it's kinda wack how sophie was immediately overwhelmed with anger and accusations when she burned down the warehouse but i don't remember anyone saying anything about fitz trying to kill alvar? um what? (also this isn't fitz hate, just an observation)
Related to this, it could be that Sophie got such a reaction out of so many people because those people hadn't just been fighting. The adults had been back their waiting and there wasn't a threat to their lives. A lot easier to be mad a someone when you've haven't been in a fight and there's no immediate threat. If Sophie had come back injured, then they would've reacted differently.
To expand on that, both Sophie and Fitz did something with severe consequences: Sophie burned down an enemy storehouse, Fitz killed his brother (using this phrasing because at the point in time we're looking at that was the belief. That hadn't realized Alvar had escaped). As such, the two instances get compared to each other a lot. Which is fair!! Both of these actions have severe consequences that impact more than the perpetrator, so it's fair that others would have a reaction. But the reactions to each action were very different. Sophie was chewed out, told she started a war, her actions generally looked down upon. Alternatively, when it came to Fitz everyone was more quiet, shocked, uncomfortable, but they didn't make a big fuss out of it.
I have three possible explanations: the impact doesn't affect people the same way, people weren't focused enough to care about Alvar's death, or that it was how the perpetrators felt that affected their reactions.
For the first one, I know I already said that they both would have a big impact, but I think the impact is a different kind of big. Sophie burning the storehouse down has more political impact, something that will affect plans and fights and motivations for everyone. That's what makes it a problem and why people were upset with her. For Fitz, the impact is more emotional. Alvar dying...didn't really change a lot in terms of the fight against the Neverseen. His impact on the story had become less plot focused and a lot more emotional affect on the Vackers and specifically Fitz. So his death impacts a specific set of people harshly, but while the Black Swan would be sympathetic to their struggles to an extent, it's okay for them to have those emotions because the effect on their order is minimal. And if they later processed more and realized they were uncomfortable with Fitz having killed his brother, he's not central to their order and can be sidelined.
The second explanation is that everyone might've been too worked up and frazzled when Alvar was thought dead to really get upset at Fitz. It was directly after a battle and everyone was just glad their loved ones were alive, they didn't have the mental capacity to process what Alvar being dead by Fitz's hands meant. There was clean up to do and people to contact and family to hug and friends to find. Alvar being dead just wasn't that important right then. They knew it would impact Fitz, but that was something they weren't dealing with in that very moment. Perhaps if they'd had time later to process they'd have reacted differently to Fitz! But the time period during which Alvar was thought dead was a few hours at most, not nearly enough time to get to that.
Related to this, it could be that Sophie got such a reaction out of so many people because those people hadn't just been fighting. The adults had been back their waiting and there wasn't a threat to their lives. A lot easier to be mad a someone when you've haven't been in a fight and there's no immediate threat. If Sophie had come back injuried, then they would've reacted differently.
And finally, Sophie and Fitz's reactions to their actions might've affected that. Maybe Fitz didn't get chewed out by the adults because he was clearly agonizing over what he'd done. It was complicated yes, but underneath all the confusion he was hurt and horrified by his own actions. The adults didn't need to scold him because he was already overanalyzing himself and making himself suffer, they didn't need to add to it. Sophie, conversely, was proud of her decision. She thought she'd done something right and had no regrets until people started scolding her. They thought she had something to learn from it and had done something bad a didn't know it, so they told her off and started lecturing her.
I don't know what the actual reason could be, but those are just some theories!! The two situations may have a lot in common on the surface, but have a lot of different details and elements that could explain why Sophie was met with anger and scorn and Fitz with nothing extreme. Thank you for the topic!! It's a really interesting set of reactions to compare
