[001]
number9robotic
Current Version
Changed line(s) 7 from:
n
As for the Doylist sense, that it’s wrong for Riot to depict a justified revolutionary as anything but the “real” good guy, is similarly a very un-nuanced take on how to observe fiction, because it assumes that those who are completely agreeable must be the heroes, while those who are disagreeable must be the villains. Like… characters flaws are not de facto a damning, irreparable thing for its heroes, just as much as they can define characters as villains. Trying to land on the whole “Riot is trying to write a BothSidesHaveAPoint scenario” is the wrong observation to make, when it’s trying to say that both sides are crucially flawed. It’s really important to note that \'\'Demacia’s anti-mage genocide is depicted as an unambiguously bad thing in the fiction,\'\' with none of the modern Demacian champions all believing in the rhetoric, and several other than Sylas wanting to fight back in their own way. Sylas is sympathetic to wants to fight back, but the actual means of getting there are sketchy and in practice driven by dreams of destructive anarchy, and writing fiction like that is not invalid.
to:
As for the Doylist sense, that it’s wrong for Riot to depict a justified revolutionary as anything but the “real” good guy, is similarly a very un-nuanced take on how to observe fiction, because it assumes that those who are completely agreeable must be the heroes, while those who are disagreeable must be the villains. Like… characters flaws are not de facto a damning, irreparable thing for its heroes, just as much as they can define characters as villains. Trying to land on the whole “Riot is trying to write a BothSidesHaveAPoint scenario” is the wrong observation to make, when it’s trying to say that both sides are crucially flawed. It’s really important to note that \\\'\\\'Demacia’s anti-mage genocide is depicted as an unambiguously bad thing in the fiction,\\\'\\\' with none of the modern Demacian champions believing in the rhetoric, with several other than Sylas wanting to fight back in their own way. Sylas is sympathetic to wants to fight back, but the actual means of getting there are sketchy and in practice driven by dreams of destructive anarchy, and writing fiction like that is not invalid or unethical, even if it doesn\\\'t fulfill the story potential Skyen wants Riot to pursue (not getting what you want from fiction is not de facto \\\"bad fiction\\\").
Changed line(s) 9 from:
n
I was tempted to rewrite this entry as Riot making him UnintentionallySympathetic… except they are writing him in exactly the way I believe they intended to write this character and this fiction: he is sympathetic in theory, antagonistic and dangerous in his actions. I don’t believe that just because he had a horrible backstory where he was forced to eat rats, that means he’s \
to:
I was tempted to rewrite this entry as Riot making him UnintentionallySympathetic… except they are writing him in exactly the way I believe they intended to write this character and this fiction: he is sympathetic in theory, antagonistic and dangerous in his actions. I don’t believe that just because he had a horrible backstory where he was forced to eat rats, that means he’s \\\"completely justified\\\" in publicly humiliating the prince by doing the same thing before executing him and his king father, no matter how much of a poetic spin you try and put on it.
