Ive been a little confused at the perception that episode 3 of the Last of Us gave Seth a ‘redemption arc’.
Seth was never being presented to us as a voice of reason or justice at the town meeting. He’s a catalyst. We’re not supposed to feel comfortable with the fact that Ellie’s need to leave Jackson is both supported and facilitated by a man who very loudly and proudly called her and Dina d*kes three months prior. He didnt help them because he’s suddenly a lesbian ally; he’s an old, conservative cop, and they weren’t friends. Sure, he made a short and weak apology at Maria’s request, and then he probably forgot about the whole thing, just like Ellie did the second she realised he might be on her side. At the town meeting, he accuses everyone of being “a bunch of goddamn victims” because they refuse to entertain the notion that violent retaliation is a way of ‘protecting our own’. These are not the words of a man reformed. Ellie saw that her cause was quickly losing the support from those around her, from those who care about her safety, her future, her grief—and instead it was someone who at one point had zero respect for her that said exactly what she wanted to hear.
Ellie Williams is a prime example of a young girl who is more than willing to pick and choose parts of what people say to her in order to further her own confirmation bias; be that Marlene telling her she has a unique purpose, David telling her she’s violent and dangerous at heart, Joel telling her she’s not family, Dina telling her she’s not ‘school oriented’. Ellie isn’t trying to make a well rounded or logical decision, nor is she trying to do right by anyone else other than herself. Just because a character agrees with the protagonist, it doesn’t mean their intentions are in good faith in the first place.
Seth didnt ‘redeem’ himself when he helped Ellie and Dina carry out their devastating revenge mission, he just confirmed he’s just as destructive as Ellie is.
