#prince orque

[princeorque]

It's wild to me that Claude is so widely perceived as untraumatized, especially in comparison to the other lords. This man has lived through extreme racism and xenophobia that threatened his life numerous times as well as his very identity. He is fundamentally in such difficult position that he has to be permanently on the lookout for threats, wherever he is.

It's pretty clear that this traumatic experience informs nearly all of his behavior. I would even argue Claude is so strongly driven by his trauma that you just can't understand his characters without considering its influence. There’s so many elements going in this direction: his drive to create a world that is at its essence safe for him to live in, his fear of vulnerability, his avoidant tendency, his thirst for knowledge, his particular ways of handling battles, etc.

It seems like the root of the treatment of Claude's trauma is both the normalization and dismissal of the suffering of racism. When we look at the wider cast, it shows a concerning trend in the treatment of character who's experience is tied to it: Dimitri or Sylvain tend to be painted much more tragically than Dedue is, and Petra is not really potrayed as tragic in general. It's particularly insidious as it's not necessarily that their hardships are not acknowledged, it's moreso that they do not get the emphasis and emotional drive other are granted. In essence, racism may be treated as something bad but it's normalized in the way it's not taken as an extraordinary traumatic event in its consideration. There's a fundamental disconnect in what is said and how it's actually handled.

In Claude case, it does seem to be as well due to the pejorative view of both trauma and mental illness. Often, I have seen this supposed lack of trauma held to frame Claude as above the other lords ( especially in memes, with some mention in discourse ), who are in return painted as irrational and emotional. Claude is thus removed from his struggles because due to ableist misconceptions, it would hurt his image as a cool, smart guy.

[princeorque]

As much as the implementation of the Agarthans is significantly flawed, I do think they hold a narrative role that is more interesting than given credit for.

Fe3h wider story surrounds a conflict that takes roots in much deeper history than first appears. Fundamentally, it arises from the problems of a society based on what Seiros built centuries ago from the fondation of the Church of Seiros to the crested elites... Which in itself originate from the conflicts between the first humans, the Agarthans, and the Nabateans.

In this way, the existence of the Agarthans in relation to the Nabateans embodies a cyclical nature of conflict. Not only does it give depth to the story in the present of the game by giving it a past, but it also strengthens the ideological themes presented in the war and renforce narrative parallel between characters.

For example, there's Claude who has distance with the past haunting Fodlan: him defeating Nemesis to then free Fodlan from some of the shackles holding it back feels much stronger in this context. Similarly, there's Edelgard who mirror Rhea in the wounds of her past caused by the Agarthans, but foil her in the path she took after. Rhea enchored society in what hurt her, authority being literally symbolized by the blood and bones of her kindered, to be able to get revenge on the Agarthans. In contrast, Edelgard used the Agarthans to radically change society in a way that would prevent what hurt her to ever happen again.

The Agarthans may be unuanced vilain in a story that build a more morally complex war, but ironically getting rid them would remove a lot of depth.