![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
potboyvia https://ift.tt/2BayrNa
The truly embarrassing thing is that LST is over here deconstructing and giving the thesis statement to Ben’s entire character literally five minutes into Ben’s introductory scene (one of the most crucial scenes for establishing a character to the audience) and people act like Ben’s characterization is this huge mystery.
I’m deconstructing the entire scene because I’m petty
The literal first line Ben ever has:
And the response is:
Read: “You’re better than this; this is not who you are meant to be”
And the response:
Read: “Kylo Ren is not who you really are” (Note he doesn’t even say “Before you became Kylo Ren”, he says “Before you called yourself Kylo Ren”. He’s not even dignifying Ben with the belief that Ben even succeeded in this attempt to kill Ben Solo. He’s almost literally accusing Ben of playing dress-up; of ‘calling himself’ something that he isn’t, and hasn’t become.)
Read: “The First Order rose from the dark side…you did not” (does this need to be explained lol)
….to which Ben tries to show how Dark and Evil he is
To which LST is like
Read:
To which Ben unwittingly hoists himself by the petard of his own ironic foreshadowing:
Ben at this moment is almost undoubtedly referring to Vader, but we as the audience know (should know) that this is Case 1/1923748 of Ben spouting lines that will come to fruition in some ironic way later, when he accepts his true family– Anakin, Luke, Leia, Han (see: ‘Han Solo can’t save you’; ‘Let the past die…that’s the only way to become what you were meant to be’, which imo will blatantly come into ironic fruition when Ben allows the persona of Kylo Ren, which has kept him chained to Vader and the First Order, itself enslaved to its obsession with the failed Empire, to die, so that he may become his true self, who he was meant to be– which Lor San Tekka told us, in his very first scene, was who he was meant to be).
The thing that gets me with this scene is that it establishes everything important about Ben’s character, through his dialogue with Lor San Tekka:
This character (we know nothing about him yet as the audience) was not always Kylo Ren; Kylo Ren is not his true self
The persona of Kylo Ren is a bastardization of who he really is/should be
That ‘Kylo Ren’ and his family do not come from the Dark (the obvious converse is, he comes from the Light, from goodness)
That ‘Kylo Ren’ will never be able to escape this Light heritage
That ‘Kylo Ren’ unwittingly agrees with LST when LST asserts this
==Redemption.
Like. The whole damn thing is spelled out in Ben’s first scene, entirely through one dialogue. Ben’s characterization has always been extremely straightforward from the absolute beginning when we’re talking about the broad strokes. Antis always like to hold LST against Ben like the purpose of this scene wasn’t to contrast Ben’s actions with this extremely deliberate commentary about these actions. The writers set up this villain, only to immediately (literally immediately, in LST’s response to his first line) deconstruct the very concept that he is a villain in the deep structure of the story. Lor San Tekka doesn’t happen by accident to a story. He’s included with intent and purpose. It’s not a mystery what that purpose was.
The truly embarrassing thing is that LST is over here deconstructing and giving the thesis statement to Ben’s entire character literally five minutes into Ben’s introductory scene (one of the most crucial scenes for establishing a character to the audience) and people act like Ben’s characterization is this huge mystery.
I’m deconstructing the entire scene because I’m petty
The literal first line Ben ever has:
And the response is:
Read: “You’re better than this; this is not who you are meant to be”
And the response:
Read: “Kylo Ren is not who you really are” (Note he doesn’t even say “Before you became Kylo Ren”, he says “Before you called yourself Kylo Ren”. He’s not even dignifying Ben with the belief that Ben even succeeded in this attempt to kill Ben Solo. He’s almost literally accusing Ben of playing dress-up; of ‘calling himself’ something that he isn’t, and hasn’t become.)
Read: “The First Order rose from the dark side…you did not” (does this need to be explained lol)
….to which Ben tries to show how Dark and Evil he is
To which LST is like
Read:
To which Ben unwittingly hoists himself by the petard of his own ironic foreshadowing:
Ben at this moment is almost undoubtedly referring to Vader, but we as the audience know (should know) that this is Case 1/1923748 of Ben spouting lines that will come to fruition in some ironic way later, when he accepts his true family– Anakin, Luke, Leia, Han (see: ‘Han Solo can’t save you’; ‘Let the past die…that’s the only way to become what you were meant to be’, which imo will blatantly come into ironic fruition when Ben allows the persona of Kylo Ren, which has kept him chained to Vader and the First Order, itself enslaved to its obsession with the failed Empire, to die, so that he may become his true self, who he was meant to be– which Lor San Tekka told us, in his very first scene, was who he was meant to be).
The thing that gets me with this scene is that it establishes everything important about Ben’s character, through his dialogue with Lor San Tekka:
This character (we know nothing about him yet as the audience) was not always Kylo Ren; Kylo Ren is not his true self
The persona of Kylo Ren is a bastardization of who he really is/should be
That ‘Kylo Ren’ and his family do not come from the Dark (the obvious converse is, he comes from the Light, from goodness)
That ‘Kylo Ren’ will never be able to escape this Light heritage
That ‘Kylo Ren’ unwittingly agrees with LST when LST asserts this
==Redemption.
Like. The whole damn thing is spelled out in Ben’s first scene, entirely through one dialogue. Ben’s characterization has always been extremely straightforward from the absolute beginning when we’re talking about the broad strokes. Antis always like to hold LST against Ben like the purpose of this scene wasn’t to contrast Ben’s actions with this extremely deliberate commentary about these actions. The writers set up this villain, only to immediately (literally immediately, in LST’s response to his first line) deconstruct the very concept that he is a villain in the deep structure of the story. Lor San Tekka doesn’t happen by accident to a story. He’s included with intent and purpose. It’s not a mystery what that purpose was.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 11:52 am (UTC)I mean, I know it's symbol/metaphor/over-simplification but whatever, it's such a... hero-concerned morality/elitaritism/exceptionalism - I struggle to find the right English word, but it's the old Jedi and Republic problem which already destroyed their democracy once. Well, sure, in real life we tend to repeat the same mistakes ad infinitum, too, buuut...
I'm pretty much sure Kylo be redeem, because it's SW and because Han Solo didn't for nothing. ;) But if for his redemption, making him light or whatever the narration has to comdamn millions of billion, mostly brainwashed children, then I strongly disagree with the narration and its purpose.
Who, darn it all, rose from the dark side? Finn? Phasma? Mitaka? All these anonymous troopers? Even Hux? They were all nurtured to the dark side, sure, just like Ben had been, but they "rose" from the same place as Ben, Rey, and any other living being in the galaxy - in the SW lore it would the Force, I guess, the Life.
I guess one can argue FO is meant as an ideology/organisation, not the people, but it's... dangerous, imho, to divide organisation from the people so strongly. Because who do you kill/oppose fighting with any organisation? Always other people and I think it's easier to avoid some... grieve mistakes and crimes... when one remembers this.
Who - what - Ben Solo is, in-universe (outside of the universe of course he's the main character so it's obvious his fate matters to us more; but this is the line said in-universe, by the Wise Sage and Good Guy and that's why I have problems with it), that makes him more important, more "Light" than all these nameless troopers?
I mean, we all know who he is, even in-universe, but darn it all, if Force is going to play the favourites like this, I'm the first to oppose it. Perhaps because I grow up in Christian culture, come to think of it, so a culture where Higher Powers sacrifice his sons to save others, not hand-waved the fate of millions to save their progeny.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 02:04 pm (UTC)I mean what this is arguing, though, is that people are defined by their heritage to the point that even making a deliberate decision to become a murderer and the enforcer of a fascist cult does not count. Prince Ben is a prince, so of course he can never be separated from goodness and redemption, whereas those other villains, who happen to have been born from dark-side families are completely irredeemable from birth. Morality has nothing to do with your choices, but everything to do with whether you were born into a fortunate family or not?
I accept that you’re right about what the scene was trying to do - it was trying to get the audience to accept that Kylo is redeemable and to hope for that, entirely because he is the son of Han and Leia. I just personally think the argument is extremely dubious. “Please don’t hold him culpable for this murder spree because he’s the son of a good family? (Unlike these other bastards, who don’t count.)” I don’t buy that argument, myself.
I definitely oppose it too! But I do agree with OP that that is indeed the (distasteful) message we're supposed to get from that scene. "Look, here is Ben and he's not really one of the bad guys. He's just pretending. Because he can't be really evil because he's Han and Leia's son. We must hope for him in an entirely different way to the way we interact with the rest of the bad guys, because... because Han and Leia!!!
Gah. I too hate it.
In fact, thinking about it for a while it's exactly this kind of thing that prevented me from having the sort of sympathy for Kylo that I normally have for villains. He has the same 'specially favoured by the narrative' quality that most heroes do, which normally prevents me from connecting to them too.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 03:44 pm (UTC)But yes, it's pretty appalling if we're meant to see Ben's slaughtering his peers, joining the FO, killing a bunch more innocent people, declaring himself Supreme Leader of the FO as a temporary lapse in judgement from an otherwise Good Guy. Boy, is that a long lapse!
I think my opinion of Ben/Kylo is ultimately going to hinge on how he ends up.Because right now, the belief that he's redeemable is held entirely by other people. He doesn't want it. He's not interested. He's not responsible for the Resistance characters' absurd and base-less beliefs about him.
What I would like is for the Resistance to wake up the fact that, even though he wasn't born Kylo Ren, that's who he is now because that's what he has chosen. What I'm afraid of is that Hux will find some way to have power over him and Kylo will be like: "Oh shit . . . oh shit! Consequences. I don't want these. Prepare the fatted calf, mother; Ben is coming home!"
I mean, unless Leia's response is: "Great. Your war crimes trial will be ready when you get here."
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 09:03 pm (UTC)I mean, to the first lot you could argue "but he also has Darth Vader's genes, so he also has the capacity for profound evil. The 'truth of his family' doesn't tell you a thing!"
And to the second lot you could say "But he was raised by good people, how could he have turned evil?
That's all a slight aside, though because yes. I too would LOVE for 'Ben' fans to face the fact that he chose to be Kylo. I actually almost find it disrespectful of him, when people insist that he's really Ben or he will become Ben again - you're supposed to be his fans! Can't you accept him for who he actually is right now? Can't you respect your favourite's own decision to be Kylo Ren, who KEEPS choosing power/the dark side/the first order even though he's now been given two separate chances to renounce it.
I'm not a huge Kylo fan but continuing to deadname someone and insist they are someone they repudiated with maximum violence and fled from is not a sign of love.
the belief that he's redeemable is held entirely by other people. He doesn't want it. He's not interested. He's not responsible for the Resistance characters' absurd and base-less beliefs about him.
Yes, exactly. I don't know either whether it will happen in the film, I just know we've been teased with it for so long that I don't personally care any more.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-12 05:21 pm (UTC)I'd just really like if people in fandom could, in general, stop acting like people having different interpretations of the characters or liking different characters and therefore wanting different endings for the characters, shipping different characters etc., etc., etc. was somehow... personally aimed at them. It's not. People don't ship others ships to spit you and yours, they do it because they find it fun and no, they would not ship yours either way, because probably the dynamics is very different (I see this in all variations, lately with Rey/Kylo vs. Finn/Rey vs. Kylo/Hux - they're, for me, very obviously three different type of "tensions/dynamics" and while I'm sure some people can enjoy all three, I can easily imagine for some, me including, only of the above is interesting and no, they would magically choose their general preferences if you would change the character gender, skin colour or whatever, what kind of... disturbing, tbh, just wrapped up in "political woke" points... thinking it is). Usually, they do their thing because of their own fun, not to spite other people. And it's not only about shipping, also with ending speculations in general? I know a lot of Kylo and Reylo fans who want Hux to become a Big Bad and die at the end, which (putting the question of probability completely aside, because it's not what "I wish" is about) is the opposite of what I want - and yeah, so, of course, their preferred ending would "hurt me", "break my heart" etc., but it's not... logical... to think of it as them wanting me to be hurt. They don't. It's just that there're thousands versions of dream ending and only one actual ending possible - you cannot please everyone and whatever Disney chooses, some people will end sad because of the finale. Some others will end happy. That's normal.
I know you know it, but I think like a really-really big part of emotions and toxicity in the current fandom discourse, not only SW one, comes from this inability to differ between "other people prefers different ending, the one which would make me sad - c'est la vie, my preferred ending would make them sad" and "other people want me sad", which of course feels like other people attacking you and hurts you. And then, of course, you cannot go the "my ending would make them sad as well" route if you feels it's an attack, because you don't want to hurt other people - they must be the one who are somehow wrong or you're a bad person for not being able to stan for their ending. It's terribly emotionally exhausting. I see it more and more in other real life discourses - this inability to process the actual diversity of the world, the struggle to reconcile all and find a one perfect solution which would make everybody happy - or just label those who don't find our happiness happy a "bad ones", because you cannot live with this existential injustice of "someone always will be unhappy" (perhaps it's actually the downside of empathy going rampant and not quite understood/controlled/realised - you makes me sad with your sadness, so you're bad, little children have it often. or abused people) and "diversity means differences which are sometimes painful and often they touch two very important values and you have to choose" - the choice and the sacrifice it means, and that Life means accepting/facing some Unhappiness/Pain seem to be hard to except by the contemporary culture in general, at all levels, the fandom one is faaar from the most scary (looks at the politics).
OTOH the dream about conflict-less utopia leading straight to totalitarian thinking is not exactly new, the opposite.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-13 11:40 am (UTC)I'm very contrary when it comes to interpreting media. If the movie wants me to stan him, I will find all the reasons why I shouldn't. If it doesn't want me to stan him, I'll be right there going "but have you considered that he couldn't help it?" I honestly think it's an issue of fairness. Somebody has to stand up for the characters that nobody else is standing up for, and that somebody is usually going to be me.
Which, as you say, doesn't mean that I can't appreciate why other people identify with him and want him to have a happy ending. I don't really care enough to be upset whether he's redeemed or not. TLJ made me not like him, but then I don't enjoy watching people suffer even when I don't like them, so if he can be redeemed, let him be. Let everybody be saved!
But yeah, I totally agree that my opinion and my shipping or lack thereof is not meant as a criticism of others. I will happily give my reasons for why I think I'm right, but at the end of the day it's only a film and if you choose to see it another way, that's your right. I do think that we don't choose which characters connect with us - something much deeper than reason just goes "That one. That one is mine." And given that we don't choose them, no amount of arguing is going to argue us into choosing a different one.
I think you probably *can* persuade someone into loving your fave, or at least liking them a bit more, but not by pressuring them in terms of goodness. What does it for me is meta. When I read a lot of meta about a character I can sometimes suddenly go "Oh, no, that is interesting!" and then I'll have a way in to their character and I'll care about them more.
But attempting to get people to love your character because it's a moral imperative seriously doesn't work. It usually turns a mild disinterest into a fixed dislike.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 07:27 pm (UTC)So, I think you're right, it's the matter of narrative seeing Vader, Tarkin, Snoke, Hux, whatever as villains and not trying to push me their redemption act down my throat. I react badly to propaganda aka narrative voice's orders usually, too, just as you said, this was probably why I ended liking the bad guys for the most of my media consumer life. I was just getting irritated at the narration telling me who to like.
I must have missed the post on tumblr. My dash moves too quickly. ;)
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 09:21 pm (UTC)I agree - I'm all for redemption for *all* the villains, as long as the story makes that seem plausible. I'm just against the special treatment meted out to Kylo because he's the legacy character. Treat them all as complex people capable of both good and evil, or treat them all as fixed in some Manichean hellscape and don't keep toying with us by having to have both things at once.
no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 12:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 12:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 02:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2018-12-11 02:17 pm (UTC)The limitations of the crossposter are quite frustrating. As are also the limitations on my impulse control ;)