The Night Unfurls has moments across every part of the scale despite its overall dark, gory tone.
open/close all folders
Cynicism VS. Idealism, who wins?
The conflict between Olga Discordia and Celestine Lucross is initially framed as an "cynicism vs. idealism" scenario. While the former wants to Kill All Humans due to them being the real monsters who enslave her kind, the latter believes that there is still good in the world. The result is a war that persists for centuries, a stalemate where no side emerges victorious.
Contrary to expectations where one or the other eventually comes out on top due to their superior ideologies, Celestine wins in the end not because of her idealism, but rather due to her being able to acquire an extreme advantage that is the Outside-Context Problem Kyril Sutherland, who only joins so he can get paid. The result would be vastly different had he chosen to join Olga, not Celestine. After all, it's absolute power, which is not inherently cynical or idealistic, that determines the victor.
Contrary to expectations where one or the other eventually comes out on top due to their superior ideologies, Celestine wins in the end not because of her idealism, but rather due to her being able to acquire an extreme advantage that is the Outside-Context Problem Kyril Sutherland, who only joins so he can get paid. The result would be vastly different had he chosen to join Olga, not Celestine. After all, it's absolute power, which is not inherently cynical or idealistic, that determines the victor.
On villains/antagonists
The portrayal of villains is mostly cynical. 99% of the antagonists are all in favour of a Sex Slave Empire. It matters not whether they are a mook (e.g. orcs, human mercs, etc.), a main villain, or a traitor that pretends to be on the same side. It matters not whether they are human or non-human, noble or peasant. Anyone who joins the Black Dogs is practically unsalvageable. No misunderstandings, no redeeming qualities, no tragic sides, no redemption arcs. On the bright side, don't expect these people to last long against the unkillable Anti-Hero who has no qualms of Paying Evil Unto Evil, and no tears are shed for their inevitable demise.
On warfare
The portrayal of warfare is slightly cynical. While The Good Guys Always Win with an overpowered protagonist on their side, the narrative doesn't shy away from the Pyrrhic Victories, the substantial Rape, Pillage, and Burn, the unavoidable civilian casualties, and the destruction of their homes. Warfare is a "kill or be killed" environment where opposing sides never compromise.
Meanwhile, the Kid Heroes are put into situations Harmful to Minors, rack up a high Mook bodycount, and traverse weird locations that would normally drive people of their age insane. Contrary to the expectation where they would be portrayed as traumatised Child Soldiers in other cynical works, these people turn out to be mentally well-adjusted, sticking with their Mentor in Sour Armor through thick and thin.
Meanwhile, the Kid Heroes are put into situations Harmful to Minors, rack up a high Mook bodycount, and traverse weird locations that would normally drive people of their age insane. Contrary to the expectation where they would be portrayed as traumatised Child Soldiers in other cynical works, these people turn out to be mentally well-adjusted, sticking with their Mentor in Sour Armor through thick and thin.
On the state of the universe
The state of the universe is firmly on the middle. On one hand, the story is critical of the idea that all the problems of a country would be magically gone by having a good, talented ruler running said country. War, slavery, and Fantastic Racism are problems that persist in Eostia for centuries. On the other hand, the main characters do make some sort of progress even if the problems linger, which is obviously better than simply leaving them to fester.
