SIPHONS, SANGRAVAH, AND READING THE PAGE IN FRONT OF YOU
I want to talk about something that I’ve been seeing more and more in the ACOTAR fandom lately (and in other bookish spaces too) … and I think it gets at something important not just pertaining to the characters we read on the page, but also at how we read fiction in general.
The argument goes something like this: Azriel is not reactive when the Valkyries are taken into the Blood Rite. He is incredibly calm and only seems focused on Cassian. Therefore, there is nothing of romantic significance (or anything that hints at a mating bond) between him and Gwyn … because, if there was, he would totally respond differently and act protective.
OK. So I disagree with this argument (and similarly cherry-picked arguments without context), and I want to push back on it. I do agree that this particular moment after the Valkyries are forced into the Blood Rite is worth shining a light on … just not for the types reasons being argued above.
But first (and truthfully, most importantly), I want to focus on something that I think gets lost in these kinds of debates based on textual analysis: The question of AUTHORIAL CHOICE and what it actually means when we are reading a novel.
THESE CHARACTERS ARE NOT REAL … and that matters for HOW we read
I say this with kindness and patience for everyone who loves these books as deeply as I do:
Azriel is not a real person whose behavior we are observing and interpreting the way we might interpret the behavior of someone we personally know.
Azriel is a character on the page.
And every single thing he does on the page … every response, every silence, every moment of calm, every moment of rage … is a deliberate choice made by an author who is trying to communicate something specific about him.
This matters enormously when we are trying to understand or analyze what a scene might mean. It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about Shakespeare, contemporary authors, or anyone in between. It also doesn’t matter if we’re talking about popular genre fiction and authors like SJM. The same rules apply.
The question is never just: What did the character do?
The question is: Why did the author choose to show us this, in this way, from this point of view, at this moment in the story?
When we forget to ask that second question, we end up doing what I think is happening in a lot of current bookish discourse. Readers end up cherry-picking isolated moments, stripping them of important context, and then argue about the character’s behavior as if it were a real person’s freely chosen action rather than a carefully crafted narrative decision.
And, unfortunately, that approach will lead readers to conclusions that the text itself just does not support.
To think about this further, I want to apply that lens to the scene when it’s discovered the Valkyries have been forcibly entered into the Blood Rite … because, I think when you do, the moment reads very differently.
When the news settles that Nesta, Gwyn, and Emerie have been taken, Azriel is not navigating a single crisis; instead, he is navigating several simultaneously … and this is crucial contextual information that gets dropped when “Azriel’s reaction” is discussed in isolation.
In the span of a very short time, the Inner Circle is dealing with: the Valks being abducted and entered into the Blood Rite against their will; the revelation that Feyre’s and Rhys’s lives are magically bound together; and the news that Eris has been captured, requiring an immediate intelligence response.
Oh … and let’s not forget that the Blood Rite itself cannot be interfered with. Not even by the High Lord of the Night Court himself. Anyone who enters to extract a participant forfeits their own life and the life of the participant. So there is, quite literally, nothing to be done except trust in the training and wait.
Azriel being the operational and steady center of this chaos (while Rhys and Feyre are also still navigating a high-risk pregnancy) is not him being indifferent to Gwyn, Emerie, or Nesta. Isn’t this what the role of the Spymaster of the Night Court requires?
And, let’s not pretend that this isn’t entirely consistent with how we have seen Azriel function on page several times under pressure throughout multiple books. He is a spymaster and soldier of enormous experience. Falling apart is not an available option to him in that moment … because Cassian is already at risk of falling apart, Rhys and Feyre are sidelined, and someone has to hold the damn room together.
To look at that specific behavior, in that specific crucible, and conclude that it reveals something definitive about his feelings for Gwyn (or lack of feelings for Gwyn) completely misreads what the scene is actually doing.
AND THEN THERE ARE THE SIPHONS
Now … here is where authorial choice becomes even more important to this conversation.
We are in Cassian’s POV in both the scene at Emerie’s house after the Valkyries are taken, and in the scene while he and Azriel spy and wait for a sign of Eris.
We are not in Azriel’s POV.
We do not have access to Azriel’s interior life the way we do in his bonus chapter (which is, again, why the bonus chapter is so crucial to understanding him as a character).
We are watching Azriel on page from the outside … which means …
We are seeing exactly what Cassian sees, and nothing more.
And what Cassian sees, as Azriel is calmly and steadily trying to talk him down, is this:
Azriel’s siphons flare when Gwyn’s name is mentioned.
Not a general flare in response to the overall crisis. After her name.
Now, I do want to be a bit careful here, because I’m not arguing that this moment is romantic in any overt way … it isn’t and, more importantly, it SHOULDN’T be. I know many Gwynriels agree with me on this, because meaningful, romantic development in this genre (or romance-adjacent sub genres) requires the relevant characters’ own points of view and their development on page within those POVs. We are not in either of theirs right now.
So, what I am arguing is more foundational than that:
Azriel’s siphons are a reflection of his emotional interior. They respond to what is happening inside him and to what he cannot (or will not) express through any other channel. That is one of their established functions in the text so far. And in a moment where he is performing absolute control … where his entire exterior presentation is calm and steady and operational … his siphons tell a different story in this moment (even if he isn’t entirely sure of what that story is).
Something inside of him is not calm. Something breaks the surface, briefly, involuntarily, and without his permission. And, again, it breaks the surface when Gwyn’s name is said.
Not only does this highlight what I’ve been trying to say about context, but it circles back to what I’ve also been trying to say about authorial choice. SJM is not trying to be tricky here, and she is also not in the business of accidental details. As the author, she CHOSE to have this happen in Cassian’s POV.
OK, so what does that mean? This means that she is showing it to the reader through the most reliable external witness we have available. If SJM wanted to show us nothing, then … guess what? She would have shown us absolutely nothing here. The siphons didn't have to flare at all.
Or, conversely, the siphons could have flared at any other tense moment along the way or where Cassian was exhibiting fear or frustration. We’re given multiple, little vignettes while Azriel and Cassian were spying together where the siphons could have flared instead.
But the siphons are there, after Gwyn’s name is mentioned, because they are meant to be there. That is the author’s hand pointing at something she wants you to notice … and then leaving the fuller articulation for Azriel’s own story, where it belongs. This is not Azriel’s story. It’s Cassian’s and Nesta’s.
Anything more overt than a siphon flare in this scene would be narratively premature and wouldn’t fit the other pieces that the author is trying to set up, convey, and highlight. This is not me saying that nothing is there (because I do think this means something). Instead, this is me saying that SJM knows exactly when and how to show her hand … and a brief, involuntary response in someone else’s POV is precisely the right amount of signal.
AND THEN THERE IS SANGRAVAH
A common argument is that Azriel throws all reason aside when concerned about a female he feels deeply for, and … okay, sure. Maybe? I disagree with some of this on multiple points, and think that this interpretation is sometimes overexaggerated and that there are other important considerations to focus on regarding those moments in question, specifically where Mor is involved (another post for another time perhaps).
But if we are going to talk about Azriel’s emotional responses … if we are truly trying to map out what moves him on an instinctual level, what breaks through his established control, and what causes him to abandon his own carefully maintained professional protocols … then, of course, we cannot talk about the Blood Rite scene without also talking about Sangravah.
“Azriel slaughtered all of them within moments. He didn’t hesitate.”
This is not standard operating procedure in the ACOTAR world. In fact, in the same book, Cassian draws attention to this at the Bog of Oorid:
“Cassian had dealt with enough assassins and prisoners to know keeping two prisoners alive would allow him to confirm information, to play them off each other.”
What happened at Sangravah seems like it was a situation where the Night Court was in desperate need of information. Not only is Rhysand preoccupied with information about it in ACOMAF, but when the story of what happened at Sangravah is changed by SJM in ACOSF, Gwyn informs us that:
“ . . . it became clear some of the soldiers had gotten away with the piece of the Cauldron, so Azriel headed after them.”
It almost sounds like a rare example of Azriel not following his professional protocol. This is not how he normally does his job.
Instead, at Sangravah: Azriel arrived, found Gwyn, and did not stop until there was no one left. Not one survivor, except for the few soldiers who had “gotten away.” When he was finished, Azriel remained focused on Gwyn afterward (perhaps allowing the few who escaped the ability to do so), as he wrapped Gwyn in his cloak and stayed with her until Morrigan and Rhys arrived.
Once again, I am not claiming that there is something romantic happening here, obviously. But what I am claiming is that Azriel did not consciously understand what was happening inside him in that moment where he apparently went into a blind rage. He demonstrates a complete abandonment of his own professional instincts and training, and it's a total break from his established pattern of behavior that we understand where his character is considered … based on what Azriel has shown the reader over several books and also based on what other characters have told us about him.
What happened at Sangravah is the text (through SJM) showing us that something happened to Azriel that reason and protocol could not contain. Something instinctive took over.
SJM has shown us across multiple series what it can look like when a character responds to something dangerous happening to their mate (whether they already know they’re mates, or also before they truly understand what they are to each other). And it can look an awful lot like what happened to Azriel at Sangravah.
The Blood Rite response/siphon scenes and the Sangravah depiction are not in contradiction. They are showing us two different but related things across different points in Azriel’s timeline. Both of these instances are showing instinctive responses that he appears to have little control over, but in different ways. And they both just happen to be brought to the reader's attention in the same book (which also just happens to be the most recent book and where SJM's most intentional choices are currently on display for our ACOTAR characters).
WHAT WE SHOULD ACTUALLY BE ASKING
When a scene feels like it doesn’t fit the argument you want to make, the answer is not to strip it of context and use the isolated moment as a counterpoint. The answer is to ask WHY THE AUTHOR WROTE IT THE WAY SHE DID.
What is she communicating?
What point of view did she choose and why?
What is this moment doing in the larger architecture of the story?
Azriel’s calm in the aftermath of the Valkyries abduction is not evidence against anything. It is the behavior of a highly trained operative managing an impossible situation in a moment where falling apart is not an option. His siphons, however, are the author briefly and deliberately showing you what is happening beneath the surface … again, in the only way that is narratively appropriate for this stage of the story, in someone else’s point of view, and in someone else’s book.
Everything on page is a choice. Azriel’s calm is a choice. The siphon flare is a choice. The changing and elaboration of Sangravah is a choice.
And SJM, my friends, does not make these choices accidentally.
