Ellie’s memory of the golfing scene and what it tells us about her.
🚨spoilers for tlou2🚨
I think Ellie’s flashback to Joel’s death is very telling of how she internalized the event and the meaning she applied to his death. It’s also a good demonstration of her relationship to autonomy. Let’s break down the elements that were inconsistent with the actual event:
The stairs/hallway are much longer than they were. This suggests a sense of helplessness, an inability to get there fast enough. Joel is constantly out of reach.
There is blood on the floor outside of the door. Not entirely certain on this one but my hunch is that she blames herself for not seeing more obvious signs of violence/not knowing something was wrong sooner.
The door is locked, another roadblock in her path to Joel. She can’t access him, she can’t help, he needs her and she isn’t there.
Most importantly. Joel yells “Ellie, help me” (which he didn’t in the actual scene, he just screams. He doesn’t say a word in the actual scene)
Ellie hearing Joel scream for her help, calling for her while being horribly beaten, and her being repeatedly impeded on her way to him suggests that what she took away from his death is that she wasn’t enough. They always helped each other, always had each others backs, always got up. Ellie views his death as a failure. She was too slow, too weak, not smart enough to save him. She failed him when he needed her most. She is absolutely helpless to save him, just like she was helpless to save Riley, Tess, Sam, and Jessie (and Marlene, and humanity, and and and-).
Once again, Ellie makes a decision (staying with Riley, going to the fireflies, staying with Joel, being the cure, trying to forgive Joel) and once again her autonomy and ability to find closure is ripped from her.
This is the inciting incident of tlou pt2, this is the moment where Ellie’s whole world shatters the same way Joel’s did at the start of pt1. Ellie enters into the same cycle (which I like to call the “Joel cycle” because… yeah.) that he did, and throughout pt2 she stays in the “20 years later” phase of the cycle. She is changed, she has lost her light, lost what she fought for. She lost her chance to genuinely forgive Joel and rebuild their relationship. She is stuck in a gruelling and violent world that she has no anchor in, at least not anymore. His death is so sudden and so incredibly violent that it practically gave her (and me as well, tbh) whiplash. She’s in a state of total shock.
On another devastating note, this is one of the three times in tlou that we see Ellie beg (that I remember). The first is begging Joel to get up at the university of Eastern Colorado, the second is begging him to get up and for Abby to stop, and the third is begging Abby to not kill Dina because she’s pregnant. (Two times she begs Joel to get up, one time he doesn’t. Two times she begs Abby to spare her family and one time she does. What a beautifully haunting contrast)
To wrap up, every person creates an internal narrative, a story of their life that is crafted from their context and lived experiences. The meaning we derive from those experiences doesn’t always reflect the truth, and that can sometimes bite us in the ass majorly when we experience a traumatic event. We tend to want to find someone or something to assign blame to, some reason or rationale to why it happened. We tell stories. We write them in our minds about ourselves and what happens to us and what that says about us.
But Ellie is wrong. Joel’s death happened in response to a conscious and willing choice he made. It is in no way her fault, and there was absolutely no way for her to know or to stop what was happening. I think Ellie knows that much on an intellectual level, It just doesn’t change how devastated she is over the whole event. It can’t change the fact that she FEELS as though this was all her fault, that Joel did what he did to save her, that she could have saved him. That she should have.
309 notes
·
View notes
I wrote a post trying to figure out why on earth some Pagans & Witches refer to Imbolc (an Irish spring agricultural holiday associated with St Brigid, a potential Christianization of the Goddess Brigid/Bríg) as Candlemas, the completely Christian holiday celebrating The Purification of Mary & Presentation of Jesus at The Temple— which originated in the eastern part of the Roman Empire (which the only "pagan" aspect was it competing with Roman Lupercalia for celebrants).
Many pagan & witch spaces online have a constant disdain for Christianity thus I could not wrap my head around them using such an important point of Jesus' & Mary's life as one of their festivals/'sabbats'.... then, after writing a bunch of stuff, I stumbled onto the answer on Wikipedia's Wheel of The Year page, which has citations for its claims:
Margaret Murray (very early 20th century scholar) in her now discredited witch-cult hypothesis said that the Scottish "witch" Issobell Smyth in 1661 confessed to attending meetings for witches on the cross quarter days included Candlemas. Robert Graves (oh how I loathe you ehem I mean: poet folklorist), mentioned that Candlemas was part of the 8 ancient British agricultural festivals. And Doreen Valiente ("The Mother of Wicca") included Candlemas in her list of Greater Sabbat Fire Festivals, while also listing "Gaelic counterparts," in this case Imbolc.
Sigh.
Early (read: 19th-20th century) paganism and witchcraft, or scholarly work about it, really was just: put every claim regardless of accuracy from any culture in this jar, shake it up real good, see what pops out from the mix, then pretend its historically attested to and traditional despite any and all evidence.
Also whatever Wikipedia writer wrote this, I appreciate your sassiness ... even if it was unintentional:
Due to early Wicca's influence on modern paganism and the syncretic adoption of Anglo-Saxon and Celtic motifs, the most commonly used English festival names for the Wheel of the Year tend to be the Celtic ones introduced by Gardner and the mostly Germanic-derived names introduced by Kelly, regardless whether the celebrations are based on those cultures.
EDIT: To be clear, not all neo/pagans, witches, wiccans, occultists, people-who-use-wheel-of-year are anti-Christian! I'm not trying to say that. But as a worshipper of Mary now, I notice it more and more. Nor am I saying all those people follow Murray/Grave/Valiente blindly but published works and trusted blogs often seem to. This is simply an observation, I've taken notice of, its not the entire communities.
39 notes
·
View notes
On the Changing Nature of the Borg
I was thinking about Season 2 of Star Trek: Picard yesterday, and I was once again struck by one of the things that disappointed me about the show: The complete retcon they gave the nature of the Borg.
I'm far from the first person to make this observation, and when I complained to friends about it last night, I was a little worried I might be doing the S2 writers a disservice. Maybe I was misremembering the details from the show and putting too much of my own interpretation on top of it. Or I might have latched on to somebody else's criticism and not checked to see if it was supported by the text.
But then I rewatched episode 2x09, "Hide and Seek" today, expecting to have to look very closely for the details that support my reading - only to find that I didn't over-interpret some throwaway line, this is a key piece of dialogue.
So, here it is: my thoughts and feelings about what happened to the Borg in season 2!
Spoilers for season 2 of Star Trek: Picard ahead, obviously. Also quite a bit of saltiness. (I have tagged this post accordingly, so please take this as your sign to blacklist that tag and/or stop reading if you're not in the mood for saltiness ;) )
Let us begin with a quick walk through the history of the Borg.
[Edit: That was a lie, I am incapable of "quick." Prepare yourself for a verbose trek through the history of the Borg.]
In TNG, they were introduced as practically a force of nature. They didn't hold grudges, they weren't ambitious or greedy or megalomaniacal. They didn't spread across the Galaxy because they wanted to be conquerors or rulers. They simply spread. Like a virus, or an invasive plant.
They added new technologies and biology into their collective to improve themselves and their chances of survival. Assimilation was akin to evolution for them. (I know this is not how biological evolution works. I'm using it as shorthand. )
These Borg didn't care that people might not want to be assimilated because for one, their objections would be overwritten once they were Borg, and for another, they had no chance of escaping their fate, anyway.
This first, original form of the Borg, in my opinion, was the most truly alien they have ever been.
This characterization started to collapse a bit once First Contact decided to introduce the Borg Queen as a weird psycho-sexual horror component, making the Borg less of a force of nature and more of a nominally collective hive-mind that operated like a person would.
Voyager definitely added to this interpretation of the Borg, making them more beholden to the moods and wishes of the Queen. They were no longer simply a dispassionate alien organism, moving through the galaxy in a quest for self-improvement because that was their nature. Instead, their characterization became more human, pursuing specific goals, strategies and motivations.
On some level, I completely understand this choice. Making your main series villain a force of nature rather than a character with personal motivation is difficult to pull off, especially when that isn't the main story you're trying to tell. But it did end up taking the Borg one step farther away from their original alien-ness.
One thing Voyager added to the mythos, though, that I find deeply fascinating is that instead of having the Borg Queen lust for power and control, or having her act out of fear and self-preservation, they instead focused on the concept of Perfection. In "The Omega Directive", Seven of Nine explains that to the Borg, the pursuit of Perfection is almost spiritual.
According to this interpretation, the Borg don't simply search out and assimilate new species because of an "evolutionary" drive for self-improvement. Instead, they are on a quest to reach a state of absolute perfection. They add new technologies and biological diversity in the hopes of coming closer to this goal and one day finding this most ideal state of existence.
These Borg don't care about your objections to assimilation, because they are convinced that their vision of perfection is universal. Every species must obviously strive for perfection and they can offer that, so why would you ever want to resist? They have no concept of the fact that others might not define perfection in the way they do, might not strive for it at all, or that "perfection" at the cost of giving up all individuality and sovereignty might not be an acceptable trade-off for people.
(And no, Voyager is not internally consistent about this. Barely any long-running tv show is entirely internally consistent. But the point still stands.)
On some level, this drive also brings the Borg closer to humanity: less dispassionate virus and more colonizers who come to extract value from “lesser cultures” and impose a more enlightened way of life on them because They Know What's Best. Still, I think the relentless, uncompromizing pursuit of a nigh-spiritual ideal of Perfection and utter disinterest in personhood and self-determination of other people make the Borg into a formidable and, at the end of the day, alien villain.
Which brings us to season 2 of Star Trek: Picard.
The thing that rubbed me the wrong way about the way the Borg were characterized here is summed up in an exchange between Jurati and the Borg Queen:
Jurati: "Millions of species, planets, and still you always needed more."
Borg Queen: "Perfection takes time, dear."
Jurati: "This was never about perfection or evolution or any of that bullshit. It was never enough, because you're just like me. Lonely."
And that's it. In all of five sentences, we have retconned the entire history, motivation and fundamental nature of one of the main alien species of the Trek universe.
Everything we have been told about the Borg, everything they have said about their reasons and their character, none of it was true. They have been lying to all of us and to themselves this entire time. They aren't a force of nature or a people/collective organism in pursuit of a higher ideal. Instead, it was all a single woman's misguided quest to not feel alone anymore.
Now, I understand that for some people, this revelation adds a new layer of complexity to a villain that had grown somewhat stale. And I have seen others argue that they like the idea that the Borg collective is actually all about connection. If that's you, I'm not saying you're wrong or trying to ruin your enjoyment of these characters.
But personally, I find this development rather disappointing. This plot twist retroactively changes not only the philosophy, psychology, and raison d'être of a fascinating alien culture but also the narrative significance of the Borg in the Trek cosmos.
Before, they were in conflict with the Federation because they refused (or were unable) to look outwards and see that there was more than one "correct" mode of existence, and that the life of people different than them had worth. Now, the conflict arises because they refuse to look inward and acknowledge that what they are really looking for cannot be achieved through conquest.
Where before they assimilated civilizations in a quest for utmost perfection no matter the cost, now they are assimilating masses of people in the hopes of creating a chorus that will drown out the loneliness.
Don't get me wrong, that sort of twist can make for an intriguing villain arc, but firstly, it needs to be executed with a lot more care than season 2 made room for, and secondly, it works a lot better for individuals or groups of individuals than for a species that is ostensibly a telepathic hive-mind.
(Seriously, the in-universe implications -- for the Prime-timeline Borg, the Federation, the xBs -- are staggering and are glossed over completely on the show. Then again, this is the same season that doesn't bother to show (or tell) whether Agnes Jurati chooses to remain with the Borg Queen out of a genuine desire to create a new collective or as a desperate bargain to save her friends. You know. The culminating moment of her character arc in season 2. But that is another rant.)
At the end of the day, I don't feel like this newly-revealed secret motivation adds a fresh layer of complexity to a well-known villain. Instead, I think it takes away many of the aspects that made the Borg intriguing, both narratively and as an alien species, and turns them into something much more human and, frankly, much more banal.
48 notes
·
View notes