That's still not really contradicting what I interpreted. I know I'm late to the party, but I'd still like to hear your thoughts. I love Dark Road, and I like the idea of moral ambiguity in the light-darkness conflict, but it's all Tell and no Show. And even then, his belief in light is vindicated by the plot. And Eraqus is ultimately an example of "false light." His darkness masquerades as pure light, but is ultimately still darkness, which leads to his obsession and more rash actions. ![]() Even the Spirits are heavily implied to be part-light, which is why they're benevolent. All our examples of good darkness ultimately have their origins in light. And we haven't really seen much of darkness that suggests that it's anything but evil and malevolent. ![]() And ultimately, Baldr's self-blame and depression lead to him being possessed by a creature of darkness born from those feelings, so ultimately what happened still wasn't his fault. If a thing is considered good, then it's light. Another issue is that it pretty much cements that light is good and darkness is evil. ![]() One is that there's a whole dimension that's objectively dark, which contradicts that notion. My problem with the whole "subjective morality" thing they're trying stems from a few things.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |