BenjCano
2015-09-06, 11:03 AM
Spoilers for Start of Darkness will be unmarked.
So the Dark One and Redcloak’s plan to use the Gates to control the Snarl is ultimately motivated by the fact that the gods designed the monstrous races as XP fodder for their clerics. They want to force the gods to create world 3.0, where the Dark One will have a say in how that world works and get a better deal for the monstrous races (particularly of concern to them are goblinoid species). The theme of Redcloak and the Dark One’s story is the limits to which one will go in order to give a voice to the voiceless. Another word for giving a voice to the voiceless is enfranchisement.
Let’s look at the situation at the Godsmoot. By mutual agreement, the gods have decided that this is the forum by which they will vote on the fate of the world. But the gods, particularly the Northern pantheon, have by accident or design disenfranchised Hel from participating in that proceeding. She has no voice, despite the fact that she is one of the gods that made the world. She cannot participate in the very-relevant-to-her business of casting a vote to decide if it’s time to pull the plug on world 2.0
And when she gets a representative by happenstance dropped into her lap, and sends him along his way to be her voice in the proceedings, what happens? Roy up and tries to murder him in the face. {SCRUBBED} I don’t believe for a second here that Rich intends that as a parallel. For one thing, I know that he’s far more progressive to put Roy in the role of vote suppressors and then paint that in a heroic light, as strip 1000 did. But as Diamanda Hagan said, “I'm amazed sometimes at the subtext that writers don't spot in their own work.”
So the moral of the events of the past few comics seems to be, “If a representative body makes decisions you don’t agree with, murder members of that legislature until you get results you want.” Why is this painted in a heroic light?
Let me preemptively deal with the matter that if the vote goes Hel’s way, she’ll get a massive power boost from all the dwarven souls. And that’s a valid point, except that that situation came about as a result of the internal negotiations of the Northern Pantheon. They decided that dwarves who dies any way but in Glorious Battle become Hel’s, despite knowing that if a mass cataclysm resulted, she would benefit from that tremendously. This goes back to disenfranchisement. “Sure, we’ll make this deal with you, but the instant that deal actually benefits you, some guy with a sword will murder your representative in the face.”
So the Dark One and Redcloak’s plan to use the Gates to control the Snarl is ultimately motivated by the fact that the gods designed the monstrous races as XP fodder for their clerics. They want to force the gods to create world 3.0, where the Dark One will have a say in how that world works and get a better deal for the monstrous races (particularly of concern to them are goblinoid species). The theme of Redcloak and the Dark One’s story is the limits to which one will go in order to give a voice to the voiceless. Another word for giving a voice to the voiceless is enfranchisement.
Let’s look at the situation at the Godsmoot. By mutual agreement, the gods have decided that this is the forum by which they will vote on the fate of the world. But the gods, particularly the Northern pantheon, have by accident or design disenfranchised Hel from participating in that proceeding. She has no voice, despite the fact that she is one of the gods that made the world. She cannot participate in the very-relevant-to-her business of casting a vote to decide if it’s time to pull the plug on world 2.0
And when she gets a representative by happenstance dropped into her lap, and sends him along his way to be her voice in the proceedings, what happens? Roy up and tries to murder him in the face. {SCRUBBED} I don’t believe for a second here that Rich intends that as a parallel. For one thing, I know that he’s far more progressive to put Roy in the role of vote suppressors and then paint that in a heroic light, as strip 1000 did. But as Diamanda Hagan said, “I'm amazed sometimes at the subtext that writers don't spot in their own work.”
So the moral of the events of the past few comics seems to be, “If a representative body makes decisions you don’t agree with, murder members of that legislature until you get results you want.” Why is this painted in a heroic light?
Let me preemptively deal with the matter that if the vote goes Hel’s way, she’ll get a massive power boost from all the dwarven souls. And that’s a valid point, except that that situation came about as a result of the internal negotiations of the Northern Pantheon. They decided that dwarves who dies any way but in Glorious Battle become Hel’s, despite knowing that if a mass cataclysm resulted, she would benefit from that tremendously. This goes back to disenfranchisement. “Sure, we’ll make this deal with you, but the instant that deal actually benefits you, some guy with a sword will murder your representative in the face.”