (Troupe)

(Or ALL the people at Hallowed Round during the play)

Let's preface this with a small reminder. During the play there people at the Hallowed Round: the Audience, the Theatre Troupe, the Magpies. Azune and Vaelus. And even Thjazi's own family, Halandi, Shadia, Elodie and Taisha.

Now, back to argument c-: (Look! It's a little smile!)

The Cloak wasn't truly sure how the plan was going to play out or if it was going to work out at all. If we pay attention how Mara answers Murray's questioning, Mara says there were concerns from other members of the Cloak for a possible bad conquence, but she also states that the Professor believed there was a possibility of reconnecting the afterlifes to Aramán or anchoring them.

[ Mara: "I work with a group of people that's trying to fix the problem of the Underworld. We're, I work with someone I call the Professor who believed theoretically that it was possible to undo, to find the lost afterlives, to re-anchor them or reroute them to Aramán. And some were worried that that would just dump a bunch of souls into an already packed underworld. And he was of the conviction and the belief that if we could do that, it would be either provide a place for souls that wouldn't let go, to go to an afterlife and get the fuck out of the underworld and be so close to Aramán (...)" (5:03:30 - Ep31) ]

So, we not only have other people inside the organisation concerned about the outcome, but the plan it's based on the belief of their leader that it was theoretically possible to do what they are aiming to do (the overall plan, not the specific "Hallowed Round plan"). A belief that it was theoretically possible. Way too many ifs and maybes for something that can put people at risk.

Not to say that Mara herself said that what happened at the Hallowed Round was a "proof of concept". A trial run to see if it was feasible.

What if it went wrong?

Well: In the cooldown of Ep 31 it was stated by Brennan that, had the ritual gone awry, there wouldn't even be a need for a battle map for the Hallowed Round due to how disastrous it could have ended.

So, this "proof of concept" could have gone terribly terribly WRONG.

I repeat,

Proof. Of. Concept.

Would you dare to put at risk, not only the lives of hundreds of people, but the lives of your own BROTHER and nieces (and ex sisters-in-law) for a proof of concept?

And yes, the magnitude of its possible "bad outcome" probably correlates to the magnitude of the ritual. So, since Thjazi and Mara's plan was to make something much smaller, the possible "bad outcome" might have been not that severe. There's a point to be made there.

But a "bad outcome" was still very much possible, Thjazi might have not put their lives at risk but he was putting them at risk in a way.

One of those risks could be (and is) Hal loosing the deed to the Theatre, afterall the Revolutionary Council had stated that Halandil could use the Hallowed Round but only as long as he protected from any arcane stuff.

[Brennan: "(...) a deed of title granted by the Revolutionary Council, signed off by various and sundry lords and potentates of the city, deeding the dithyramb of Azgra, ancient and forbade, to one Halandil Fang on the condition of his safeguarding it against any arcane shenanigans that might unfold. (...) "] ( 1:48:26 - Ep1 )

There's a possible argument there that Thjazi didn't know the extent of the deal for the deed, since he was waiting for Hal to get it to be able to try the plan. But that raises another point: he had already everything at the ready before Hal even got the deed. Almost like he was taking a couple of things and decisions for granted. But will talk about this in Ex3...

Back to Ex2:

Even if they planned for it to be small, Thjazi had spread the components enough that it could have very possibly got out of hand, which did happen. Someone along the way, uninformed (or otherwise) of the plan unfolding, could've gotten a hand of one of the components and used it in the wrong way. Which, again, did happen.

It happened with The Paint. Shadia didn't know anything about The Paint and so she painted the Theatre just like with any other pigment. There was an enormous quantity of The Paint afterall (it was in more than three amphoras, it was even in crates, plural ), of course she would think it is to be used to paint throughout the Hallowed Round. Which raises an eyebrow, if Thjazi was just planning to do a small portrait... why so much paint?

It happened with the Pariah Blades. Shadia saw them at the Theatre, thought they were props, and used them to promote the play throughout the city.

It happened with the Coffin of Olbalad. Twice. Olgud saw the box of "wigs with extra lice" and took care of it. Of course he would, why would a producer leave that be long enough to cause problems. And so he opened the box.

You could argue that those happened due to the Schemers doing, but the components were spread enough already that someone could have opened it on accident even before.

Which DID HAPPEN in Episode 1, when Thaisha peeked into the box to see what was inside (after it opened when someone mentioned Thimble downstairs). Thjazi had asked her to go get the "box" from Venatus and deliver it to Bolaire, but he apparently didn't mentioned it was dangerous nor, at bare minimum, warned her not to look inside, putting his ex sister-in-law (and Occtis) at risk.

Thjazi was willing to risk putting others in harms way as long as his plan sailed smoothly.

The argument of "But it went great in the end so it doesn't matter" is not only hollow but shows how much they were ignoring (either unknowingly or knowingly) the consequences of the plan going possibly (very) wrong.

The Cloak wasn't truly sure of it from the start. Thjazi didn't have any certainty this particular plan would work. And the consequences would have made the sacrifice of destroying the Stone and all the people of inside the Hallowed Round possibly being harmed (or worse) not only worthles but negative instead. It would have been a loss.

His own family could've died.

And this cannot be argued as just a lack of information or ignorance. Thjazi had tried this before with Mara and back then something had went very wrong with that plan.

[Brennan: " (...) Returning back towards the theater, this was about eight years ago. Getting back towards where you were going to meet Thaz, you heard him yelling at the top of his lungs angry at someone. "Then why wasn't it anchored? Why wasn't it, Mara? Why wasn't it?" (...) "] ( 16:17 - Ep26 )

Thjazi chose to do this whole proof of concept at the Hallowed Round, where his family would be, knowing it could go wrong. Was it carelessness? Was it impulsivity? Was Thjazi on a rush to get things done quickly, so much so that he was willing to out his brother at risk?

I was of the impression that Thjazi could do many awful things, but would never put his brother at risk. Clearly that's not always the case.

And from what Mara herself stated, its not odd for Thjazi Fang to go through a couple of people to get things done.

Sometimes he might potentially hurt them emotionally, others physically, while doing what "has to be done" to get things done.

-> This shows Thjazi's (and as far as we know, the Cloak's as well) mindset being "ends justify the means".

["(...) he would risk 5,000 people if he knew he was saving many, many more. (...) He was a soldier, he understood that sometimes it is in fact a numbers game (...) "] (1:06:15 - Ep27)

-> It doesn't matter what you have to do to achieve your goal, it doesn't matter how many people you have to hurt or use to get there, as long as the goal is a good and noble cause it justifies it. It's worth it. <-

-> What does it matter how I get there if the ending goal is beneficial to us all? <-

Mara said it herself, (5:11:20 - ep31) :

Mara, someone who has seen very closely how Thjazi operates says this. It's even stated as something obvious that's barely worth focusing on in the grand scheme of their plan.

-> It shows Thjazi's behaviour. What he deemed right and ok to do. He was fine with using people for the "greater good".

I don't see any other way to explain his actions without making Thjazi a character with a grey (or even dark grey) moral compass.

You can think this still makes him a flawed hero, but he's still good. He's fighting for a good cause. He's willing to sacrifice himself and his family to save the world, how heroic!

... despite his family not knowing, therefore being unable to choose weather or not to participate. He made the choice, to possibly sacrifice themselves or not, for them.

Something Something, taking the choice away from people, Something

Which leads us to Example 3:

Ex 3: Murray's questioning

[ Murray: "(...) we did not agree to participate in any of this." ]

There were point in the previous examples where we could see Thjazi taking the choice away from others. Murray pointed this out through out Episode 31. Neither the Cloak nor Thjazi had their consent to make them part of this whole plan. Neither the Cloak nor Thjazi had asked them for their consent to do so.

Throughout Murray's questioning in episode 31, Mara was adamant in avoiding two topics: The doors to Faerie closing and her motivations.

[ Murray: "And what was the personal motivation? It's a very noble cause."

Mara: "I'm a noble bitch."

Murray: "I'm sure you are. But everyone has their own motives."

Thimble: "What's yours?"

Murray: "(I'm) Asking her."

Mara: "I'll answer when you do, sweetie pie."(...) ] ( 5:04:45 - Ep 31 )

First, Mara uses Thimble intersection to redirect the question towards Murray, and then the conversation goes somewhere else.

Murray bring back the question, emphasising that they were forced to participate in Mara and Thjazi's whole plan. And what does Mara do? Tell them that's Thjazi's doing, and thus must ask to the man, not her.

[ Murray: "To answer your question, my motivation, and most of the people's motivation here, is because this shit show got dropped into our laps without any type of knowledge or consent in wanting to take part in this. A lot of us are watching our city get commandeered and overrun by a bunch of Sundered House fucks. And we were trying to prevent that. Then all of this shit started spiraling out of control.

Bolaire: "And it has not stopped. This is a breath, but it has not stopped. It is only going to get worse."

Halandil: "A breath."

Murray: "So we did not agree to participate in any of this. So forgive me if I'm being a little pushy in asking what the motivations were around all of this."

Mara: "None of you were supposed to participate in this."

Murray: "Well, I call horse caca on that one. Because you literally just said that he was going to loop in Thaisha, that he was going to loop in Hal, he was already--"

Murray: "Yeah, that's two out of the 12 of ya."

Bolaire: "What about me? What about my participation in all of this? (...) What does that box have to do with me?"

Murray: "Also-- (...) Stealing stones from an ancient religion of sisters."

Thimble: "Sorry about that."

Murray: "Having me move plenty of goods for him through the Penteveral. So yeah, he was kind of looping all of us in."

Mara: "I'm not here to answer for Thjazi's crimes. You saved my life, and I'm very grateful for that. If you want to take it up with the man, talk to your friend's shadow." (...) ] ( 5:06:40 - Ep31 )

You could argue that Mara was throwing Thjazi under the bus to exempt herself of any responsibility. But even then, her participation in it doesn't exempt Thjazi himself either.

If we believe Mara's words to be true, Thjazi made more people participants than the Cloak/Mara actually had agreed upon previously.

If we believe Mara's words aren't fully true, these people in question still were participating unknowingly, so rather than being participants they were being used. And that was still Thjazi's doing, with or without Mara's involvement/agreement.

Thjazi removed the choice from them, by not informing them.

• Thjazi didn't ask the Sisters of Sylandri (nor Vaelus) to participate or asked for the Stone of Nightsong, he just stole it. Therefore, taking the choice away from them and making the choice himself.

• Thjazi didn't ask Bolaire if he could use the coffin (with his sister inside) or for his consent in whatever job he had Bolaire do. He just grabbed coffin and told him (or rather told Thimble to tell Bolaire) what to do. Therefore, taking the choice away from him and making the choice himself.

• Thjazi didn't tell Murray why he had her traffic stuff from the school (objects utilized by the students there, by the way), didn't ask her if he could use that for a ritual, he just did. Therefore, taking the choice away from her and making the choice himself.

But there's even more Murray isn't mentioning.

• Thjazi left the letter about Bolaire for Thimble to give to Murray, possibly pushing Murray (and Thimble since she was the messenger) to take part in a whole other (big) thing she didn't ask for. Therefore, making himself the choice of weather Murray needed to intervene there or not.

• Thjazi left the paints with Bolaire for him to give to Halandil, making both of them participants of the ritual without knowing, therefore without their expressed consent. Therefore, choosing himself whether Hal (and Bolaire) wanted to be his accomplice.

• Thjazi made himself at home in Julien's shadow, without asking the man if that was alright. Wich, of course Julien would say no, so to guarantee his own survival he took the decision himself.

• Thjazi asked Thimble to help him steal the Stone. Without much explanation it appears, due to how Thimble apologises to Vaelus in the last episode for doing so. And even if Thimble would've agreed to help even if Thjazi told her the full truth, he still kept the actual choice from her by not informing her of the full picture. At least that they were going to steal an important object for the Sisters of Sylandri, not just some "random rock".

• Thjazi yanked Julien back inside Obrimjs Manor and attempted to forcefully lead him to where Thimble was to save him. Which was very probable to cause damage to Julien if not his own death. He didn't ask Julien to go help Thimble, or nudge him towards a direction, or give him a "vision" in some way since he is a shadow and as far as we know he cannot speak. He simply made the choice for him.

But despite all of these cases, Thjazi still was, apparently going to give two people the right to choose: Halandil and Taisha.

Oddly enough, his own family and people.

I could point this out as a part of Thjazi's mindset "if you are my people I'll treat you as such, if aren't my people you can be used". But the way Mara and Brennan described how Thjazi intendeed to talk to both of them (Hal and Taisha) is making me doubt even that.

From what Mara herself said, he wasn't truly planning to tell Taisha what to use the Pariah Blades for. You know, an important object of great significance to, not only the Lloys, but the orcs if not everyone in Aramán (since the murder of the Shaper of Destruction is what inspired the others to rebell against their Shapers).

[ Mara: "We're trying to line 'em all up. Look, the plan was, we went to the Font of Gavzidra. Thjazi, I did the Druidcraft and Thjazi dove in and found the font and brought it back. And we worked with a lady here in town to, that was one piece. Thjazi was planning on talking to you (Taisha) about calling back one of your swords." (...) "] ( 5:05:20 - Ep31 )

Talking about calling back one of the swords is not the same as talking to her about the plan. Afterall, it was apparently common of Thjazi to ask for things without explaining why. You could argue that conversation would involve that explanation, but do we truly know? Mara phrased it in an oddly specific way.

And with Halandil he... Here's the thing, what Mara says is said in such a way the of course it seems like Thjazi was going to tell him everything. And I understood that from what she said. That Thjazi was planning to tell Hal everything, but he got arrested before he could.

But upon rewatch, is what Brennan says later what makes me suspect Thjazi might have not intended to do so.

[ Mara: "And Hal, he was planning on talking to you."

Hal: "Well, despite being a shadow of his former self, he managed to leave the breadcrumbs out for the lot of us to stumble onto the answer."

Mara: "He told me that he didn't want to say nothing to you until-- He knew that the Round was a place that it could work, but he didn't want to ask until he, you know, it wasn't a sure thing you were even going to get it. And there were other options, worse options, but there were other places that we could try."

Brennan: Hal, you remember that Thjazi got arrested a day and a half after the deed cleared.

Liam: I do. (...) " ] ( 5:05:56 - Ep 31 )

Maybe I'm misunderstanding this... but a day an a half is both too little and enough time to tell your brother something.

Maybe Thjazi was in hiding, and thus couldn't walk so nilly willy up to Hal's house to talk to him. But there was the Hallowed Round, which we've seen even the Seekers enter, from the Tintazi woods, without being detected. So there's that option.

So he theoretically had a place and a whole day to tell his brother. And yet... didn't. Why? The deed was already cleared. Thjazi knew Hal would be in possession of the Hallowed Round for him to use for the ritual. So why not talk to him?

He didn't seem anxious to tell him either at his execution (before he saw Mara and knew the plan got off the rails). And we cannot argue he was planning on telling Hal himself after he escaped because the plan was to get Thjazi out of the city quick and fast, without making a stop. I would argue he maybe planned to send someone to send Halandil a message... but that may be a stretch.

As far as Thjazi knew (again, before he saw Mara flying above him) the plan at the Hallowed Round was in the workings and was going to happen. He had delivered Bolaire the paints to give to Hal the same day of the the execution (maybe it was Tsu'lrekshi the one to deliver them but it would've been still unfer Thjazi's request). Thimble had the Stone of Nightsong. The only thing missing was one of the Pariah Blades, but he could always send someone to ask Taisha for them or ask Taisha herself once he escaped. And again, it was one out of three items missing, and he had Bolaire as someone with enough power to smuggle the blades for him (is not like he hasn't made Bolaire smugle stuff from the museum before).

So why not tell Halandil in that day and a half he had worth of time? Not telling him before was a way of protecting him, sure, but if Thjazi planned to use the Hallowed Round, if he had everything already set for the place to be used, then why not tell him?

And that's another point.

• He was going to involve not only Hal but many others due to his decision to use the Hallowed Round.

And I'm not saying they shouldn't have used it for the ritual, but why not inform anyone that might be there at least?

Hal raised a valid point of concern before his meeting with the Photarc:

[ Halandil: "Maybe the blood is angel blood, and maybe the blood is orcs' blood, and maybe Tachonis is coming back and maybe he's not. And maybe this is their plan and maybe it's not. How do I risk 5,000 people's lives?"

Murray: "I mean, we could cancel the play and see what they do. How they react would be a pretty big indicator, don't you think?"

Halandil: "What's the alternative?"

Azune: "I think, Hal, you should ask yourself, and I'm sorry to remind you of your brother who kept so much from you, but why would your brother risk 5,000 people?" (...) ] ( 1:05:28 - Ep27 )

At that point Hal doesn't know wether the plan has risks or not. How could he knowingly and willingly risk the 5,000 lives of everyone at the Hallowed Round during the play? The of the audience, the lives of his troupe, the lives of his family.

And therefore I pass this question unto Thjazi, how could he willingly risk all of those people without even asking for their expressed consent and permission? How could be willing to do so without even informing them before hand?

Because at the end of the day Thjazi was a soldier, and isn't war sometimes compared to a game of chess? You might be willing to sacrifice your bishop, or even your Queen, if it means winning the game.

[ Bolaire: "Kindly, and with as much respect for the man as I can muster, he would risk 5,000 people if he knew he was saving many, many more."

Azune: "He would."

Bolaire: "He was a soldier, he understood that sometimes it is in fact a numbers game."(...) ] (1:06:10 - Ep27)

Thjazi is willing to do such a thing. To use someone, make someone participate in his plans, ask repeatedly stuff from them. To even make that choice for them. To push them in one direction or the other while keeping them in the dark about the chess board Thjazi has put them in.

Again, I'm not saying he did it out of malice. He might have viewed it as a necessity or something of the sort. He might have even been aware it wasn't a good thing to do. But at the en of the day, he did in fact do it anyways.

And I don't think theres a way to explain this without portraying Thjazi's moral compass as grey (at bare minimum).

[Murray: "(...) we did not agree to participate in any of this. (...) " ] (5:07:10 - Ep31)

Thjazi, by avoiding telling (some of) them the truth, by avoiding informing them, he took away the choice from them. For how could they possibly truly choose without knowing what they're choosing?

But avoiding a conversation is not only way to strip someone the choice they have the right to make. Lying is another way of doing such a thing.

And sometimes, the choice gets made anyways. Sometimes, by trying to avoid others from making such choice, by using them as pawns, they get pushed in a certain direction.

Sub ex: Casimir and Cyd

Let's start with Casimir, shall we?

No, I'm not going to defend Casimir. His actions cannot be justified by what I'm about to say. It gives him a cause, yes, but yet again cause ≠ justification. Now. Focus!

"How long was I supposed to wait?" Is the question Casimir asks Thimble.

Casimir expressed his displeasure with the fact that Thjazi told him to wait, many times. To wait until it was all over. To wait barely making ends meet. To wait and trust in his word, without much else but a vague promise to go with. To wait and trust in the process. To wait, and wait, and wait...

Thjazi asked a lot of him and in return Casimir was given promises of what will happen after it was all over, promises to be fulfilled at a horizon that seemed more and more far away the more time passed.

And the more and more time passed, the more Casimir's trust in Thjazi wore thin. He kept being given promises, to told to hold on and wait. His suffering would be worth it in the end.

But the "new dawn" never came. He was convinced to join the rebellion, convinced into "that life", yet the promise he was given to be convinced never became a reality.

And waiting in the precarious living situation he was in, in the dark about the exact reason, took a toll on him.

And we don't have to take Casimir's word for it. Talcydimir Pridesire himself said it:

[Cyd: "(...) so I knew that they were in on whatever happened to Thjazi and Casimir was the weak link in the plan, so that's where they hit, and they gave him all the money he needed to turn his back on us and this cause... I mean, he was always weak, you know? The city was getting to him. Thjazi asked a lot of us, not more than he was willing to give himself, but I was living on a cab driver's salary (...) " (2:00:54 - Ep28) ]

Cyd himself admits Thjazi asked a lot of them. Not more than Thjazi was willing to give himself, but it still was a lot. Cyd was living with what I assume is barely minimum wage in Aramán (if it even is). He was a really important asset to Thjazi and the Cloaks plans, and yet Cyd wasn't given economical help outside of what he could gain as a cab driver.

[ Cyd: "(...) I mean, I was Thjazi's eyes and ears in the Revolutionary Council. You know, I was a cab driver. I was driving carriages for the Grey Tower. I-- (...) "] ( 1:58:06 - Ep28 )

And yes, Thjazi probably didn't have much economical power himself to fully support Cyd. But neither did the Schemers, not really. They had the blank check from the Cormorays, which was a one time retrieve of money and couldn't be abused either (lest the Cormorays know), but besides that they didn't really have much else to support an entire web of spies.

What did they do then? They brought support from other people willing to help.

• Elodie bought and gave them the food, and so the Schemers were able to stop the magpies from starving.

• Orus Blade, gave them the empty warehouses, and so the Schemers were able to stop the magpies from going/being homeless.

You cannot expect to make and support a revolution without a collective help.

Thjazi never tried to use his web of connections for his Falconers. No matter how noble is the cause, if you have your man starving for you, they will eventually turn on you or die helping you.

Cyd stated that Thjazi never asked of them (his fellow Falconers) something he wasn't willing to give himself. But that's the thing, you may willing to give up something someone else might not be. You might be willing to wait for something important of yours to be resolved, but others may not. You may be willing to live barely making ends meat to preserve a job that lets you spy on others, but others may not.

You may be willing to make the hard choice of sacrificing or using people, but others might not. That depends from person to person.

Cyd was told to wait aswell, when he told Thjazi about his unknown power.

[ Cyd: "I had this thing in me. I started to be able to see fairies and demons and it was like something was coming back that, you know, there had always been pieces during the Rebellion, but not like this. Something pushing out and-- I looked through and I said to Thjazi, 'I think there's something here,' and he said, 'We're going.' He said, 'When this is all taken care of,' he says, 'I'm going to get you and Teor. 'I'm going to find a way for us to explore this, 'but for right now, the Council.' You know, he saw parts of the tapestry that I couldn't see and he said it was safer for me not to see it, and I-- (...) "] (2:01:50 - Ep28)

Thjazi didn't tell Cyd (nor any of his men for the likes of it) what or why. Not only that, he told him it was better if he didn't know. Sure, it was a way to keep him safe.

But how long would you be willing to keep a job/lifestyle that's starving you, making you miserable, to be a useful asset for a cause that's not truly explained to you?

Cyd pointedly never says that Casimir didn't ask for help, nor does he prove untrue Casimir's words about being given unfulfilled promises in exchange for waiting in line like a soldier. There's no "Had he told Thjazi" nor "Had he asked Thjazi for help". Casimir was just a weak link, the city was getting to him, and Thjazi asked a lot of them. And that's that.

Thjazi had them as their man in the inside, undercover soldiers, spies, etc. But he didn't treat them as anything beyond that. Again, chess pieces. You may care if your knight piece might get eliminated, but you only care superficially, your true concern is how that might affect your game.

We can see the comment he made to Azune reflected here,

[ Azune: "I'll do whatever it takes."

Brennan: (Thjazi) Looks down.

Thjazi: "It's going to take a lot of us feeling that same way. (...)" ] ( 1:12:50 - Ep19 )

It's going to take a lot of the Falconers, soldiers, or people in general, to be willing to do anything to win the rebellion. Whatever means necessary to achieve an end. Even if they have to suffer through it.

Cyd even admits they were kept in the dark about the whys of the tasks they were given, beyond "it will help the rebellion". But the only difference between him and Casimir is that Cyd kept trusting Thjazi blindly while Casimir lost faith in the man.

At the end of the day Casimir made his choice to betray Thjazi in an awful way. But it's curious seeing such a change in someone who at the Falconers Rebellion was willing to put his own life at risk to save Thjazi.

What happened that changed him from a man fighting for a Rebellion to the screeching mess we've seen him as back in Sloak?

What happened that changed him from someone who smiled while saving Thjazi to someone that smiled as he sold Thjazi's life?

[ Brennan: "(...) A shape runs towards Thjazi's body, and at the last moment you see gets two arms underneath it, lifts up his body, throws it on his shoulder and (grunts) rushes forward as fast as he can, thundering with heavy boots, drops into the trench right in front of you, saving Thjazi from the oncoming barrage of these flying wyverns. As you return from the sorcerer as Loza calls to fall back, the face (grunts) lifts him up, looks at you. Casimir smiles.

Casimir: "I got him. Let's fall back." (...) " ] ( 00:10:43 -Ep 2 )

It does look like Thjazi's choices to keep them in the dark, to keep them following after the carrot on the stick while suffering their way through the end, pushed Casimir to betray him.

Remove someone's choice one too many times, use some one too many times, and they might make their own choice in betraying you.

Point of O.: Julien

⚠️ You can skip this segment if you deem it extra. This is just something that I think is interesting to point out. ⚠️

We don't fully know what happened between Julien and Thjazi. We don't fully know why Julien hates Thjazi. There may be some pettiness, and there may be some childish rivalry there. Maybe. We don't have the full details.

But I would like to raise some of the comments Julien made about the man for consideration.

Why? Because I do consider that by now Julien, while he has his flaws like anybody else, has proven to be a person with some noble qualities. And I'm NOT taking about his nobeliary title.

Julien has shown to refuse to make promises he cannot keep (ex, with his mother), he has shown to care (in his own way) for those he calls companions or fellow brothers-in-arms (ex the seekers). And yes, he might be an asshole in some moments, petty even, but with those that have shown him care and/or respect he doesn't attempt to disrespect them in return.

The only times we have seen him being actively disrespectful (not just having a bit "of an attitude" or being "sassy") were with people that aren't, in his eyes, noble (again, not talking about nobility).

We have seen him be disrespectful (and murderous) towards the Tachonis, and we can all agree most of them don't really have ethics and possess skewed morals. We have seen him be respectful towards his students or fellow comrades at the Barrowguards.

So when he is being actively hostile towards Thjazi, it should raise an eyebrow. What is going on there?

Why would Julien dislike Thjazi so much to the point of spitting on his corpse? Well, from what we were shown thus far, it must be because Julien sees Thjazi as someone lacking a noble moral code or with a skewed moral compass.

Again, not saying Julien is the epitome of nobility nor anything of the sort. He still has his flaws that need to be adressed (if he doesn't help Ingrid in some way I will be very furious at him-). But he has shown to only be actively hostile to a certain type of person, therefore it makes one wonder wether Thjazi, from Julien's perspective, falls on that category or not.

But, if that's the case, why would Julien be the only one to see him in such light? Not even Julien's father views Thjazi in such bad light.

Well, I think the answer is pretty simple. Thjazi has a charisma stat of 20- No... But also yes.

Julien said it himself, Thjazi is charismatic. And charisma can make some people ignore his wrong doings, trust his words, view something that happened through the lens of his version of the story.

Charisma has proven to be a powerful tool time and time again. We have the first schemers table as an example. Or Wicander at the reunion with his grandmother in the Convergance. Charisma can save you from even death.

And even outside the world of DnD, in real life people have shown that "charisma" can get even the masses to believe the craziest of things or "facts". Take a look at any leader of a hate-filled organisation that can get other people to view the world in a twisted way (homophobic, racist, misogynistic, etc).

Or anyone from a good cause as well, being able to rally people into a good cause by convincing them to fight for it. Charisma isn't necessarily bad.

All this to say, even if others view Thjazi as friendly or heroic, it could easily be what Thjazi decided to show them/make them believe on that version of himself.

[Julien: "You all have been tricked by a person with endless charisma and cult-like personality." (4:56:50 - Ep31) ]

-> From a meta perspective: Considering Julien ended up being someone different from the way others viewed him as (from just an asshole to someone with a temperament but noble), I wouldn't be so quick to discard the possibility of the same thing happening with Thjazi but in reverse (from being a heroic martyr of the revolution to a morally grey/dark grey leader).

But why does Julien see Thjazi as a man who lacks any honour?

Well, we get a glimpse of the why in Julien's conversation with his father in episode 2:

[ Raymond: "Is there anything you heard at the Farramh of Thjazi Fang, yesterday when you attended in escort of the Lady Aranessa?"

Julien: "A lot of tears. Some old war stories. You know. People that have a very strong opinion of this man. You know about him. Surprised you weren't there, for how well you were two friends, huh? Right? Storied history. So gracious. Two of you, thick as thieves for so long."

Raymond: "Thjazi Fang saved your cousin's life at the end of the War of Axe and Vine. It was a tragedy and a heartbreak It was a tragedy and a heartbreak that he ended up on the other side of the Falconer's Rebellion."

Julien: "Every man makes their choices. I'm sorry that I was the consequence of his."

Raymond: "My hope for you at the funeral, having spoken to the Lady Aranessa of what unfolded there, is that you see what it means to live a life of honor."

Juliem: "To answer your first question, Father, from what I saw, this party was not a man who had dabbled much in honor in many years. There are things-- (sighs) I hope Aranessa got what she needed out of it. She deserves at least some closure for what he did to her."

Julien: "I have never understood your hatred for Thjazi. You did what you did, you neglected my orders, disobeyed my commands, rode off and captured the hero of the Torn Banner. Made a name for yourself. Brought him in, delivered him to Tachonis, Halovar, the others. You got your glory, and it's like you hate him for it. Why?"

Matt: He sits a minute, clenching his jaw even tighter before he, without making eye contact with his father:

Julien: "Do you know how much of your golden path I was set up for? To have you turn away and throw our entire house's name and-- For friendship with that man. The glory was mine, yes, but you? You sullied everything. So I don't forgive him for what he did to you. As much as I don't forgive him for what he did to Aranessa."

Raymond: "Men do make their own choices, and maybe one day, you will take an interest in why they make those choices." (...) "] (3:05:20 - Ep 2)

Julien dislikes/hates Thjazi for something he did to his father and Aranessa. Now, maybe that's because Thjazi attempted a revolution against the Sundred Houses, which did include the Royce. Maybe that's the betrayal Julien speaks of.

But considering how easy going (to Julien's standards) he is with Teor, after being informed they fought on opposite sides of the Falconer's Rebellion, I'm not sure if that's the case. Yes Thjazi was Aranessa's husband, so leading a rebellion against the group of houses she forms part of could have been what Julien views as a wrongdoing.

But there's something odd in the way Julien keeps cutting himself off while he explains himself.

"(...) was not a man who had dabbled much in honor in many years. There are things-- (sighs) I hope Aranessa got what she needed out of it. She deserves at least some closure for what he did to her (...)"

There are things that what Julien?

He cuts himself off here and ends abruptly his train of thought by pointing out again "what he did to her".

If it was about his rebellion against the Sundred Houses I don't believe Julien would have tipped toed around the subject, twice. He has shown to be very vocal and open to confrontation with his father, just a few minutes earlier Raymond barely contains himself from hitting Julien after he answers teenage-like way. So Julien is not unwilling to go against his father, he did went to catch Thjazi against his father's orders afterall.

"(...) To have you turn away and throw our entire house's name and-- For friendship with that man. The glory was mine, yes, but you? You sullied everything. So I don't forgive him for what he did to you. As much as I don't forgive him for what he did to Aranessa (...) "

And what, Julien?

Again, he cuts himself off and points out again "what he (Thjazi) did" to both Raymond and Aranessa. But he oddly separates both things.

If his hatred towards Thjazi was just about the rebellion, then it would have been the same what for both Raymond and Aranessa. It would have been "he betrayed you and he betrayed her", but it's still the same thing. But its talked separately, which makes one assume maybe Julien had been thinking of two different (or somewhat different things) when talking.

I'll add the continuation of this thought in an extra post, since we would be getting into (deep) theory territory.

[Click here to read that side post]

Besides all this, I'm just adding this Point of Observation, as I decided to call it, as something to keep an eye on. Not necessarily a sustancial segment, but it might become so in the future.

The Mask: Bolaire

[ Bolaire: " (...) Do you remember the day I met your brother at your house? " ]

Thjazi's treatment towards Bolaire is the most clear example of all the points I've been laying out before. Here we have: depersonalization/objectification, the ends justify the means, removal of choice.

There are many possible ways one could try to justify Thjazi's actions to attempt to portray him as something outside a morally grey character, but most of them get disproven by the previous arguments I've made. (So if you just jumped to this section, I would suggest reading the other examples)

Let's start, just like I did with Azune's section, making a brief summary of what we know of Bolaire's history before he met Thjazi Fang.

71 years ago Bolaire was created. A god-destroying weapong in the shape of a Mask. The Mask performed a play alongside other Masks, with the goal of defeating the Shaper of Trickery. Once that play was done the theater were it ocurred was destroyed and the Masks were lost alongside the story they told. One of said Masks, that we will later come to know as Bolaire, was found. The Mask was used, as the weapon it was created as, and then put to sleep once more. The Mask only came "alive" when it was being used and then slept when put back in a box. Over and over again this cycle repeated. At some point, a scout squad of the Falconer's Rebellion got the Mask (either bought it, found it, given as a gift we do not know it yet). They kept the cycle ongoing, using the Mask and then putting it back to sleep. Until one day, while the Mask was being used, a play was performed for the Mask to see. The play spoke about tale of the defeat of the Trickster Shaper, and despite the story told being false, it inspired the Mask. A play had made him and now a play had awaken him anew. And so Bolaire decided to be his own person, as much as the limitations of hid nature would allow him. He took charge of the body of the man using him, promising in exchange to help with the cause, with the Rebellion, just like they would have used him for regardless, and killed the rest of the group to escape. Many years later, in a city named Dol-Makjar, a play of an orchish bard would finish Bolaire's transformation. Bolaire could be content, with a job at the museum of the city and a blooming friendship with said bard. He could leave all traces of his past existence behind, hidden so he could never be used and stripped of his personhood again. Bolaire began to live a life of his own, as truthfully as he could.

And then Bolaire met Thjazi at Halandil's house. And all that he had built shattered under the actions of one man. The brother of his best friend.

[ Bolaire: "(sighs) One week after I met your brother at your home, Thimble arrived at the museum with a letter. (sighs) Your brother had discovered things about me that could get me, I'd say put away, but that sounds like I'd done something. He knew things about me that were, if put out into the open would've made my life if not difficult, unbearable. He told me I had to work for him, and he forced me to start stealing from this library for him, for other people. He told me if I told you any of this, that would be the end of me. (...) " ] (3:52:45 - Ep4)

Thjazi went to his brother's house and met a very close friend of his (if not the closest). He found out (either discovered on accident or looked for that information purposefully) that Bolaire was one of the Masks of the Panto. A weapong designed to kill a good.

What did Thjazi do with that information? Used it to his advantage, and got himself a man inside the Archanade, via blackmail, and had (forced) him steal objects for him.

Without even focusing on Bolaire himself there's already two issues with this:

First af all, the Archanade being stolen.

I don't think it's necessary to go into detail as to why the museum of the city being stolen is bad. And considering that some of the things in that museum are so dangerous that a lot of the curators have been harmed by them, it's even more concerning.

We could guess that Thjazi wanted to have access to the museum's artifacts due to his connection with the Cloak. But again, to argue that their good cause justifies blackmailing and stealing, is not the way to go. Even more if we consider the danger of any of those artefacts falling on the wrong hands, which Thjazi has proven some of his actions can lead to such outcome.

Second of all, Halandil involvement in this.

There's an argument to be made that he might have been scared of Bolaire, scared that he would harm his brorher. But if that was the case, why not threaten him to stay away from Hal?

Thjazi blackmailed Bolaire by threatening to expose him and ruin him over, which in Bolaire's case could mean being put away again, being put to sleep (dying in a way).

Thjazi specifically told him not to tell Halandil, and we could argue this was to protect Hal. And it probably was. But we can only make a case for said argument specifically for Thjazi telling Bolaire to lie to Hal. The argument doesn't work for the whole: forcing him to steal from the museum for him.

And even when you argue it was in part to protect Hal, that is put to question. Why? Because Thjazi used Bolaire's relationship with his brother as blackmail. In other words, using his own brother to keep a god-destroying weapong under his thumb.

If you truly are afraid of someone hurting your brother, would you use the close relationship they have as a threat to keep that someone working for you? Would you risk that someone harming him in retaliation for you doing that? Wouldn't you rather tell/threaten that someone to stay away from your bother?

I'm not doubting that Thjazi protected Hal from many things, but in this case there was clearly something that weighted more for him.

He put Hal in risk, just like in ex 2. Even if he thought that in a way he was protecting his brother. "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" and all that stuff.

But that's in regards to Halandil and th Archanade itself. What about Bolaire?

Well, Bolaire had built a life of his own. A personhood of his own, finding a new way to appreciate theater and a job he liked. He had managed to run a way from a life where due to his very own nature he was used like just any other tool. Only for Thjazi to discover the secret and use it to pressure Bolaire into stealing stuff for him.

-> Thjazi once more, saw an opportunity to further his and the Cloak's plans and took it. Regardless of the harm it may cause.

I would say it may be similar to Vaelus' case, she (and the Sisters of Sylandri) was harmed due to Thjazi's actions. That Thjazi saw it as a means to an end. Nothing personal, just business.

We could, then, make the same argument that that sort of mindset shows a morally grey compass and everything said in Ex2. And that would be all.

...

However that's not the case, is it? At least not wholly. That's not where it ends:

[Bolaire: "(sighs) Your brother was a very complicated man. Many people I've heard have said many things about him. But he could also be very cruel and hateful. He was not kind to me to the bitter end, and I did not deserve it. Any sins that I have would pale in comparison to the things that I have done for him or the things I have seen him do. (...) "] (3:55:00 - Ep4)

Bolaire here describes Thjazi's actions not as just cruel or hurtful, but hateful. Hate marks a difference here. Hate is more personal. It implies an emotional context paired with his actions. It implies some intention emotionally based.

So while in previous Examples we could see Thjazi's actions are not malicious/ill intended, in this one there's a certain emotionally charged side tied to it. An emotionally negative motivator.

But it's not Hate per se. It's disdain.

[ Bolaire: " (...) He has compromised every level of my life that I was very happy with and just treated me with more disdain than I can possibly express. And it has broken my heart that I've had to sit here and think about that in front of you for so long. (...) " ] (3:54:27 - Ep4)

Disdain can be similar to Hate, but its not the same.

[ Disdain (noun): 1- the feeling of not liking someone or something and thinking that they do not deserve your interest or respect; 2- dislike of someone or something that you feel does not deserve your interest or respect.] (Cambridge Dictionary)

[Disdain (noun): the feeling that somebody/something is not good enough to deserve your respect or attention.] (Oxford Dictionary)

Disdain implies contempt or a feeling of disrespect for someone or something regarded as unworthy (of respect), while hate involves a stronger aversion.

But disdain due to what?

If Thjazi feared Bolaire he wouldn't have expressed disdain, it would be an odd combination fearing something and viewing it as not-good-enough to be respected at the same time. He wouldn't have done hateful actions so openly that Bolaire might caught on and retaliate, considering Bolaire kept being in close contact with his brother. He would be risking putting Hal (and others) in danger if that was truly his point of view.

So then why?

Well, maybe Thjazi disliked Bolaire due to his perception of him. Maybe Thjazi viewed Bolaire as a bad person, therefore unworthy of respect. Maybe in Thjazi's eyes he was harming a bad person, so to him it doesn't matter.

But as far as we've seen, at least since he's been in Dol-Makjar, Bolaire has been using the bodies of bad people. So he would be applying the same reasoning as Thjazi would in this argument: "bad people deserve to be harmed". Which in that case, if we argue Thjazi's actions cannot qualify him as a bad person because he was harming a bad person, then Bolaire wouldn't be able to fit in that chategory either, since he was harming other bad people himself. Therefore, Thjazi wouldn't be harming a bad person but a "vigilante "of sorts (since Bolaire would be innacting justice his own way), which is what (if this was his actual perspective) Thjazi himself would be acting as with the whole "justice by my own hand". A bit of a hypocrite. The moment it applies on Thjazi's favour it applies on Bolaire's favour as well, and the whole argument crumbles because it wouldn't apply to Thjazi anymore.

Therefore, Thjazi's actions cannot be supported with this argument if your goal is to portray them in a good light.

You could try to counter argue this by saying "What about Bolaire's actions before Dol-Makjar? What about the bodies he used back then? " And to that I have three arguments (or counter counter arguments) to be made, if we follow the mindset of "harming people that harm others is ok":

1- This is speculation.

We don't have confirmation from any source of what type of people Bolaire chose after Castep eventually died (we don't even know how Castep died). We don't know if he used criminals or not before Dol-Makjar, we can only guess for now. As far we know Bolaire might as well have started a carrier as a ballerina during that time (I'm of course joking, I know we have bits that show he was not doing this. Hey! it was a joke-)

2- If you are specifically referring to Castep and his troup of clandestine scouts, that doesn't work either.

• Yes, Bolaire killed the troupe. And yes, he took possession of Castep's body. But the troupe was using him, so he was killing his captors in a way. Or are we ignoring that he was being actively and constantly used by that time? Sure, he was viewed as a weapon and nothing else, and until then he was. But once he became self-aware the troupe use of him stops being qualified as "the use of an object" and starts qualifying as "the use of a person that's coming into being", which can count as ensalvement in a way.

We can make excuses for using an object but the moment Bolaire starts becoming self-aware this excuses stop having steady ground. Sure, we can say the troupe and Castep didn't know that the Mask they found had sentience, so they can't be held accountable for using Bolaire-

[ Brennan: "(...) You are grabbed and pulled back by one of the soldiers.

Soldier: "What are you doing?"

Bolaire: "It's a very good play."

Soldier: "What do you mean it's a very-- You're a fucking weapon!"

Bolaire: "No, he's (Castep) enjoying it so much. I was just letting-- I was letting him through. He seems to want to watch."

Soldier: "What does it mean if the mask is watching the play? Is that it's a good play? It's supposed to just be-- I don't like it. Magic masks should just give you the fucking spells, not have a whole fucking personality!"

Brennan: And another one of them says,

Soldier: "I don't like this, making Castep watch the play. We should take the mask off and put it away."

Brennan: And you see that they say,

Soldiers: "All right, we'll take the mask off if we need to. Let's go get the box. (...) "] (00:08:30 - Ep 13)

... I think they saw the signs.

You can argue they were scared of the prospect of the weapon being self-aware, but let's be careful thinking someone can justify certain wrongdoings or actions because they are scared of something. That's a double edged sword. Careful now.

• Yes, Bolaire took away Castep's body. Maybe Castep was a "good man". But, first of all, this is, again speculation. Castep may have been fighting for the Falconer's Rebellion but that doesn't mean he is necessarily a good person. He may do so in self interest. Second of all, even if he was "good", he still was Bolaire's captor in a way and he still used Bolaire. And third of all, if the "good" about Castep is him fighting for the rebellion, Bolaire kept Castep's work as a soldier in the rebellion, if anything he kept doing what he was going to be used for.

[ Brennan: "(...) Bolaire, elsewhere in the camp, your host's companions are gathering. What do you do in this moment?

Bolaire: I tell the man who I'm wearing that I apologize, but he can't come out ever again. I've had a change of heart. Then in return, I will fight for his cause. They have me for the duration, but the situation has changed. And I'm going to start over, and I'm going to be a better story, and I'm going to be kind, and I'm going to be clever, and I'm going to be myself, whoever that is. But first, I think I'm going to have to kill all these people in their sleep. (...) " ] (00:17:01 - Ep 13)

Yes, it's still an awful thing to kill someone in their sleep or take possession of one of their bodies. I won't argue against that. Maybe there was an alternative, but to convince a bunch of people that jump to denfensiveness the moment you give a sign of being alive requires an important amount of maturity and wisdom. Which it does lead to the third point:

[ Bolaire: "(sighs) It's been difficult. I have been serving my current master. I have been serving my current master. The man who owns me is a soldier, and we are fighting for freedom, which is what I do. I'm tired, but I don't know I'm tired. It's been so many battles over the last 59 years. It's just another war. (...) " ] (00:43:00 - Ep 13)

3- Bolaire was just starting to become self-aware. In a way, he was like a kid.

All he knew for 59 years was war. How to war. So, it's no surprising that the "new-born" self-aware being previously used as a weapon results to violence to escape imprisonment.

Does it justify it? No. A bad action is still a bad action. But neither does it justify the clandestine troupe's actions.

Nor Thjazi's.

If we aim to portray Thjazi as a morally good/light grey character then let's see what such perspective would think of this. From a purely stric morally good perspective: bad actions don't justify another bad action to be made.

Even if Thjazi somehow discovered what happened to that clandestine group (which considering Bolaire states he brunt all the evidence he wouldn't be able to know, he just would be able to take a guess), the argument "Maybe in Thjazi's eyes he was harming a bad person, so to him it was justified" still doesn't trully apply. Because if it applies against Bolaire due to him killing the scouts (despite there being a point to be made of him being way too inmature/newly-"born", as in coming into awareness, to have other tools to escape his "inslavement"), then from that perspective, the clandestine scouts were also "bad people", because they were using Bolaire. The argument "but they didn't know Bolaire was a person" wouldn't be enought to justify them, even more considering they were shown to be aware that Bolaire was at least showing signs of having a personhood/personality.

Therefore, again, Thjazi wouldn't be harming a "bad person" but a victim that attacked those that harmed them. Therefore, Thjazi's actions cannot be supported with this argument if your goal is to portray them in a good light.

You could try to keep the argument of "Thjazi viewing Bolaire as bad and therefore seeing himself as in the right to hurt him" by saying that using people is bad regardless of who they are as a person (that even if you use a bad individual, using them is still bad), and therefore Bolaire counts as a bad person for possession of other people's bodies. But again, it would fall back on Thjazi as well, a man that has been shown and described to use (and abuse) people. And then that argument can be utilised to justify Thjazi getting executed, for example. Which is a bit much, let's not use that double edge sword without proper gloves, please.

Again, I'm trying to propose an analysis of Thjazi's character not Bolaire's. So the focus on this essay is on Thjazi.

The only way we can try to use this argument of "Thjazi viewed Bolaire as bad and therefore saw himself as in the right to hurt him" and excuse it, is if we and Thjazi ignore Bolaire's whole personhood. Is if we view Bolaire purely as an object. A thing that's inherently evil and dangerous. Which... has two major problems:

• If we view Bolaire as an object, then he cannot be held accountable for any of his actions because they wouldn't be "his" actions to begin with. If you burn your fingers on the stove you cannot seriously accuse the stove of attempted murder. Therefore if you hurt it and excuse it with the argument of "bad people deserve to be harmed" it doesn't work because you are not viewing the stove as a person to begin with. The argument would change to "bad behaving objects deserve to be punished". Different argument. And even in said argument you are assigning an object some sort of personality, otherwise you cannot say you are "punishing" it.

• Removing Bolaire's personhood is not only a BAD thing to do, but would also be cutting off the information and proof that doesn't favour a certain conclusion, just so we can fit a version of the story that doesn't portray Thjazi badly. We would be stripping the story of essential parts of it, and twisting it knto a completely different tale that the one being told. Which would be lying, something that defeats the purpose of any analysis. And I am aiming to do an analysis, so let's not do that with Bolaire or the other characters.

However, while we cannot remove Bolaire's personhood if we want to keep an actual debate about Thjazi, it doesn't mean a certain character in the story hasn't done so already.

Which brings us back to the question,

Why did Thjazi hate him?

[ Murray: "None of that explains why he hated you."

Bolaire: "He didn't hate me. He thought I was a thing. He had no compulsion about treating me as--"

Azune: "You were useful to him? "

Bolaire: "I was useful and I wasn't real." ] ( 4:08:55 - Ep4 )

Then perhaps, Thjazi felt disdain because he viewed Bolaire as an object that doesn't behave properly. A tool that doesn't work when it should.

Like old school TVs that failed to catch the signal and so you would hit it until it worked. It's an object, it cannot be harmed, only people can be harmed. It's an object, it should be working as intended, only people can choose what to do.

From this perspective, we don't even need to ask ourselves in which way Thjazi might have justified blackmailing Bolaire. If he didn't viewed him as a person, what he did cannot be counted as blackmail. You cannot blackmail an object.

This brings forth another thing about Thjazi that was pointed out in a previous segment: depersonalization/objectification.

[ Bolaire: "Are we to trust Thjazi? "

Thimble: "I always have."

Bolaire: "Very well, then. I belong to you. I am your weapon. What would you have me do?"

Thimble: "Bolaire."

Bolaire: "What did he used to say? (sighs) "Thimble, please tell it what to do next." What would you have me do? If I don't belong to you, I belong to his brother."

Thimble: "Bolaire."

Bolaire: "Yes?"

Thimble: "You don't belong to anyone. And you know that."

Bolaire: "Are you saying that Thjazi was wrong? Are you saying that his notion of what I am was incorrect? Did you ever tell him that? And I'm very good at telling when someone's lying." (...) ] ( 5:41:51 - Ep31 )

-> Thjazi treated Bolaire as a thing. He stripped Bolaire of his personhood, referred to him as an it, and reduced him to a tool.

We cannot argue that this statement is false for a couple of reasons. But the main two are:

Thimble didn't deny what Bolaire said. She accepted it.

Bolaire expressed this again in the quoted scene above infront of Thimble. Who did not denied the statement. She doesn't deny Thjazi's words that Bolaire brings forth "Thimble, tell IT what to do", she simply says that Bolaire knows he is not owned by anyone, not that Thjazi knew that nor that Thjazi never treated him like a thing. She didn't even say that Thjazi never meant those words like that.

The only two things she says are that she doesn't truly know what was going on between the two, and then she offers a possible explination being that Thjazi maybe was scared of Bolaire. And then offers to hear him out while on the road.

[ Thimble: "I don't know everything he did to you. All I know is you only wanted to deal with me."

Bolaire: "He wouldn't look at me."

Thimble: "Maybe he was scared of you, Bolaire."

Bolaire: "Mm."

Thimble: "Maybe he just didn't like your ugly mug."

Bolaire: "I was definitely scared of him. He told me everything he was going to do to me, and funny enough, he did it. My life is over."

Thimble: "I just--"

Bolaire: "I have lost everything."

Thimble: "Bolaire, then come with us, and you can tell me all about how terrible he was." (...) ] ( 5:43:03 - Ep31 )

And maybe Thjazi was in part scared of him. Maybe he felt disdain and fear towards Bolaire. Maybe one feeling fed the other.

However, that's not justification for his actions. Again, it is a dangerous thing to justify hurting someone/something because you sre scared of them.

Even if Thjazi was indeed scared of Bolaire, his actions towards him (and others) still portray Thjazi as a morally grey (or dark grey) character.

Bolaire, as far as the story showed, is either unwilling or unable to tell a lie.

Now, unwillingness is not the same as inability. Unwillingness is less difficult to change than inability to do something. One is about principles or likes/dislikes stopping you, the other about something "external" (in the sense of not of your choosing) stopping you.

But there's at bare minimum a refusal on Bolaire's part to tell a lie. Emphasis on "tell", omitting parts of the truth is different than saying a flat out lie. And Bolaire has been shown willing and capable of not spewing out every bit of true information he has, of avoiding saying certain stuff, or making statements in an ambiguous way. Lying by omission Bolaire is capable of.

But once he says it, it is said. Therefore, any direct statement about Thjazi's treatment towards him should be taken as Bolaire saying the truth and therefore truthfull.

Theres a whole post, made by @/featherquillpen, about this (that Bolaire might be unable to lie) already, so if you want to focus on that check out their post!

Since I don't want to derail the conversation but I also don't want to make an argument without backing it up, I'll compromise on showing just three examples that help support this:

Way back in Episode 3, there a particular scene that gives a glimpse to this reluctance to lie from Bolaire.

[ Bolarie: (...) "I am as shocked as anyone. I am usually aware of everything that comes in or out of your wing. (...) I don't know. Anything that comes to the museum should be checked to make sure it's safe. (...) It wouldn't be there if it wasn't unusual. And it is unusual. There is a letter, if I recall."

Brennan: From, oh, there is a note from Hal that said like, "With love."

Halandil: "You've given it a once and a twice and a thrice over?"

Bolaire: "Five times at this point. I hand the note. This is highly unusual."

Brennan: Give me, Tal, I'll ask for persuasion or deception. Give me an insight, Hal and Thaisha.

(...)

Taliesin: What question in particular?

(...)

Brennan: The earlier statement as well. Just as a general vibe from Bolaire talking about how unusual all this is.

Taliesin: The circumstances by which it showed up are definitely unusual.

Brennan: Sure.

Taliesin: That's what I will say. I get to, so.

(...)

Brennan: "(...) Your lovely friend Bolaire seems as perplexed, and I think there's a question hanging in the air about Thjazi telling you in his last moments that Bolaire had something for you. It's unusual. You didn't, I don't know, what would-- Does Hal know that Bolaire and Thjazi--?

Bolaire: As far as he knows, we've met once at your house.

Brennan: So I think that on a nine, you don't see any, nothing. Bolaire's not acting strange at all, but there's a question hanging in the air of like, why did Thjazi?" (...) ] ( 2:41:10 - Ep3 )

Bolaire states that it is unsual, that he is "as shocked as anyone". Brennan asks persuasion or deception check from Bolaire, and from the description he does for Hal at the end, we can know he asked this due to Bolaire's and Thjazi's whole thing. In other words, he is "saying", Bolaire shouldn't be as shocked therefore needs to make a check. We know Thjazi did leave stuff in the Archanade for Bolaire to examine, so really unusual it shouldn't be. To which Taliesin clarifies he is speaking about the circumstances being unusual, which is true, therefore no lying happening there.

If Bolaire was alright with just stating a lie, there wouldn't be a need clarify the specifics of the roll.

Then we have the whole scene withe Demodus on episode 24,

[ Brennan: "(...) You get back, he's rearranged the various illusory gewgaws that make your apartment a little brighter and more lively. The kitchen is spotless. He looks out and goes,

Demodus: "I was thinking about the decorations in the kitchen, and I know that I put that mobile by the window. I actually think the mobile's-- I moved it over to the arch, but then it looked too chunky in the arch. I moved it back to the window. But the window, it's the same light problem. So I don't know if you want to get them to build another window in here."

Bolaire: "I-- I-- Mm." (Rolls a dice)

Bolaire: (uncertain) "I love what you've done with the place. Oh, that felt very weird to do. Oh, I did not like that. That felt-- I can get used to this. You need to be comfortable. I'm not used to sharing space. Don't not change anything. Yes." (...) ] ( Ep24)

Here Demodus changed the furniture/decoration arrangement in his apartment. We see in Bolaire's expression he is not that happy about it. But he does care about Demodus, and so does not desire to make him uncomfortable.

So what does Bolaire do? Well, Taliesin oddly enough rolls a dice and looks at the number it said (which meana he didn't do it neither on accident or "just because"). He makes a check. But of what? Brennan doesn't ask him to do it nor does he ask why he is making it, so it appears it is something Brennan is aware of (in some way) but let's Taliesin decide when he does it.

After the mysterious check he does, Bolaire tells a flat out lie for the first time we've seen/known (albeit with an uncertain tone of voice, so not that good of a lie). But then instantly regrets doing so stating that it "felt very weird to do" and he "didn't like it".

With this scene in mind it does appear that Bolaire needs to pass some check to attempt to lie, not even to see if the lie works or not. It might just be a common deception check, but it still appears to be something he doesn't do often enough to not feel "very weird" about it.

It's, thus far, the only time we've seen him do this. And considering he specifically doesn't do it nor any check while talking about Thjazi with Thimble, we can be certain he is telling the truth on that regard.

Now, in episode 30, we kinda get a confirmation of sorts.

[ Termina: (...) "Someone's not telling me the truth."

Bolaire: I know. Have I ever not told the truth? I may not tell the whole truth, but I tell the truth. You know that." (...) ] (00:52:33 - Ep30)

In the confrontation with Termina on Ep30, Bolaire states he tells the truth. There's no roundabout, it is a simple statement. There's no deception check Brennan asks, he specifically ask for persuasion (very different). And, besides, Bolaire is saying it infront of Termina, someone of the Panto that could be capable of denying it if she knows his nature to push towards lying. So sort of confirmed.

Back to the main conversation:

Considering all of this, we know then that the statements about Thjazi's mistreatment towards him are true. Therefore, there's no argument against their veridity to be made.

Thjazi did those things, and as such, is responsible for them.

Thjazi treated Bolaire like an object, forced him to steal stuff from the museum for him, treated him with disdain, made him lie to Hal. And he forced Bolaire to comply with this or else his life would be ruined.

-> There's even an argument to be made that he removed the freedom of choosing from Bolaire. A decision taken under threat is not a free choice done willingly.

-> Not to mention that in dehumanising Bolaire by viewing and treating him like an object, he was removing any possible choice from him as well. Things don't make choices. The choices are made for them.

Now, can we justify this or explain this in any way that wouldn't portray Thjazi as a morally (dark) grey character? I don't think there's any somewhat valid argument left to do so.

Which leads to the final section:

............................................................................

Who is he?: Thjazi Fang

[ Bolaire: "(sighs) Your brother was a very complicated man. Many people I've heard have said many things about him. But he could also be very cruel and hateful. (...) " ]

Homer described Odyseus not as a hero, not as a villian. Odysseus was described as "polutropos". Which was usually was translated (in English) as "many turned". However, Emily Wilson proposes an alternate translation, one that fits the character the best due to his story. Odysseus the complicated.

Now this multifaceted aspect of Odyseus is viewed in another lens. He is complicated. He has good heroic aspects as well as bad ones. He has layers.

And I do think this also applies to Thjazi. He has treated Thimble as an equal, and he also has treated Bolaire as less-than-a-person. He has protected Halandil in many ways, while also putting him at risk in many others.

"Ogres are like Onions. Onions have layers. Ogres have layers... You get it? We both have layers." - Shrek (2001)

Thjazi has layers. And all of them deserve to be acknowledge. All of have impact on others. Good and bad.

Now, I think there's a possibility Thjazi ended up becoming a darker character later in his life than who he was in his earlier days.

[ Julien: "My lady, I do not mean to speak out of turn here. I'm a bit taken aback. We are no strangers to the history of violence and Thjazi, whatever memories you cling to he's not the man that you once loved. He wouldn't be there if he was, yes?"

Aranessa: "I married a dashing hero from the very end of the War of Axe and Vine, the adventurer rogue, a pixie by his side and magic in his eyes.And two years later, he took up the banner of rebellion And my grandfather-- My grandfather sided with the Halovars and the Tachonises. Perhaps these things are fated. Two points of light exist in constellation but the night sky grows between them. (...)" ] ( 3:22:43 - Ep1 )

[ Vaelus: "I do believe you haven't seen him in many years? I think the man that's laying here is very different than what you thought of him." (...) ] ( 4:14:01 - Ep1 ?)

Thjazi is no longer the man that Married Aranessa, nor the kid playing with his brother Hal.

He fought in the war of Axe and Vine young. He married a noblewoman. He led a rebellion against her house. He joined the Cloak and worked with them. He was executed.

Many things happened throughout his life. Enough to make a person change.

I believe there was a sustancial change in him somewhere between the Falconer's Rebellion and him working with the Cloak. I'm not aware if he was already part of the Cloak before he led the rebellion. But one must've led to the other in some way.

Maybe he was already part of the Cloak, and the rebellion was part of their plan.

Maybe he led the rebellion first, and then, after loosing, decided to work with the Cloak.

Either way, there was a change in his moral compass, in what he deemed right and wrong, somewhere at that time. And I do believe that change made his moral compass darken. Maybe out of desperation, or after seeing so many awful things, his perspective changed. He started believing the means are justified by the ends. He started viewing those who helped him or worked for him as assets, as chess pieces. He started moving said pieces on his own, withholding the whys for the sake of keeping the plans from crumbling and the goals from vanishing.

In the end, he stole things from many places, used and abused many people. He constructed a whole web of connections whose members worked in the dark. Spend too much time in the darkness, and you might start to see things differently.

But this darker side of him, this change to a dark and darker perspective on things, doesn't take away from the good stuffhe did either.

[ Brennan: "(...) Hal, as you look up, I think, as you walk back to land again on Thjazi's chest, Thimble, you look under his chest and you see there's a couple different necklaces. A lot of thieves and scoundrels, you know, collected little bits of jewelry from here and there, but you see that his silver necklace is kind of bunched up that has his old wedding ring on it, that he was wearing around his neck, and I think there's a moment where, Hal, you're standing nearby and you just remember being in a tiny little tower room of Castle Royce, two young guys, orcish commoners from Dol-Makjar in this nobles' wedding, and your brother dressed in (laughs) gifted finery looking at you and being like,

Thjazi: "I'm nervous. I don't know why I'm so nervous. I can't. (stammers) N-n-none of this fits. I'm getting a noble's coat on loan from my fiancee's family."

Brennan: And a knock at the door and her hand over her face, the Lady Aranessa going, Aranessa: "I'm not looking, I'm not looking." Brennan: Your brother looking, saying, Thjazi: "I can't see you. I can still see you right now if you cover your eyes," (...) Aranessa: "I don't know how it works. I've never been married before." Brennan: Holding this gorgeous flower that looks like it's either foxglove or prickle poppy, this gorgeous flower, and she says, Aranessa: "In our tradition, I'm supposed to-- It's for you. It's a wedding gift. You should have it before the ceremony." Brennan: And the flower opens. (poof) And with that ring on a little table beside Thimble, for the very first time in the mortal world (poof) looking much different than she does today, appeared in that moment as Thjazi looks down at you and goes, Thjazi: "Hi." Thimble: "Oh, hi." Thjazi: "Sorry, the fairy's a gift? I don't agree with any of this." Thimble: "You know, I think it's kind of weird myself, but." Thjazi: "Do you want to be a gift? You don't have to be a gift if you don't want to be a gift." Halandil: "Just shut up and say thank you." Thjazi: "Thank you. Thank you to you, frankly. I don't know--" Brennan: and you see-- (laughter) And Aranessa says, Aranessa: "Of course it's not like that! It's just, she's free. If you wish, then you marrying into the family have the protection of the fae, and as our family has enjoyed, Thimble is a warrior fairy from the gardens." Thimble: "I can kill a bunch of mice in your house. Also, I'm really good at braiding hair." (nervous laugh) Brennan: Thjazi goes, Thjazi: "Is that related? Are those skills from one and the same-- No, you know what? Now, here's what you really need to do. You need to catch a bunch of mice, braid their hair, keep everybody here on their toes." Thimble: "We can do that?" Thjazi: "We can do anything." Thimble: I look at the Lady Aranessa. "I think I'm going to really like it here. I'm going to really like him." And I'll fly over and land on his shoulder. Brennan: Lands on your shoulder and says, Thjazi: "Are they giving you a little outfit, too?" Thimble: "I don't like this stupid dress, so if we can get something different, I'd be thrilled." Thjazi: "We'll go to a dollhouse upstairs and see what they got." (laughter) Halandil: Over my shoulder to Aranessa, I say: "I think you just bought yourself a lot of trouble." Aranessa: "Oh god. Everything about this is ill-advised." Brennan: As you hear her in this memory, "Everything about this is ill-advised," You're just looking at the stubble on his face, the ring on the necklace. You remember that first little, the whole wedding was delayed because he wanted to get you something from the dollhouse that you would enjoy wearing before you had to go down the aisle. (...)" ] ( 1:00:15 - Ep2 )

Thjazi Fang was a complicated person. Good in some sides of his life, bad in others. And both sides can co-exist.

But just like his bad actions don't erase his good ones, nor do his good actions override his bad ones, his complicated character doesn't take away from the Revolution.

Thjazi was a morally (dark) grey character at the end, yes. That doesn't mean the rebellion he led, the revolution he supported is bad as well.

Nor because Thjazi fought for good cause does it mean his bad actions towards others can/must be overlooked.

• The goodness of the cause doesn't necessarily correlate to the goodness of the person supporting it.

• The badness of the person supporting it doesn't necessarily correlate to the badness of the cause.

Thjazi led the Falconer's Rebellion, not the entire Revolution. The Revolution is made by the community work of everyone. One fight, one of its fronts, don't define it.

Just like there was a fight against the Shapers before the shapers wars. Volkjan's Revolution was one of those previous fights and it was many years ago. So Thjazi's Rebellion might have been the first or one of the first, but it is not the sole center of the main fight. His symbol might've been the Falcon, but now we have the Magpies to take over a Revolution that was long brewing even before Thjazi made a group of rebels.

Thjazi was not the sole leader of the Revolution, he was one of many supporting the fight. He was a leader, yes, but the leader of one of it's fights, not the whole thing.

Or are we ignoring King Augustus Valian and the whole rebellion that happened in Timmony? There might have been many more fires of rebellion throughout Aramán. Thjazi's Falconers are just the ones we focused on at the start because, well, he is connected to all the characters afterall.

Therefore, admitting Thjazi's wrongdoings and his morally (dark) grey compass does not harm the Revolution. He became a pretty bad person in the end, that doesn't take away from the Revolution.

In fact it let's us focus on the actual Cause instead of permanently glueing it with just one person, when there are many other people fighting for it. It doesn't seem fair to anyone to think it was just a Thjazi thing.

Thjazi was a leader of one of the fights/rebellions, and a member of the whole Revolution. But that doesn't mean he must be perfect. Or are we saying all the members of a cause must be perfectly good people without any dark sides or else the cause is bad? That doesn't seem reasonable.

Thjazi was a person, he is bound to have flaws. Some people's flaws are worse than other's, some people's bad sides are worse than other's.

Thjazi was a person, and therefore he is multifaceted. Any living being changes throughout their life, has different sides that coexist. Denying that is a disservice to Thjazi, is denhing him the right to be an actual person and not a cardboard cut-out of himself. He has, just like any person can, depth.

Thjazi Fang was a complicated person.

............................................................................

............................................................................

............................................................................

Bibliography:

Yes, of course I'm adding the sources where I got the quotations and such, by now it's an essay.

Langridge, Stuart (n/d) "Critical Role Linkable Transcrips" -> source of transcrips

Critical Role Campaign 4 youtube playlist -> self explanatory

Critical Role Campaign 4 Beacon -> self explanatory

Critical Role Campaign 4 Beacon -> character's art

Critical Role Wiki -> checks of extra information

Cambridge, "Disdain" In Cambridge Dictionary

Oxford, "Disdain" In Oxford Learner's Dictionary

Higgins, Charlotte (2017) "The Odyssey translated by Emily Wilson review – a new cultural landmark" - The Guardian

Jenson, Vicky & Adamson, Andrew (2001) "Shrek" - Dreamworks

............................................................................

............................................................................

............................................................................

[onloisoh]

Allow me to add a little Theory that has been going around into the mix:

Thjazi's previous plan was the reason the doors to Faerie closed.

............................................................................

Again, this part is theoretical based on a Theory.

⚠️ This can be excluded from the segment, as well as the whole Point of O. can be excluded from the post if you deem it extra.

This part is just an extra bit, food for thought. I'll keep the more centred analysis/arguments to the main post.

............................................................................

Back to the Theory,

I believe Julien knows. That's where the hate towards Thjazi comes from (for his part).

Thjazi (and Mara) needed something related to Faerie to stabilise the path they were aiming to re-anchor, that's why later they tried to use the Stone of Nightsong.

[ Mara: " (...) And the Dying Fields, (...) It was a gift of the Demon Queen when she married Azgra. So you need to stabilize in some other diametrically opposed realm, so we needed something rooted in Faerie, and that's what the Stone of Nightsong was. (...) " ] (5:14:00 - Ep31)

But the Hallowed Round wasn't the first attempt. They had tried ot before and it went very very wrong.

I want to bring again the conversation between Mara and Thjazi when this happened. A conversation Thimble spyed on:

[ Brennan: "(...) Returning back towards the theater, this was about eight years ago. Getting back towards where you were going to meet Thaz, you heard him yelling at the top of his lungs angry at someone.

Thjazi: "Then why wasn't it anchored? Why wasn't it, Mara? Why wasn't it? "

Brennan: Upon entering, do you think Thimble would've given him privacy in this tense interaction with someone you didn't know or would you have joined it? (...)

Thimble: No.

Brennan: You would've stayed away?

Thimble: No, I would've gone and tried to stay away, but I would want to see his anger.

Brennan: Walking in, you see him there, a young human woman (...) Looks out, looks back at Thjazi as Thjazi turns and says,

Thjazi: "(sighs) Uh, Thimble. I'm sorry. Just bad hit on a-- On a caravan headed out for Venatus. I'll talk to you later."

Brennan: You see the woman looks at you wordlessly, turns around, and heads to the balcony, turns into a falcon and flies away. That's what a nat 20 will get ya. (...) These are memories. At the time, you had no context for it. You know, this was one of, you know-- By that point, you had already-- You know, you and Thjazi had separated some of your spheres of influence. (...) But you do have that memory of him shouting at that woman, Mara. Her not saying anything, just flying away. (...) I'd say, too, that probably wasn't the last time you saw her. (...) But Thjazi tended to have a tense relationship with her-- He didn't seem to want you guys to like--

Thimble: Communicating.

Brennan: Communicating. (...) " ] (00:16:17 - Ep26)

There's a couple of things to point out here.

First of all, Thjazi appears very upset. He's yelling angrily at Mara, demanding an answer. We don't know how Thjazi usually reacted to things going awry, so maybe this is his usual reaction in those circumstances. But we don't know if the opposite is also the case. Until further flashback scenes or insight is added, we just have to guess. But if it's the latter, it leads to the question, what happened that made him so angry ?

Second, Thjazi gives a clumsy lie as an excuse to Thimble once he spots her, and at that, Mara looks at Thimble, without saying anything, and leaves. Thimble had already made the promise of keeping secrets from the other with Thjazi by that time, so the clumsy excuse wasn't questioned further due to that. It's Mara's reaction to it that gives some sort of hint pointing at Thimble. She looks at her, stays quiet as if thinking (or maybe biting down something to say), and goes away.

Third, and this is where an eyebrow is raised, Thjazi didn't want Mara and Thimble to communicate with each other. Why? What did he feared might happen? Or rather, what did he feared could be said? Maybe because they (Thjazi and Mara) had a tense relationship, but it is still odd.

They (Thjazi and Mara) needed something rooted in faerie, yes, but because the doors to Faerie were closed:

[ Mara: "(...) So you need to stabilize in some other diametrically opposed realm, so we needed something rooted in Faerie (...) We just needed some artifact that had connection to traveling to Faerie, whose doors are fucking closed."

Brennan: Anyone who wants to make an insight check. (...) 21, 19? The three of you get a similar note as Mara mentions the doors closed to Faerie that an iceberg in her mind is moved over swiftly. She says,

Mara: "So look. You're supposed to go to make a tiny, tiny path. (...) " ] (5:14:00 - Ep31)

Mara mentions the doors to Faerie and avoids the subject, that Brennan describes as an iceberg, swiftly. An iceberg, something that could sunk a ship.

But why would that subject need to be avoided? It could be a sensitive subject for Thimble, but she has been showed not avoiding conversations about the subject. So, why avoid it?

Maybe because they had something to do with it, and talking about it would change the perspective on a lot of things (for some characters). It was said that the doors to Faerie closed due to necromantic magic. And afterlifes are connected to, well, that.

Not to mention Mara says "We just needed some artifact that had connection to traveling to Faerie, whose doors are fucking closed", in other words needed something to be able to send the souls INTO Faerie whose doors are closed and therefore cannot be opened to let the souls in. Which suggests that their previous attempt was indeed with the doors to Faerie directly. Doors that mysteriously closed while we've seen Mara and Thjazi where indeed trying to anchor the afterlife.

But back to Julien:

If the Theory is true, I do believe Julien somehow knew Thjazi was behind this.

If this is the case, in his eyes, Thjazi betrayed his loved ones by doing something that caused the doors to Faerie to close.

Thjazi would've caused the connection the Royce had to their source of power to be severed, betraying Aranessa.

Thjazi would've caused the fae in Aramán to be left out of their home, betraying Thimble.

I'm not saying this would've been done out of malice. It would've been an accident. But Thjazi (and the Cloak) would've caused this nonetheless. Thjazi would've risked the power of his lover and the home of his best friend, and (at least to Thimble) lied about it. And for Julien, that might have been enough to deem Thjazi someone worthy of being spat on at their funeral.

⚠️ Now, theories aside, back to the rest of the post

[stephfandomdumps]

oh em GEE! it's not accurate?? can you guys wake up homer? find his corpse and ask him what he thinks? was he the first writer of the odyssey? or was he the first person to write it down? did he exist? lets wake up the first ever bard to think of the odyssey! who is he? oh we dont know? that sucks. did you guys ask ovid? did you talk to hesiod? or sophocles? does mythology have one definite story? or does it evolve over time across centuries and milleniums? is there one true translation? or version? dont stories change? should nolan have stood there for 18 hours and recite it in ancient greek while you guys ate food? oh wait sorry thats not accurate. he should speak for one hour over dinner and then you guys come back for 17 straight days and listen for an hour at a time. oh wait sorry that wrong too. he hasnt mastered speaking classical greek. oh wait no one speaks that anymore, no one alive does. let's wake up and find euripedes' ghost too. and aeschylus. and apuleius! cant forget that guy. oh but wait they all lived hundreds of years apart and all told different versions of the different mythologies and added their own messaging and ideas. and they left out other parts too. according to you guys thats not allowed. god forbid. oh sorry. gods forbid.

[seek--rest]

Me, having watched the odyssey and loved it, talking about it with my beloved and smart mutuals about the meaning and themes of this ancient epic and the masterful way Nolan was able to make this foundational western story feel modern in a way that still paid tribute: wow, I’m sure the people of tumblr dot com— the people who love Themes and Meanings and Messages and conversations around the social construct, of consequences, and of the intricacies of mankind— will understand

Also me, scrolling the tag for (1) minute:

oh i forgot you all are stupid. that’s my b.

[angelwalking]

(source) its so funny how actual Greek and Homeric scholars are talking about this movie vs the fact that people on tumblr are acting like Nolan personally dug up Homer's actual bones and pissed on them

[not-freyja]

Can everyone who makes video content do a Deaf bitch a favor? Watch your shit with the captions on and the sound off, and then do another round of editing to fix things including but not limited to:

Captions cover the spot on the screen you put the information I need

The dialogue is captioned but not the song you have playing that the dialogue is responding to

You only captioned the person on the screen, not the person off screen who is also talking

No captioning of critical sound effects (alarms, bells, dogs barking, etc)

Speakers are not labelled at moments where it is not clear on the screen who is talking.

Captions cover the spot on the screen that you put the information I need!

Other d/Deaf people welcome to add.

This post brought to you by the fifth video tutorial I could not follow because the bad, auto-generated captions covered what I was trying to watch today.

[twobeesornottwobees]

printers behave like that because the medieval monks they put out of work are haunting them

[angel-starbeam]

July 18:

It begins.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

I hate that certain types of reality tv are entertaining to me. Turns out I'm a human who finds the same kind of bullshit compelling as other humans. I'll be ike "ha, I would never watch The Bachelor or Love At First Sight, they hold no interest to me" but that's just because I don't care about romantic relationships. Give me a show about revamping failing restaurants and I'm hooked. I've spent the last 3 days watching a guy help people in debt budget and learned nothing because the show is not about accounting, it's about a fed up man swearing at people for booking too many Disney trips. This is trash and I'm watching hours of it. I Am Not Immune.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Me: I should enjoy something with depth

Media: We put some petty drama in front of a camera and exaggerated the mistakes of strangers so you can be amazed at their behaviour

Me: Fuck it I'm in

[palis-delon]

Me: the wedding ceremony is only the start of a marriage. Yes, it's important but not worth all that ::waves hand at the wedding industry::

Media: here's a video of a woman whose mother was just diagnosed with stage 4 cancer. Watch them dress shop, even though there's no partner, just so they can have that memory.

Me: her mom thinks she's so beautiful in that dress 😭😭😭

[prismatic-bell]

Me, eating box soup and looking at commercials for Love Island: this is so stupid

Me, same soup, watching Chopped: every single one of you dumbasses thinks the only use for cornmeal is polenta?! IF I WAS THERE--

[pintsandparapets]

A scrapped illustration for Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “The Yellow Wallpaper” (1892).

[destiel-news-channel]

[Image ID: The Destiel confession meme edited so that Dean answers 'JK Rowling posted upskirt photos of a woman on Twitter' to Cas 'I love you'. /End ID]

No one doing this should be allowed to call themselves a feminist.

JK Rowling deadnamed and posted 'upskirt' photo of trans woman on X

The wealthy author escalated a social media spat that resulted in posting a photo from a 2023 event at the Institute of Economic Affairs in

[solarishashernoseinabook]

Let's not beat around the bush: Children's author JK Rowling sexually harassed someone. In some jurisdictions, this would count as sexual abuse. JK Rowling has committed a sex crime against a woman and fell back on the old rape apologist standby of "she was asking for it".

I hope your nostalgia is worth it

[thememedaddy]

[balaclava-trismegistus]

Just saw my doctor type "FUCKED FOR LIFE" on my chart then he turned the screen away and stopped making eye contact with me

[starbeenz]

Oops made another comic

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

I love youtube off-grid/homesteading videos because they're always like "living the simple life" and then depict a life ten times more complicated than mine

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Like I'm sure it's way more rewarding to grow and can your own tomatoes and they're probably healthier or whatever but is it simpler than me giving Coles one dollar to bring a much more safely canned can of tomatoes to my house? No. No it is not.

[spark1eheartemoji]

growing your own tomatoes is a fuck load more simple than having a job and keeping a job plus paying all the fees of living in society.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

Most homesteaders still need to have a job and keep a job and pay all the fees of living in a society. There seem to be a lucky handful who have reduced their costs by homesteading (usually due to the free labour of friends and family) but there were easier ways to reduce those cost. In the vast majority of cases, homesteading is a lot more expensive than not homesteading. And where people are saving money, the amount of labour per dollar works out to well below minimum wage in savings.

From what I've seen, successful homesteaders do it because they find it rewarding. Rewarding does NOT mean simple.

[rosstmcd]

I can't speak to Australia, but at least in the US there is another group of homesteaders who are trying to live self-sufficiently off-grid because they expect the imminent total collapse of civilization, and they have fantasies of themselves living happily on home-grown produce while everyone else is killing each other for the last can of tomatoes at the store.

[alex51324]

Another thing about this subset of homesteaders* is that they are insistent--proud, even!--of doing things that are unsafe, and encouraging others to also do those things.

One example is canning dairy products (milk, butter, cheese). They'll show up in a canning group and say something like, "Look how I canned all this milk that the store was getting rid of this milk for 50 cents a gallon because it's the last day!"

Sane and responsible members of the group will say things like, "Dairy isn't safe for home canning; if you have fresh milk that you need to save for later, you can freeze it or make cheese!" And, "If you need shelf-stable milk you can buy powdered milk," or "You can dehydrate it at home, but you need a really good dehydrator, plenty of trays, and it takes forever; you're usually better off just buying it."

And then the person who just canned 20 quarts of botulism will start frothing at the mouth about how when the shit hits the fan--

And yeah, I'll grant that if grocery stores cease to exist, and you are entirely reliant for your winter survival on what you can put up during times of plenty, the risk-benefit analysis would be different. But in the actual world that we currently live in, it's false economy at best, and at worst a stupid flex that could end up killing somebody.

Anyway, TL;DR, "simple" often refers to an imagined past when the problems of modernity did not exist--yet somehow, the problems of that era have been left behind--which in turn is often a racist dogwhistle.

(*Besides their substantial overlap with weapons stockpilers/"militia" types.)

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

The Can/Dehydrate Absolutely Everything people baffle me. Most homesteaders (sensibly) have personal solar panels, because they want to live off-grid and still have electricity. When Shit Hits The Fan, their solar panels will not stop working. Their freezers would work fine. Canning or dehydrating or salting is great for certain foods (especially if you want to ferment, pickle or flavour something) but for so much stuff the best thing you can do to preserve nutrients and preserve it safely is chuck it in the freezer.

Freezers just aren't homesteady enough I guess.

[reikiajakoiranruohoja]

The simplest, but also the most immature, answer is that solar panels are 'cheating.' These people base their doomsday images on Fallout and zombie apocalypse movies. But not even on them but this lone wolf stereotype of a stereotype. If you can just create electricity from the sun, then it means you can bypass the gritty survival of eating canned goods and just live like you used to. And that kills the fantasy.

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

I haven't seen that kind, all the ones I've seen get solar panels as soon as they can afford them because living off generator power is expensive and sucks (and, unlike solar panels, would not serve you well in an apocalypse because you need to keep buying petrol for them). I don't think I've ever seen these anti-solar-panel homesteaders that you deal with. Variety in every community I suppose.

[ineffectualdemon]

Whenever I hear homesteaders and trad wife people talk about how much better it is to do your own canning I remember my grandmother telling me about the canning days from her childhood and how she would help her grandmother can fresh fruit (we lived in orchard country) in a hot canning shed built for that purpose for days at a time in the middle of summer

Specifically about how it was hell on fucking earth and how her grandmother fucking hated every single second of it

The moment her grandmother could buy canned fruit easily in the supermarket? Never fucking canned a thing herself again and was so relieved and grateful that she would never have to again

Canning as a hobby in your kitchen? I can see that being fun

Canning because you have a fuck ton of fresh fruit coming off of your trees and if you don't can it all NOW you won't have any fruit for winter and it's all you do from sun up to sun down in the middle of summer?

That isn't a cute fun rewarding time. It's hard fucking labour

[trail-mx]

When all of us kids were finally grown and out of the house, my parents (finally) separated and sold their house, my mom used her half of the proceeds to rent a nice little apartment that is now filled with her diamond art and the other little things that make her happy.

(Tbh, I think she's the happiest she's ever been since I was born. She would probably agree.)

My dad, on the other hand, took his half and bought a tiny parcel of land with a rickety barn on it with the determination to do the homestead life. It's in the middle of nowhere and off the grid completely: no electricity, no sewage, and has a well to draw water from. It's been a little over a year since he moved onto it full time and he explains his life like this:

"It's simple — simply harder."

Every moment of his day, from the moment he gets up to the moment he goes to bed, there's something that needs built or repaired or prepped. Now that it's warmer, it's a race against the clock to grow and can his food and cut down enough wood for the winter because he lives on a mountain and that means snow comes in much earlier for him than everyone else. There's just not much downtime if he wants to be comfortable and, idk, alive, after the snowfall has blocked him in for weeks.

On top of that, something is always going wrong from the generator (decided to quit working in the dark in the middle of winter), to the barn he renovated to live in (mystery hole in roof discovered just as it starts to piss pour outside, along with a bat just chilling out and pissing off the cats). And it's not like he can just call a guy to come fix it because he's living quite a way from civilization, so dad has to do it all. He's always been the guy to call when you need something fixed, so it's whatever to him, but how many of these "preppers" have that kind of know-how?

Shit, my dad doesn't even have a mailbox bc the mail carrier says that putting one at the end of the little road to his property would be too dangerous, which it would be because it's located on a blind corner with no lights. And that road is nearly always foggy (from the low lying clouds) and driving it at night when you can't see far ahead and there's no street lighting is terrifying.

Despite everything, he likes his life and its inherent challenges, but all these internet personalities trying to sell it as something worth giving up all modern conveniences for because it's "simpler" make me uncomfortable because, no, it's not — and saying so is just downright stupid.