Surprise Surprise · 12:38am Nov 5th, 2013
Evening, my fellow peoples of varying degrees of awesome and splendor,
Despite my technical snafu, I did manage to get the latest installment of The Journey up and running a couple of days ago. Not gonna lie, this one was about as far out of left field as I've ever gone with The Journey, and probably ever will. I was a bit reticent to write an M-rated story, but I felt that there were a few issues that I needed to shed light on. I didn't know how readers would take it, so it was with much trepidation, I wrote The Ugly Side of Right.
And honestly, the feedback kind of surprised me.
SPOILER ALERT: for those who haven't read it, I'd recommend giving it a gander before progressing.
Anywho, like I said, the feedback kind of surprised me. I didn't expect people's reactions to Graves and what can only be described as a psychotic break to be so positive. I mean, I understand why people would want justice served, especially on a monster like Sueno Creador, but there was a perplexing lack of pushback on Graves's actions. In fact, I only think one person expressed any actual negativity towards Graves (described as "disappointment," which I can fully understand).
Personally, I was really torn about his actions. True, something needed to be done, and there was little chance a civilized government would ever do quite enough to satisfy my sense of fair. But what Graves did was extreme. Not only did he severely breach the bounds of his official duties, he showed a disturbing lack of empathy by continuously mutilating a broken and beaten man who continually screamed and begged for mercy. The intent of this story was to show that people who go through hell bring some of it with them when they leave, and even heroes such as Graves may succumb to darker desires that should never see the light of day. It seems to me that anyone who could do something like that over the course of hours is not someone to be admired.
Or maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm just a lily-livered softy who isn't willing to do what's really needed to make things right. Maybe Graves didn't like the ugly things he did but recognized it as necessary for morality sake and maybe that's what the readers were latching onto.
Anyways, I wrote this story expecting more negativity than I actually got, which is great but also slightly unexpected. Thus, I write this blog asking for more feedback and conversation with the readers on the subject. I'd love to hear back on what you all thought of the story, what you thought of Graves's actions in general, and really whether you interpret Graves's depression at the end as guilt for giving in or weariness that he had to be the necessary hammer of wrath.
So yeah, glad you guys are enjoying, and hope to hear back in what could be a very lively discussion. Adieu!
Sincerely,
GentlemanJ
P.S. A random thing I noticed. People usually go gaga over anything backstory related, but I don't think I saw any reactions to it this time. Why's that?
I'd rather be a dark man, that succumbs to heroic deeds, then a heroic one that succumbs to dark ones.
To be honest, while I understand what he did and am not going to condemn him for doing so, I definitely disagree with his actions. Arrest him, beat him up, even kill him, sure. Hell, Sueno deserved what he got in the end, but Graves is a good guy and giving Sueno what he deserved was a decidedly evil thing to do. Now, Graves is no less of a good man for doing it, but that doesn't excuse the action. I am eager see where this goes, if that's what is to happen.
All that said, I loved this update, and think it was done spectacularly well, and would not mind seeing more stories in this vein.
*looks at Graves* Man, I thought I'd seen some sh*t until I read this. *tips helmet* You don't fail to dissapoint sir.
As for the back story part, I think it's because it might be starting to become cliche to jump all over things like that. Hey, can we get a body count for Graves? I want to know how much blood is on his hands.
I didn't comment, but I'm one of the few who agrees with you, that Graves did a despicable thing. Even though it was done to a despicable person, only those kinds of people do those things in the first place. Does that make sense? The need for the dark gratification of vengeance is something everyone has, I think, but it should be something we resist if we want to show our strength of character. If anything, his actions were a show of weakness. He is NOT weak for it, though; he's a lone man, and he found an anchor in Rarity. I don't fear that he'll become monster like Sueno, ever. I'd want to meet Graves far less than I did before, but I don't think he's evil.
Personally speaking, what made this story such a great read was because it shows that even as a man of the law, Graves is still human. And as a human, he is fallible.
Another reason is that, strange as it may seem, Graves' actions seemed quite in-character to me. Graves' personality was shaped by years of mental trauma that is further explained to us through his story to Tinder Spark (assuming it was true, this would garner sympathy for him rather than rage, as he would possibly be remembering the death of his sister at the hands of the Orcs). This serves to give the reader insight on a part of Graves that we rarely (if ever) see.
Granted, what Graves did to Sueno could be considered cruelly excessive, but like I said, even the best men fail at times. What matters is that they pick themselves up and learn from their mistakes.
That, and the Internet has somewhat desensitized me to certain aspects of violence.
"All things have consequences. Sometimes you get what you deserve and sometimes you are what someone deserves."
That said, I think the relative lack of detail is what prevented the backlash you expected. We only get the very beginning of what Graves does and the assurance that it continues for a long time. Without the raw, graphic, horrifying detail, detail you probably had in mind when writing it, it's easy agree with the poetic justice without seeing how extreme his actions are.
Personally, I'd spend several minutes beating the living shit out of the scumbag before putting a bullet through his brain. Illegal? Certainly. Unjust? That's debatable.
Sueno got what he deserved. At first I thought Graves went to far but then I realized while reading through it Sueno got the perfect punishment. Everything Graves did, Sueno did to Tinder Sparks for his own selfish reason of obtaining power. Graves should not feel guilty for what he did to Sueno because Sueno is the type of scum that doesn't deserve that courtesy. He doesn't deserve to have a hero like Graves be regretful for what he did to him. He doesn't even deserve to be a passing thought in Graves mind. When Graves broke down at the end I like to believe it was because of Tinder Spark not Sueno. The title says it all. Graves did the right thing, it wasn't pretty but it was right.
I still don't understand why he didn't have a dead switch. I mean come on. That's basic equipment for highly illegal and unjust operations.
1482521>>1482544>>1482577>>1482667
Disclaimer: all comments are dialogue, not attacks on statements. I love everything that's been said. For reals.
Alexstarkiller - if Sueno deserved everything he got, then how is it evil for Graves to be the one dishing it out, especially since if he doesn't, it'll never happen? Is he supposed to let a lenient judicial system take over or wait for karma to intervene?
Mercgilado - Graves is a fundamentally good man who gave into the darkness, but was kept from drowning in it by Rarity, which is a bloody beautiful sentiment to say the least. However, can you really say that what he did was evil? He was literally applying "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," arguably the most fundamental philosophy of justice. Escalation is one thing, but how can mirroring back what another does be considered evil or even a mistake?
MC BRON3 - very similar to comments directed at Mercgilado: how is it excessive if he does exactly what Sueno did to others? Also, we can see that Graves has very personal reasons for wanting to do what he did, but does the fact that he might even have enjoyed the actions change the fact that those actions needed doing?
Stormageddon - Sueno definitely deserved what was coming to him, but was it Graves's place to decide that? He's an officer of the law, given power to stop evil, not act as judge, jury, and executioner. After all, if everyone decided to take the law into their own hands, then society basically falls apart. A fairly large stretch of an argument to be sure, but he core still stands: what gives Graves the right to dole out the punishment for another? (P.S. there's no way Tinder Sparks wasn't a part of that ending. For sure).
1482751
At that point, it's up to the actor to decide to bloody their hands, because justice is fair, balanced. For equal retribution you must do something as heinous as the crime committed with that philosophy, yes? Graves punished a guilty man, but it wasn't his job to do so; it was to stop him (as far as I know). If Graves wants to wallow in the depravity himself, then so be it, but he can't have one or the other.
It wasn't excessive, and that wasn't what I meant for the record.
I think the fact that you have made a sympathetic character in Graves stopped people from being angry. We know his past, and we know he's human: we're not going to hate him for suffering a psychotic break, but pity him. Who among us could claim to have been stronger, mentally or emotionally, after ushering on the soul of a child who had been tortured to death by an unrepentant drug dealer?
1482751
While the utilitarian belief of "paying evil unto evil" is certainly debatable, there are those that argue that Graves is as bad as Sueno if he is willing to commit acts of torture, when there are many ways to take Sueno down in a less sadistic manner (such as breaking his thighbones and both humerus bones, leaving him immobilized and in agony…which is only marginally better).
Once again, this is debatable. In my opinion, this shows that Graves has a darker side, just like all of us, and is capable of succumbing to such desires. While he may have gained some cruel satisfaction from torturing Sueno, we are later shown that he deeply regrets those actions, to the point of nearly suffering a breakdown. This signifies that although he has the potential for great evil, he still retains the humanity to regret his actions, and (hopefully) the mental fortitude to restrain his darker impulses
"The intent of this story was to show that people who go through hell bring some of it with them when they leave, and even heroes such as Graves may succumb to darker desires that should never see the light of day. It seems to me that anyone who could do something like that over the course of hours is not someone to be admired."
I wholeheartedly agree that Graves indeed stepped beyond the boundary and went to the extreme. It's hard to stay on that fine line, but having Graves do this does make him more human (no pun intended).
People whine about superheroes having their moral code, but it's because of this that shows why they do that. Losing control of your emotions and unleashing your true power doesn't make people cheer for you. Instead, they start to fear you and shun you. As hard as it is to let someone so vile as Sueno live, it would be the right decision because killing him would make the public brand Graves the monster instead.
It's hard to not kill someone so evil, but people don't realize that if the superhero (their role model, the person they look to when trouble comes, and the one they cheer on to save the day) crosses the line, then that hero loses all credibility and instead has degraded to the actions of the people he was trying to fight.
That's why a lot of villains who go on about saving the world are because they see themselves as heroes, but have actually crossed the line. They have become the very things they were fighting against, which doesn't end the evil, but rather continue it in the place where people thought it to be safe. They're planting the seeds of evil in the place where the good people thought they can stay the good people.
The part that really freaked me out was that Graves healed Sueno just so he could kill him slowly and painfully as per the instructions from Sueno's own blood magic manual. Justifiable or not, that was creepy. Vivisecting a man, even an evil man, while he's begging for mercy isn't exactly heroic behavior.
I wonder if Graves would have "just" killed Sueno if Sueno had remembered Tinder Spark's name.
Going to repeat what pretty much has already been said.
The thing about people is that they have limits. When a person just becomes so outrageously mad, he would do things he wouldn't normally do.
Was the act moral? No.
Was it in character? Sure?
Were there any witnesses? Haha, nope.
Did he deserve it? Yes.
Graves could afford a little greed in his life. Give your character the satisfaction of his retribution, and say the victim fell down some stairs.
Some poorly maintained, really jagged stairs.
I saw the action Graves did as unnecessary, but deserved.
I gave up on debating if it was 'right'. Leave that to the philosophers.
1482751 Oh that's easy. Because what he deserves is not what he should have gotten. Because that means Graves had to do something horrible beyond measure, and he's supposed to be the good guy. Sueno may have deserved it, but Graves is the one we care about, and he was negatively affected by such committing an evil act. It's what Graves experienced that matters, and what he deserves is a clear conscience, which could have only been achieved by granting Sueno undeserved mercy.
That's what I mean, but I apologize if this seems as disjointed as I think it looks. I'm not the best at putting what I think to words.
EDIT: Thanks PlaceHolder, stuff you wrote helped clear things for me a bit. To clarify what I meant in the first paragraph further, it was an immoral act, but bad people often deserve bad things to happen to them. And mercy is hard, sometimes too hard as we clearly saw in the story.
EDIT 2: And to answer your question to Mercgilado, because I'd like to, I also find that a simple answer. Paying evil unto evil, does not a good act make. It was still evil, just directed at someone who was actually evil. Justifiable, probably, but it is not "right".
Graves is not an empathetic person to begin with, and so his "tooth for a tooth, eye for an eye" sense of justice really doesn't surprise me. He's been shit on since he was still a young kid and his life never really got any easier, hell, it's no wonder he snapped when children became involved in the sick depravity he witnessed, as children are probably the only type of people Graves can feel some kind of empathy for, having been through hell as a child himself.
Further, his Cutie Mark shows that this is who he is. Hammers, knives, scythes, sickles, axes, and bows are all tools, used to build and to provide as their first function, Once the war is over and the battles won or lost the tools can go back to their original function easily, a sword must first be taken to a ploughshare to be reformed, because a sword is a weapon through and through, made only to kill, and to protect others from being killed through the use of violence and intimidation. Graves' cutie mark, the worn down and unadorned sword, shows this. He isn't human, not entirely, he's a piece of steel, hammered and folded and tempered until he is the perfect tool for war. I think once Graves enters "kill mode" it would be almost impossible to stop him because what little humanity he has left goes out the goddamned window. I've seen it happen once in real life with one of my friends, and he was pretty much the opposite of Graves in every way.
His relationship with Rarity was very well done in this story, better than any of the others. You've managed to show in a few brief paragraphs what many writers spend an entire story trying to capture, a pure and loving relationship that works within the context of the characters and setting, and was the perfect way to show the effects of the events of the story on Graves.
Lastly, on the topic of backstory. You have Graves tell us only the bare minimum of what his family was like, but managed to tell us so much at the same time through inference and a sort of foreshadowing that was very well executed. Graves loved his parents, he loved his sister, and he lost it all through blood and fire, we don't even know their names but we don't want them to die already, even though we know they will. Honestly, it's the most cliche and overused tragic past story there is, but it still seems new and refreshing because of how it's presented.
Keep writing like this, it's the best you've done.
What defines good or evil? I like to look back at the Chinese symbol, the yin yang. This iconic symbol is easily the true focus of this argument. Within the light, there will always be a shred of darkness, as even every darkness holds a small flicker of light. Graves to me is the perfect representation of this symbol. He is balance. Someone who chooses to refute evil will undoubtedly become lost within their own values. Actions leading up to doing unspeakable things in the name of good. When this happens, are they truly good, or is it just another form of evil. Balance is the true good in all situations, as to answer my first question, there is no difference between good and evil, just a different way of looking at it. Because he is capable of recognizing his actions, because he can show guilt, is what makes him a real hero.
Let him embrace the darkness, and see the light.
Let him bathe in the warmth of light, but never forget to acknowledge the darkness.
This is his true strength, and don't ever be afraid to show it. Just or unjust, he did what he felt was right. He knew what he did was wrong. You, GentlemanJ, represented that perfectly. I hope this helps provide you the insight you were looking for, at least from my view. In the end, no one is ever going to be truly right or wrong when it comes to this topic.
When I first read the story, I was somewhat appalled, but mostly disappointed by Grave's actions. But, I figured, people snap. A sudden sharp stab like that could break even the hardest rock. Seeing this post made me think about it though, and now here I am typing at one in the morning so I can go to sleep.
To me, from the start, what was wrong with Grave's actions wan't a matter of morality or justice or anything like that. It was that he betrayed his duty, and more importantly he disrespected his position as Marshal. Marshals are allowed a significant amount of leeway in their actions from what we've seen, and Graves, with all his skill and connections gets more than most. But what he did to the cartel leader was an abuse of his power. Had Graves been a mercenary, or a contractor or a vigilante I wouldn't have batted an eye at his actions, but being a Marshal of Equestria is... just, well... WORDS!
Basically it's this: at the very beginning of the Journey of Graves we saw him take down a group of Marshals for abusing their positions and power and now he does exactly the same here.
Personally I would like to see Graves either give up his badge or be court-martialed for his actions here, but I doubt it will happen as it wasn't the point of the story (Plot armor is the best kind of armor). Really though I enjoyed it, even with my hopes that the story won't move in a similar direction again sometime soon. Anyways, sorry for rambling but I had to get this out so I can sleep and get up for class tomo- sorry, today.
G'night.
I think Graves did make a very rash decision, but I believe it suits him. Perhaps that doesn't make sense to other people and I just see him as a much darker person than everyone else. But I believe, while Graves is as solid as the earth, he has a soft spot for kids and females. He's very protective and will go to lengths while doing so. I believe when he did what he did, he was just seeing red and wanted vengeance for Tinder. As I said before, imagine if that were Sweetie Belle or Rarity. Or any of his friends for that matter. The story also showed how he shows his true colors around Rarity and uses her as a relief.
And I wanted to know if the story that Graves was telling was about himself? If so I love it, because I didn't know he once had a sister and that very much explains his soft spot for women and children. If that was the backstory you speak of, then maybe people didn't talk about it because they didn't realize it was about Graves?
I also have a feeling that this isn't the worst thing that Graves has done...
I found no fault with what Graves did. Not because I don't think it was wrong, but because my thoughts on morality don't affect morality itself. I don't believe in a solid concept of right and wrong, only that there are things people, myself included, believe are right and wrong. The condemning of something "wrong" is merely the voicing of a lack of perspective.
While I would not have done what Graves did, I can understand why he did it. He is a man, and man has "flaws." Besides, it was interesting and well written, and that's all I care about.
If it had been an adult... then no, Graves should not have done it.
But it was a child. I would have done exactly the same!!
Anyways... I know how Rarity can cheer him up a little
derpicdn.net/img/2013/5/13/324134/large.png
1482779>>1482784>>1482848
Mercgilado - I guess this is the same idea for any sort of punishment, including general capital punishment: are you willing to do something bad to one who has done bad for the sake of punishment? I think reasonable minds can disagree on this one, so I ask whether it's really depravity to decide a person deserves as bad as he gets and then acts in a way needed to make it so?
Taxus - Guess I just made him too lovable, lol. But even if he has a tragic past, does that mean we should give him a free pass and not condemn him for his actions?
MC BRON3 - I think there's a very strong differentiation in that Sueno did evil things to the innocent while Graves did it to one who deserved it. Or is there? Would you say that doing bad things, regardless of how deserving the person, counts as evil? (Oh, and I'd take a broken leg over Graves's ministrations in a heartbeat).
That is a beautiful interpretation of a man who knows he's at risk of going darkside. However, what if he wasn't? What if his only reaction was that he was thinking of Tinder and upset about what happened to her? Do you think he may very well have shrugged off Sueno because he deserves as much thought as a clump of sod under his boot?
1482879>>1482984>>1483013
gent777 - that... that makes so much sense. I've never actually understood the moral code before. However, that raises a question on whether its worth it. Is it worth it for a hero to keep up a pristine reputation when it means evil runs free? Batman never killed the Joker, and people died as a result. Maybe what we need isn't a hero in Graves, but an executioner, one to soil his hands and soul for the greater good. Heck, maybe the greatest heroes are the one who are willing to corrupt themselves in order to protect many. After all, dying is one thing, but who's willing to sacrifice their legacy?
FlyingChurro - you bring up a good point. I never did say what had Graves so bothered. I said he was tired, that he was on the point of breaking, but not why. I really couldn't because I didn't know myself. Did he feel guilty? Or maybe it was just a broken heart over a little girl's suffering and the unfairness of it all. That's why I raised the question: I wanted to see how people interpret Graves's actions.
Ripple - a very good point I don't think has been raised yet. Graves was very, very careful to make sure Sueno got the full treatment. I always feel the scary people aren't the emotional ones, but he ones who can act in a completely rational manner even in the most emotional situation. On another note, do you think Graves would have shown mercy just for remembering a name?
1483079>>1483188>>1483231
Placeholder - in essence, that's what the official report says. But does Graves really get a free pass to be "greedy" in such a violent way? Who ever has that sort of right?
AlexStarkiller - then do you believe good people never need to do bad things? Fighting is violence, so can you not fight back? Killing is bad, so can you not kill in defense of another? Where is the line that separates what a good man can do from what he can't? And even if we want the best for Graves, should our desire for his happiness outweigh our desire for justice?
And on your comment to Mercgilado, what then makes an action "right?" If it's not the karmic sense of getting what you give, then what is it?
heirofaniu - not sure where your downvote came from because honestly, those were some of the nicest things anyone's ever said about my story. But I raise a point: a sword is made for war, quick efficient destruction of an enemy. What Graves did seems out of bounds even for him. And from the context, we can see that Graves was certainly not in any sort of out-of-control fugue. As Ripple pointed out, he healed Sueno in order to make sure he could make him suffer as long as possible. It's one thing to be completely focused on taking down an enemy, but is what Graves did really understandable since the fight was already clearly over?
1483814 It's less offering him a free pass than understanding the situation. You described it as a psychotic break, which is a severe mental health issue. One does not condemn a soldier for suffering from PTSD, and for similar reasons, I would not condemn Graves for suffering a psychotic break after placating the angry soul of a child who had been used in torturous blood magic rituals, then ushering them on across the pale. I will grant, however, that there will be consequences for what he did. He did do something horrible, but one has to take into account what he had just witnessed.
1483367>>1483390>>1483642>>1483745
blowngasket - balance is a beautiful thing. But if the darkness is only a part, how much of a part is it? I could understand easily Graves's less than tender take down of Sueno. I could also justify executing him right there and then. But the lengths Graves went to in order to show the man pain... can you really call that balance, even when the target is an evil man? And for a truly good man, is embracing the darkness the same as acknowledging darkness? It seems to me that one teaches caution while the other leads you onto a slippery slope of self-destruction.
falloutshelters - this abuse of power really resonated with me. It does seem like Graves is becoming (at least, became for a moment) what he fought against. BUT... was his more justified? The other marshals used their power to abuse innocent people. Graves used his power to mete out just deserts when it's very likely a lenient legal system would have let him off. In other words, it may have been vigilante and it may have been overstepping bounds, but should a good man be expected to do anything less when the system is insufficient?
I'd also like to say that this wouldn't be plot armor, but just good old-fashioned cover up. As we've seen, Graves is the only conscious person around for miles. By the time he's finished, there will be no evidence of Sueno around at all. Thus, his reports on the subject are really the only things anyone has to go on, and considering the mountain of evidence Graves brings against the man, I doubt anyone will inquire too deeply into the truth. After all, as long nobody knows the details, people are probably even rooting for Graves, no?
CaliPackFan - I'd question how rash it was given his meticulous planning and the sheer scope of time he spent on this endeavor. It's one thing to lash out, but wouldn't it be an entirely different thing to engage in an act that constantly reminds you of how horrible it is?
Nevertheless, Graves does have a soft spot for children in particular. Not sure about women, since he's only shown his tender side to one particular woman (actually, never thought about it, really), but children is a definite. And I will answer your question, but I'd like to pose a question before I do: would that being his history make a difference? Would having that past somehow justify what he did? Or does it just make us more sympathetic and less likely to condemn him for something we know is wrong?
And if this isn't the worst, how bad does it get? 0_o
Azrael Chiaroscuro - if there's no definite right and wrong, then does that mean Sueno's actions can't be condemned? Do we just lack perspective on a man ahead of his times in the development of a long oppressed and misunderstood art?
I don't know if what I'm about to say makes a whole lot of sense, but I feel that what Graves did to the monster was perfectly okay. I mean really, the bad guy tortured tons of people, not just the little girl, her soul was just the only one still around (I mean, it was a huge chain of various rituals and sacrifices right? It only needed one soul for the focus of all that energy though). The fact that he was completely unrepentant about his actions, even during the torture (he said he gave up but I don't think he said he was sorry, and even if he did it's clear he'd only be sorry because it is causing him physical harm) helps support my idea that the bad guy was a horrible monster. It deserved what Graves did to it.
The only problem with all of this is that for Graves to do what he did, he had to open up an incredibly dark portion of his mind, and let that fuel him above anything else. The part of his mind he gave control too isn't too different than the mind of the monster he killed, and could lead to Grave himself becoming some kind of monster if he isn't careful.
Thankfully though, he is clearly pretty upset at what he did, which is good, as it means he is unlikely to tap into that part of his mind again any time soon.
So in short, I guess what I'm saying is that as far as I can tell, Graves didn't do anything wrong. Tapping into the darker part of your mind is rarely a good idea, but can be immensely useful in certain circumstances, and while it was unnecessary for him to do what he did, I don't feel that anything bad came from it. I'd be just as okay if Graves just one hit killed the monster, or had it thrown in jail for the rest of its life, but if Graves wants to ensure that the monster understands just what exactly it was doing to people before it dies, that's fine too. Graves tapped into a monstrous mindset while killing a monster, and so long he tries not to let that mindset control him, and only uses it against those who have become monsters, then there's no problem. If Graves then proceeded to kill all the guards he had captured after torturing the monster, then we'd have a problem, but he didn't, so we don't.
I hope I made sense and that anyone reading this enjoyed my rant. Have a great day, and as always, thanks for the story good sir!
1483814
That is a hard question to answer, as each individual has their own perception of morality. Part of me still believes that that Graves' actions are morally "Right" due to the unforgivable crimes of Sueno, but if you look at it from an outsider's perspective, it is harder to determine who is the greater monster.
Now that is where the proverbial line between "Good" and "Evil" begins to blur: When your empathy begins to slip away. Mercy is not only a sign of humanity, but also one of both physical and mental strength. If you are strong, you can afford to show the enemy mercy.
The Road to Hell is paved with good intentions. Nightmare Moon wanted ponies to appreciate her night. Chrysalis wanted the best for her kingdom and acted proactively. Both had noble causes, but became morally warped somewhere along the line (probably via obsession with their goals), and ended up falling from grace.
This is a challenge that Graves must face…and would also make for a interesting story arc: Graves questioning his own sense of morality, and the others trying to help with (and find out about) his mental struggles.
1483836
If killing someone relatively quickly is considered merciful, then yes. If Sueno had shown just a shred of humanity, at least enough to know the name of his victim, maybe Graves would have let him off with just a quick and brutal death. As it stands, the guy proved beyond a doubt that he didn't even have that shred, so Graves did to him what he did to Tinder and Celestia only knows how many others. Though Sueno is still getting off relatively lightly compared to his victims considering Graves isn't actually torturing his soul with blood magic. That said, I hope I never have to read about Graves doing something like that again.
1483890
It's not that they cannot be condemned, but it should be understood that condemnation comes from the self. what he did was not wrong, but people perceive it as wrong. And it is not that we lack perspective on a man ahead of his time, but we lack perspective in the sense that he did what he desired, and to him that is the most important thing. to him what he did was right, and because of that it was not wrong.
When I read the chapter, I felt no anger or outrage or condemnation. I only felt a deeply set sadness that the world had to be such a way as this, for it is not the world I want.
1483860 No, I'm very aware good people have to do bad things. That doesn't mean they aren't bad and that good people shouldn't avoid them if possible, just that those things are sometimes necessary to prevent worse things from happening. Because being good isn't about being perfect, it's about being better than bad people, doing your personal best to be that good person you wish to be.
But there's a sliding scale of bad things, it's hard to determine where the line is, if it exists. It's probably more personal than anything, and is more of a blur in reality. That said damning a soul is pretty far to the demonic side of the scale, certainly past any given line. That was something to avoid doing.
And honestly, yes, Graves' happiness is far more important than a singular justice. He's a good man who's had a hard life, and he deserves every bit of happiness he can keep. Even then, justice, comparatively minor it may be, would've been served had Sueno been arrested, or even outright murdered.
A totally abstract and occasionally arbitrary sense of morality, actually. Yeah, it can't be measured all nice like karma, and it's fairly pointless to describe given how personal it is, but that's the way it works. Admittedly, I have no idea how to describe right and wrong that isn't just personal beliefs. There's just things I'd never do, things I'd do if necessary, and things that I would do in a heartbeat. And within those categories are things that are right, wrong, evil, or grey as hell. Sorry, but this is one question I won't be able to give a straight answer. [Not like I'm doing a good job of that anyway.]
1483890
An abuse of power is an abuse of power regardless of how justified. He abused his power as Marshal and by doing so disrespected the position. In my mind there is no justification for that and, well, that's all that matters to me.
1483836 What I find interesting is that Graves is not a vigilante, he's supposed to be an agent of the Princesses, obeying their codes. Besides the ethical dimension of torturing Sueno, I'm willing to bet that the Marshall regulations and the oath he swore probably forbid something exactly like that. Does Graves think himself above the laws he enforces? Does he trust the Princesses judgment so little that he feels he cannot turn Sueno over to them for a trial?
Or maybe he doesn't want to burden the Princesses with making such a difficult decision. Either way, the fact that he covered up his actions in his report indicate he knows he shouldn't have done it. I think you make a great point about superheroes, and how if they would just kill super-villains then a lot of innocent lives would be saved. But there's a reason every time you see Superman or other heroes start killing villains, it ends with them taking over the government. The government cannot allow individuals to kill people on their own judgment, otherwise there is no government. A vigilante who kills ends up a bandit or a king.
1483836
It may seem like that, but the real motivation should not be to keep that pristine image, but to show people that we're better.
Humans are barbaric, yes, but what made the human race so strong (and still makes them strong) is that we come together for an ideal. We work on that ideal not to make a name for ourselves or to say that we're awesome for having this ideal and making most of it work, but because we work on those ideals for the sake of bettering humanity.
It's heroes like Batman and Superman that do what they do because they're trying to show humanity that they can make the better choice and that we're not a bunch of desperate savages who will resort to the lowest common denominator. Like I stated before, killing the bad guys when you can end the fight without killing them doesn't stop the violence. It just inspires more to the bad guys because when humans get scared, they don't back into a corner for the rest of their life. They retaliate even stronger than ever and continue the cycle of violence (except even worse than before).
If big-named heroes that we look up to crosses that line, they become hypocrites to the best of human ideals and make the cycle of violence even worse than it is already.
But if you were to kill a bad guy, then it can be justified if you have no other choice BUT to kill them. That's why I don't condemn soldiers (being that I am about to become one) for their actions. They kill because they're in some god-forsaken land with harsh terrain and nothing but their weapons and whatever equipment they pack. Since they're facing an enemy who are equally armed, but with better knowledge of the terrain, then the soldiers have no choice but to kill or be killed.
Even then, soldiers still have a moral code. If they have a lone enemy still alive and unarmed, they take them in as prisoner of war. As such, the protocol is that they treat prisoners of war the same as we treat other people (giving food, water, and shelter), even if the bad guys won't do the same to us. We take the higher road not to make a better image of ourselves, but to remind everyone the best image that humanity in general represents.
Superheroes never kill because, while they can be killed, they are capable of ending the fights without killing. It's very unfortunate that there are casualties in the process, but the point is that the people who are supposed to keep the bad guys locked up or even executed, they don't do it because they represent how screwed up our justice system is. If anything, it's the law's fault because they're supposed to be the judge, jury, and executioner. We, as people, are not the judge, jury, and executioner, and that would also include the superheroes. They are the enforcers. While Graves is a Marshal, he's a soldier who does as he is ordered. Unless he's very high ranked (Colonel, General, etc.), he's only the enforcer of the law.
Taking the higher road is not for the sake of having a better image. We do it because it's the right thing and to prove that we are not unintelligible cavemen. It's the same deal as when we do work in our daily lives. No matter how hard we work, we don't get rewarded too often. But what's most important is that we work without expecting any reward, because in the long run, what we work for will benefit many people in general, and someday, we will be rewarded without knowing it.
1483860
Out of control? Perhaps not. Pushed far, FAR, FAR beyond his limits? Yes. Insanity and madness are not always the result of a lack of control, but often times stem from a twisted, corrupted, or otherwise warped sense of reality and morality. Sueno is dangerous, he is insane, sadistic, apathetic, and wields a power strong enough to destroy damned near anything. And just to put the icing on the cake, he's a certified lunatic who desires world domination, and will do anything to achieve that goal.
Sueno has already lost everything, nothing to lose means everything to gain, he is the most dangerous type of person there is and Graves knows it. The fact that Sueno couldn't even remember a little girl he brutally tortured and murdered was enough to convince Graves that he deserved only the worst. If i had to guess, I would say Graves even felt a sort of kin-ship with Tinder, she may have reminded him of his sister, or even himself. It was an extremely volatile situation to begin with, that just compounded the issue until what Graves did seemed the correct thing to do in Graves' mind.
As for my down vote, I don't know, maybe it was someone who didn't go to the Derek Zoolander Center For Kids Who Can't Read Good And Wanna Learn To Do Other Stuff Good Too.
1483814
Graves was not wrong in deciding he needed to be punished. There's no depravity there. But I boil it down to the simple act, rather than the reasoning or morality: Graves tortured a man to death in cold blood. Personally, I don't condone that kind of punishment, mainly because I could never actually carry it out myself, so I can't say it's WRONG. Graves just has to decide what kind of man he wants to be when he fights monsters, is all. He's always been the savior, the hero, and he left all the icky jobs to those who chose to do them from the start. When Graves starts handing out punishments on the spot, that would be bad. The next perpetrator may not be as black and white as Sueno (or maybe he was already, I don't know).
I view Graves as a paladin. More in the defender sense than "holy warrior", but both apply. While everyone views paladins as holy protectors and shields against evil; I often find that people forget that paladins also represent divine wrath. I feel I can understand Graves because our personalities are fairly similar. I was a soldier, cold and distant as he was, and oddly enough my armor was chipped at by a group of girls, one in particular that is now my wife.
As far as Graves mental breakdown goes. I disagree. He didn't break at all. I would have done precisely the same thing in his place. Reasoning: being able to control your emotions to the degree required by lightning magic requires extreme discipline as GentlemanJ has stated prior. As one with a similar personality and discipline, I will tell you exactly why I would have done what Graves did.
An eye for an eye in all it's visceral glory is only applied in certain circumstances. Had the drug lord been just that, he would have been left in peace to be seen to by the Equestrian justice system. Even given that to maintain that position the drug lord had to have murdered, tortured, etc. to maintain his empire and position. The eye for an eye justice scales don't start kicking in until the blood magic was brought to light.
Here there are degrees again. Had the spirit that Graves encountered been an adult male, the drug lord would have only been beaten to near death (Graves' first actions). A boy child would garner a greater magnitude of retribution, such as the performing of the blood rites, or at least the opening few. An adult female would receive the same tribute as the boy. While the female child would receive the greatest recompense that could be given.
However, this is all modified by a single fact. Her name. If the drug lord had known the girl's name I can say with complete confidence that Graves would have only used the punishment of the adult male, before turning the drug lord over to the authorities. The absence of her name was gate, key, and permission for the full weight of "eye for eye" justice.
I can also say with the same confidence that Graves did not enjoy the act. The clinical detachment that men like us can achieve when fighting or meeting out this kind of justice is chilling and absolutely terrifying. It is not darkness of the soul that Graves is tapping, though the actions most assuredly are. It is the cold and implacable justice that certain acts require as payment.
First i want to apologize for my english, if it's bad (it's my third language). I think it's hard to discuss the nature of good and evil. We all have this idea of a world whitch only are black and white, but the world is gray. Darkness and light are in every hearth of man. these virtues fuel human greed and selfishness, our pride and vanity it even fan the flames of bigotry, but it also teach us how to love and live rightous lives, and this struggle between right and wrong is measured by a scale. this will bring live to thouse who learn and death to those who fail. without good and evil their wouldn't be light and dark, no perspectives on who, and what we are. good and evil are the roots of humanity, they are the virtues that forged us into what we are today. to cut it short good and evil are humanity.
what i'm trying to get to is that Graves turned into a minor evil to justify a mayor evil, and if he hadn't Sueno's actions wouldn't had be justified. i may be wrong i may not, after all i have be raise under the influence of norse mythology and the viking codex.
1484751
I don't know why but i find your comment fantastic.
1485930
Thank you
1483890
I believe it would make a difference. Perhaps it wouldn't justify what he did but would definitely explain why he did it. It would also explain why he gets along with Sweetie Belle so well. It would help us understand why he did what he did, even if we know it was wrong.
And I don't think either of us want to know how bad it gets....
Very insightful blog comments indeed. However, Gandhi said it best: 'An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.' How long will it be until Graves becomes that which he fights against. (Especially given how much grief he's gone through.)
I just came to an interesting conclusion. I recall reading a fic called A Captain's Duty where after Chrysalis landed due to the spell, Shining Armor found her and confronted her once more. (Very disturbing, worth a read, but anyway...) While reading it, I could believe that Shining Armor not only could, but would do what he claimed to her. I guess that people like the idea of their heroes being better than they are themselves. (Like Batman, he approaches the edge of the darkness, but never crosses that line.)