#Exterminations could be like exorcisms and the souls are free to ascend

[multifunctionalnitroglycerin]

Heaven is not entirely on the wrong – a hazbin hotel theory #2 – Exterminations

Something that is often overlooked or sugarcoated a bit in Hazbin amidst all the goofy songs and trust exercises, is that Hell is terrible. There I said it. Hell is a blood terrible place to be. It’s a place of eternal torment, and a prison, a container if you will, for the most terrible of people that have walked on earth. (Let’s not forget that fan favorite Alastor was a psychotic serial killer when he was alive, and still is a master puppeteer, a manipulative, powerful owner of countless souls that is undoubtedly cruel.)

            Murder. Manipulation. Abuse. R*pe. They all exist in abundance down there. And for the average sinner down in the pride ring, things are tough. After being exposed to all that and worse even – as we glimpse with Angel, and Husk – your average sinner is left severely traumatized, if not also physically hurt (regenerative abilities, so idk). To put it simply, hell is a hellish place. And even our beloved princess of Optimism in all her naivete sees it and wants to help. Thus, the plan for rehabilitation and getting a postmortem chance at redemption. (Though how many of them can be redeemed? And does it count if they only do it in fear of punishment? What about metanoia? Is it sincere? What if someone breaks through that shouldn’t have?)

            Hell is overpopulated and here comes heaven with its plan of annual exterminations to keep the population on the down low. And Adam who does it purely for his own entertainment. And Sera who internally struggles with having given the okay for them. (We’ll get to her in a bit, though).

            Here comes the controversial part. If Hell is such a terrible place to be, and no one wants to be there, isn’t killing sinners a way of freeing them from their torment? (It sounds bad I know, and I don’t intend to turn this to an assisted – suicide / euthanasia debate). And if they are “worthy” see rehabilitated, aka have regretted what they’ve done, aka can be redeemed their souls are cleansed and free to ascend to heaven.      

We are not talking about exterminators, we are talking abt exorcists. And if you are familiar with at least horror movies – not necessarily history or religion – you know that exorcists vanquish restless or misguided souls and release them. It’s not a form of punishment, but historically an attempt to help the soul rest in peace. So, if the name choice is deliberate and we are talking exorcists and not exterminators, aka soul cleanses instead of forever death, things might not be as bad.

Keep in mind that I am saying this from an outsider’s perspective and the show is portrayed from the sinner’s perspective. Or at least the denizens of hell. The very traumatized denizens of hell that amongst all their other torment have to be worried abt being killed like cattle once a year. And they have no idea what happens once you die by angelic spear. So that births fear and paranoia Not to mention that Adam and Lute’s sadism and the general bloodthirsty tendencies of the exorcists don’t help the case.

The narrative perspective is meant to make us empathize with the sinners and the denizens of hell, not heaven not the angels, and certainly not Adam or Sera. In the shows narrative they are supposed to represent the corrupt order and oppressive powers we are supposed to resent, whether that is objectively the case, is an entirely different discussion.  So the perspective, and the narrative tools used express that particular POV, and the plot and characterization is meant to support that. Consequently, the questions abt narrator reliability arise, and what I have said above seems lackluster and completely opposite to what the show tells us.

Another point I wanted to bring up is that the way Charlie pitches the idea of the hotel, and a chance at redemption has a bit of a… big hole in it. Anyone can improve at any time yes. I agree. But people that are in hell, have already had the chance to improve for so long as they were alive. It is an arduous process, a mountain to climb yes, but if one truly desires to redeem themselves for what they have done, and become a better person they would have tried before. Perhaps tried and failed, but tried, nonetheless. Which sets those people up perfectly to be residents of the hotel.  But how many of them are there? How many ended up in hell? How many of those in hell actually want to redeem themselves, regret, change their ways and ask for forgiveness? So, the postmortem redemption is kinda fishy. And there is another reason for it as well. If you want to redeem yourself, just for the shake of avoiding punishment, and eternal suffering, is it really redemption? Do you really want to become a better person?  Or just avoid the consequences of your decisions in life?

And as we see none of the people in hell, apart from Vaggie, believe in Charlie’s plan. Most even ridicule her for it. Including Angel who just wants free food and a place to crash at night. And who while having showin signs of improvement, still is in hell. Would just sticking to Adam’s rules, make him go up in heaven? Would that balance out all that he has done in life? Hell, does Sir Pentious’ sacrifice balance out all he did in life? And earns him a place in heaven?

Alright though, Sir Pentious is a mostly harmless goofball. What about people Like Vox and Alastor, Valentine, Velvette, the overlords? Hell is populated and in part ruled by the worst that humanity has to offer. And what happens if one of them manages to break the system, manipulate Charlie, fool her and take advantage of her, and end up in heaven? What will that spell for all the innocent souls up there?

Could infiltration be the key to a new Hellish uprising? And war between heaven and hell? Would corruption sheep into all their hearts? Idk what would happen but it would spell disaster for all the innocent souls in heaven that remain ignorant of all that mess.

And lastly a big elephant in the room I’d like t o address. Is Pentious really the first denizen of hell to be redeemed? He gets blasted by holy light and ends up in heaven, because he dies in an act of self-sacrifice. Have there not been any sinners before him that just tried to get by in hell? That ended up there for a stupid reason, or sth that they didn’t quite have a choice about, and then tried to make the most of their life in that mess, regretting what they have done? And if so, if they were killed in exterminations, why would they not ascend to heaven instead of being cast away to oblivion? Like Sir Pentious?

What if there were souls that were worthy of heaven, and with their release – however violent – from the plane of hell they had the chance to ascend? If it is possible now, wouldn’t it have been possible before? Why would Pentious be the only one? Or the first one for that matter?  

 In all the history of hell, I m supposed to believe that the only time a soul was regretful and changed and could have been redeemed was Pentious, with that one act of self-sacrifice? No woman that might have killed her abuser, and regretted taking a life but never regretted gaining her freedom, no man stranded in a desert or struck by a great famine with nothing to eat, hunt or scavenge but the bodies of his dead comrades? People that genuinely were faced with an impossible choice and ended up in hell for making it.

In a way I feel that if redemption is possible now, it was also possible before. It just flew under the radar, because probably no one ended up face to face with Sera after their ascend. Otherwise, she would have known it’s possible. And perhaps taken other measures.

And yes my ridiculous last argument leads me to the third installment of this huge mess

#3 – SERA