this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2024
163 points (97.1% liked)

Asklemmy

43898 readers
1033 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 60 points 8 months ago (8 children)

In the third season of the legend of korra, a group of people try to get rid of a monarchy (which is long established as especially unequal and oppressive) in favor of self government. They also try to get rid of the avatar, because she is an infallible being with incredibly outsized power. I love the avatar universe and get how they needed to fight them, but the group wasn’t wrong

[–] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 55 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Even the first season had Amon, the guy that wanted equality between benders and non-benders. At one point we're even shown that power was cut to a predominantly non-bender neighborhood, and when people went outside to protest to get their power turned back on, they were all rounded up and arrested. Afterwards, when Korra goes and tries to get the people that were arrested set free, she's told

All equalist suspects are being detained indefinitely. They'll be freed if and when the task force deems them no longer a threat.

Just in case it wasn't clear enough by that point that non-benders were treated as second class citizens.

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 9 points 8 months ago

All of the LoK villains were basically correct, and had to be caricatures of their stated beliefs in order to be villains. Amon was one of the better ones IMO though. Zaheer is too unrealistic

[–] paultimate14@lemmy.world 19 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I've been meaning to re-watch Korra, but I remember even the first time I watched it being a bit disappointed in the "enlightened centrism" where they are trying to paint every conflict as pacifists vs extremists.

I think it's similar to looking at BioShock 1 and BioShock Infinite. There's a lot of writers out there who just use politics and ideology as a setting for the conflict rather than actually being central to their message. It's simply a solid formula to make a villain: take any sort of stance and push it to violent extremes. Comstock is a religious zealot, Andrew Ryan I don't think ever even mentions spirituality if I remember. Ken Levine's message in the two games is not about religion, but extremes.

There are benefits. It makes the villains more nuanced and relatable. It gives the protagonist room for doubt and allows for some of the "good" guys to take on antagonistic roles. But Korra also ends up supporting an oppressive regime, and Booker DeWitt gets shoehorned into fights against the people rebelling against his enemy because... Reasons?

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago

Andrew Ryan I don’t think ever even mentions spirituality if I remember.

"No gods or kings, only men."

[–] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

If you're talking about Kuvira you should read the comics that take place after the show. My feelings on Kuvira became much more mixed as I ended up sympathizing with her after finishing them.

[–] InfiniWheel@lemmy.one 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Its about Zaheer and his gang

[–] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

Oh. In my defense I haven't watched Korra for years and thought it was only 3 seasons.

[–] JowlesMcGee@kbin.social 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

He's talking about Zaheer and the Red Lotus. They were extremely well intentioned, but set about their goals with violence.

was there a reasonable alternative?

[–] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

Mate. I already got corrected, what's the point of telling me the same thing twice? Unless you just want attention. Blocking you.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 8 months ago

Even in the first season, I was siding with the equalists :s

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

They also try to get rid of the avatar, because she is an infallible being with incredibly outsized power.

Did autocorrect change "fallible"? Because otherwise it makes the opposite point.

[–] idiomaddict@feddit.de 4 points 8 months ago

Probably a brain fart, thanks s

[–] dandroid@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I think what made that group such good villains is that you could definitely see their point of view. That said, they left behind a TON of collateral damage, and they didn't seem to care that innocent people, including children, died in their wake everywhere they went. They were terrorists that happened to have a noble cause.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

The formula for a good villain is "legitimate grievance, insane solution."

[–] xkforce@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

No they definitely were bad guys. You cant try to murder someone just because they were born as a specific person you dont like and be good guys. And they didnt differentiate between the Earth queen and any other ruler. Their ideology when it came down to it, was indefensible trash.