Tumgik
#as is Technoblade having the emotional intelligence and self awareness of a bag of rocks
razberry-jam · 3 years
Text
Also!!! Idk if this would help people here??? But I’ve noticed a lot of people having discourse on whether Techno is meant to be interpreted, on a narrative level, if he is in the right or in the wrong! 
I just wanted to share, as someone with a big nerd feelings about storytelling, plot structure, etc- that not every narrative is about showing characters who are in the right, react appropriately, have correct beliefs etc. Most aren’t, actually! 
This is a strange trend I’ve noticed recently!!! I think it’s because a lot of us grew up idolizing fictional characters that we shouldn't have, and so who actually turned out to be assholes?? So I think people have somehow got it stuck in their heads that the main purpose of a character, or a story, is to be a role model, to be an example, send a message etc etc!
A side effect of storytelling is that we draw meaning- a “message” or a “theme” from it. Which is hella cool!! But it’s not what storytelling IS. Storytelling is the process by which you explain the change of state of one thing to another. Saying “The ballon was floating. Then I popped it.” Is a story! Saying “The ballon was a good person. Good things will happen to it.” Is not necessarily, because the ballon is not changing on any fundamental level. Even saying “bad things will happen to it” is not a story, because the ballon is still remaining exactly the same. (more underneath)
A story MIGHT say both. “A boy say a drowning cat. The boy saved the cat. The town threw him a party to thank him!” Is a story. It can be interpreted to send the message, “this boy is good, and because of that good things happen to him. Maybe we should be good too!” But even without the interpretation, the story still stands. 
Because the story does not require a message to be itself, storytelling doesn’t require messages. So the main point of stories can’t be sending messages if they don't require them. A story DOES require that a thing change from one state to another. So, if that’s true, describing change is the point of storytelling. 
It’s sort of like painting. A painting IS paint on canvas. Gogh’s Starry Night is paint on canvas, arranged to look like a night sky. People can pull different interpretations of it- but a good artist rarely goes in with their message fully formed in their mind. An artist represents something else, and by doing so, a message will often come out subconsciously through the artists’s subject combined with their own (often conflicting) beliefs, feelings, and desires.
How do most authors decide to induce change? They use conflict! Conflict: to be incompatible or at variance. Conflict, by its nature, creates change because incompatible things can’t share the same space. These two things will continue to push and fight against each other until they find a place where both of them can come to a rest. Think water and oil! Or a cat and a mouse. 
This is something that is fairly often brought up in English classes! If you’ve listen to some of Technoblade’s early streams, he even brings it up during his first two Pogtopia streams!! He mentions that he’s a little worried because everyone on the server is “too nice” so there's “not enough conflict.” He’s not saying that cause he doesn’t want people to be nice- he’s saying that because when someone is not pushing against you, its harder to know what to do. You ever done improv? It’s much easier to improv a funny argument than to improv two people who are completely on the same page in every way. 
So! Taking the dream smp for example cause thats where we’re at!
I saw some people were a bit upset that Techno said he was glad Tommy died. Yeah, not a nice thing to say about c!Tommy!! BUT cc!Techno choosing to say that is a wonderful thing to do for cc!Tommy!! Why? It creates conflict. 
If Technoblade had a “good” opinion on Tommy’s death, there would not be sufficient conflict between them, which essentially means there is no story left to tell there. That’s not good for cc!Techno or cc!Tommy. 
IF Technoblade had a “neutral” opinion on Tommy’s death (as he initially tried to have) there's still technically not a conflict there. A neutral opinion is still neutral- it does not force Techno to actually confront his mixed feelings about Tommy, or Tommy to come to a bigger awareness of those feelings, either on his or Techno’s side. 
A “bad” opinion on Tommy’s death IS the most conflict inducing choice we have here. Though small, in this moment it immediately brings him into conflict with both Ranboo and Phil (Phil!!! Which is hella interesting!!). 
A “bad” opinion also continues to heighten the conflict between Tommy and Techno, which again, is a good thing. If Techno had openly admitted he was sad that Tommy was dead, then there isn’t really anything new for us to learn about Techno or Tommy when Tommy comes back. It is redundant- which is something you wanna HELLA avoid in storytelling. 
As well as brings Techno into conflict with himself! I’m of the opinion that, while Techno believes what he said, it is not necessarily true. We can see both from Phil’s reaction “I swear he has a heart guys.” We can see this in how he talks about other people we know he cares deeply about ie my “acquaintance” Ranboo who he was willing to murder someone over. And we see this even in his brief interactions with Tommy- when Tommy came over before seeing Dream to steal out of Techno’s chests, Techno was upset, but also incredibly lenient. Which you know, is coming from a guy who hoards things religiously, towards someone whose guts he’s supposed to hate. Techno’s inability to properly regulate his attachments- keeping a cold facade while bouncing between incredibly polarizing apathy or absolute ride-and-die devotion, is literally one of Techno’s most reoccurring struggles and character flaws. A character flaw, which if Techno did not have, he would cease to be a character with any sort of dynamic struggle within him.
And finally it brings the audience into conflict with Techno, which is actually a good thing. We loose interest in characters we completely understand, and we loose interest in characters when we know exactly the direction they are going in. People who are saying “How could Techno say that when early he’d said he’d have given the world for Tommy??” Is EXACTLY the question the writers want you to be asking. 
Anyway !! To sum up!!! For technoblade, as a writer (not a character!! as a writer!!) his main concern is not portraying a character who is in the right, has the correct beliefs, or is justified in his actions. I’d argue its also NOT portraying a character who is in the wrong, has wrong beliefs, or is completely unjust.His main goal is portraying an interesting character. Through which cc!Techno’s main tool is almost always conflict! 
The narrative’s goal is usually not to portray good people, or to punish people for what they deserve. It’s main purpose is not to teach us what’s right and wrong (though that is an incredibly interesting side of effect of some stories!) The main goal of most stories is to be interesting, create conflict, and explore hypothetical scenarios.
(Which, if you notice- is true of a lot of the CCs who come from a storytelling background! IE Wilbur, Tommy, etc).
I mean, the dude’s into Greek mythology. Greek mythology is like the absolute king of “maybe heroic but mostly asshole” main characters lol. 
Anyway!! That got a bit long! But that’s the idea : ) of course, anyone’s welcome to interpret or enjoy the story in anyway they like! And feelings are feelings. But the fandom idea that a character’s purpose is to be a role model misses the point (and often, a lot of the enjoyment) of writing. 
40 notes · View notes