@artioptera Since you asked me for my theory on my own question, here is my answer 💕 (btw I can't believe how thoughtful yours was !! Guys, if you hadn't -> go read it here)
I did not approach Nathan and David’s relationship by imagining what might have been lost in the original ending rewrite of Life is strange. Instead, I tried to interpret their dynamic based strictly on what remains canon. Our analyses are therefore very different !💕
Nathan - psychosis, paranoia and generalized fear :
For my theory, Nathan’s mental health is central to understanding this relationship. His medication - like Risperidone - strongly suggests the presence of a psychotic disorder. When such conditions are not effectively managed, they frequently manifest as delusional thinking and intense paranoia, causing the individual’s perception of the world to diverge sharply from objective reality.
this is my source for the symptoms of psychosis
In Nathan’s case, the apparent absence of consistent and adequate professional care may have allowed his symptoms to intensify over time. While his fear of Jefferson is objectively legitimate, several elements suggest that this fear may have expanded beyond its original cause. Rather than remaining focused on a specific and real danger, it appears to evolve into a broader state of hypervigilance, where potential threats are perceived almost everywhere. I base this interpretation on the “fan” letter addressed to David that can be found in his garage if he is fired. The phrasing and choice of words strongly suggest, in my view, that Nathan could be its author. Who else but our lovely boy would talk like that ?
I’ve seen people mock this text on several occasions, interpreting it as Nathan being overly dramatic or attempting to cast himself as a victim when he is, in many ways, the aggressor. However, I read it differently. I believe Nathan is being sincere here, expressing a genuine sense of fear. Even if that fear may not fully align with objective reality, it nonetheless reflects his lived perception of it. The anonymity of the message is significant - there is no audience to impress, no reputation to defend. In that sense, there is little reason for him to perform. To me, the text reflects an unfiltered emotional state and offers a rare glimpse into his honest state of mind. This letter is, in fact, my primary source when it comes to interpreting Nathan’s paranoia and grounding this analysis about his and David's relationship. From an external perspective, it seems difficult to reconcile the idea that someone portrayed as the “King of Blackwell” could simultaneously be “scared of this school”. The most coherent explanation, in my view, is to link this contradiction to the symptoms of his mental health disorder. I would also draw attention to his wording : he does not say he is afraid “in” this school, but afraid “of” this school. The distinction is subtle, yet meaningful. Being afraid in a place suggests a situational fear tied to specific circumstances. Being afraid of the school, however, makes the institution itself the object of fear. This broader formulation implies a more diffuse and pervasive anxiety. From a psychological perspective, this aligns more coherently with generalized or paranoid patterns of thinking. In that sense, his phrasing further supports the interpretation that Nathan’s fear extends beyond a concrete threat and reflects deeper mental health struggles.
We can take this reflection even further by linking his paranoia to the fact that he seemingly carries a gun everywhere. While Jefferson is a legitimate threat to his life, it is highly unlikely he would ever attack him on the Blackwell campus and in broad daylight. Constantly carrying a firearm is a disproportionate reaction, driven by a deep-seated sense of fear rather than reason.
Nathan and David's alliance :
Within that framework, an alliance with David Madsen begins to make sense. Surveillance and anticipating danger may function as coping mechanisms and an attempts to manage overwhelming paranoia.
If Sean Prescott hired David to oversee security at Pan Estates and trusted him in that role, he may have perceived David as both useful and stabilizing. I doubt there is genuine emotional attachment on Nathan’s side, but rather a pragmatic alignment. Through David’s security measures, camera monitoring, and general oversight of Blackwell, Nathan acquires a broader awareness of his environment. He gains a means of keeping track of both potential threats and anyone connected to the Dark Room, ensuring that nothing jeopardizes Jefferson’s plan.
The line “David always asks what’s going on in my head. David always helps me follow those he follows” carries an unsettling tone. What stands out is not merely the content of the statement, but the structure of it : the repetition, the emphasis on mental monitoring and the normalization of mutual surveillance. I encounter similar sentences in my professional work with individuals experiencing paranoid disorders. This strongly supports my view that Nathan’s mental health issues are central to understanding the nature of their relationship. At the same time, the sentence suggests that David’s surveillance reassures Nathan, allowing him to maintain a sense of control over those being monitored. Their dynamic appears, in this regard, functionally beneficial to Nathan’s paranoia. It does not eliminate his fears, but it helps him manage them by transforming them into organized vigilance rather than isolated anxiety.
David Madsen - trauma, validation and controlled vigilance :
For David, whose hypervigilance appears to stem from unresolved war trauma, Nathan might represent both reinforcement and opportunity. Nathan offers practical assistance, but more importantly, validation of David’s surveillance methods. In an environment where his behavior is frequently criticized or dismissed as excessive, having someone actively participate in monitoring others legitimizes his approach. It transforms what might otherwise be perceived as paranoia into a shared mission. At the same time, this alliance serves another purpose : it allows David to keep Nathan within reach. David is deeply distrustful and his worldview is structured around anticipation of threat. In Episode 5, he explicitly admits that he has suspicions about Nathan. Keeping him close might be a strategy - monitor the potential danger rather than distance yourself from it. In that sense, the relationship reflects not confidence, but controlled vigilance.
Conclusion :
Ultimately, I don't think Nathan and David’s relationship is built on trust, affection, or friendship, but on utility and mutual reinforcement of their coping mechanisms. Nathan externalizes and legitimizes his paranoia through David, while David gains validation for his hypervigilance and maintains proximity to both the Prescott family and potential threats.
