ah yeah the second movie was a bit up and down with Odin's character, though I did once defend his "humans are like us" compared to his "human lives are fleeting" lectures to Thor and Loki, I personally had the idea that he had the same ideas, but what he said to Thor wasn't to be rude, but more to say that if Thor was to love Jane, it wouldn't last long, I don't know, I thought it was more of a warning than a "meh, humans suck" thing. But, yeah! I'm glad you RP Odin the way you do!
((I had rather interpreted the comment in that way as well, but it's an odd juxtaposition with what he says in Loki's trial (equating Asgardian lives to those of humans') and what he says to Thor, to the idea of at least inherently supposed superiority when he states that "illness is their defining trait." These just seem like inconsistent writing to me, but to make them work, there are several options, one of which you mention, which is audience and intentionality. Odin's comment to Thor is actually pretty matter-of-fact in the scheme of things he could say if he truly believed inherent superiority. His quote to Loki confirms an idea of equality of life, which would lead me to conclude that his intention in voicing the idea to Loki is humility, while the one to Thor really must serve as a warning rather than a pure dismissal.
However, the times during which Odin was presented as being on Earth might also have been an influence on that opinion, likewise with the fact that of the Nine Realms, or what we have seen of them, Earth/Midgard appears to be the only realm that is still divided into warring factions. The other realms only appear to fall into external wars or suffer invasions (nothing institutionalising division or war within the realm itself), while Earth still battles "a war of nations and flags" as Red Skull would probably put it.
It's also a rather vague notion as to what it is he means by "illness," and I really wish they had expanded on that idea. I have a few things rattling around as what I'll do with that, but so far what I'm leaning toward is actually something I came across recently in my reading of the Superman and Shazam team-up:
"We are born from darkness into the light . . . and thus, humanity, by its very nature, fears the unknown. The shadows. It fears the dark. Dark hearts as well as skies. Give light, and the darkness will disappear of itself. Humanity is not a race driven by rage. It is driven by desire. So, we are easily led astray. But, in that, we can also be led home."
Now, Odin's not Clark, but a mostly-immortal perspective on humanity from the inside out is helpful in this, particularly Clark's comment on the drive of humanity being desire. I could easily see desire interpreted, when it becomes uncontrolled, unfounded, malevolent, etc., as a disease or an illness. Desire can also prompt good or even greatness, as in desire for knowledge, understanding, etc., but it might be a little easier to see why a thought process like this might be prevalent in Asgard. Even Loki's tyrannical demands are phrased in the language of desire, the unspoken truth of humanity being that they "crave" subjugation.
Now, Asgard isn't free from desires--far from it. But the humanity's fleetingness of life and the "mad scramble for power, for identity" that exists and must be accomplished within what must seem a ridiculously short amount of time, I think, very well could be interpreted as something sick or diseased in the culture as a whole. It doesn't mean they are bad, or should be subjugated, or eradicated, or what have you--it means they ought to be pitied, I suppose, and that idea holds a sense of superiority that, while not outwardly malicious, is still unequal.
it makes me so mad when i go into the odin tag just to get mobbed by a bunch of "ODIN IS A JERK! ODIN IS SO MEAN! ODIN NEEDS TO DIE. ODIN IS A BAD FATHER" crap. And i'm glad I'm not alone
((I will be the first to admit that the writing on the most recent film hasn't helped Odin's case, though much of it could be explained as progressive emotional reactions to the events of the other films, but what probably irritates me most is that many fans feel the need to justify their favourite character's actions by completely warping the characterisation of others--and Odin is a prime example. I would also argue that Frigga is as well, and both of these characters have been twisted around and polarised so dramatically from what the original conception of the appeared to be in the first film for the sole purpose of defending the prospect of redemption in Loki. The problem I have is that the amount of consideration and analysis from a varied perspective used to analyse Loki is not ever shared among the other characters in the series, when most of the same arguments that are used to interpret and forgive Loki's character can easily be applied to others.
I think I summed it up in this post.
--the idea being that perspective is everything, and "showing compassion for complexity of character" ought to apply to all characters. A far more interesting narrative emerges if all characters are treated with consideration, put under analysis (both critical and defensive), and treated not solely as devices to fuel other characters' actions or motivations, but as people with motivations, good qualities, bad qualities, and perspectives of their own, even when they are not the protagonist or primary characters. The protagonist is simply where the multiple arcs and stories of each character in the series intersects.
I'unno, it's early in the morning here for me, but that's my thinking on it and what I've tried to play in our RPs on this site. While I often may come off as angry about the interpretation and proliferation of Loki, I do not hate any character in the series, and I think character hate is probably one of the silliest things I've seen on this site, beaten only perhaps by the act of tagging character hate.))
