#but he's supposed to be an antagonist AND sympathetic AND funny AND pathetic AND tragic

[caligvlasaqvarivm]

I used to despise Eridan and think he was the absolute worst character (barring Cronus ig) but you have shown me the light and completely turned my opinion around and now I think he is such an endearing little freak <3 I read your whole blog already but if you've got any more thoughts on eri or anyone else then I hope you post them bc I'd love to hear more abt it!

i have sooo many controversial opinions about the dancestors you have noooooo idea

[five-flavor-soup]

I suppose I can imagine why the emotional manipulation is interpreted as ‘okay’ (or, let’s just say ‘acceptable’) on some level, in Jet’s case. And like, is it good? No. But fans do have a tendency to woobify their favourite characters.

People will feel sorry for a rebel who rebels out of agony and trauma. Jet isn’t a villain or antagonist (he really isn’t important enough), and he’s charming and slightly pathetic character, so he’s bound to be liked. Except he can’t just be liked because of his charm and the empathy he evokes, he needs to be a Fully Good Guy who was In The Right Actually. Never mind that the text literally spoon feeds us the idea that no matter how sympathetic a bad guy, no matter how tragic their back story, they need to actively change and do better to be considered Good Actually, and that they need to accept some might still not trust them.

His emotional manipulation is interpreted as not really being emotional manipulation, but more like a means to an end. He has to use it because most people he interacts with will react negatively to his actions, about which they’re right: he goes on and on about extenuating circumstances initially, and the moment the risk of a reveal is heightened he plays with “think of what they did to us, to you”. He needs to repeatedly push the trauma buttons because he knows what he’s doing isn’t rational—that it’s just cruelty for the sake of cruelty. But he’s such a sad little meow meow! Such a wet cat! He just needs to be wrapped in a heated blanket and be fed soup! So surely, his actions are basically on par with what evil Zuko did and should all be forgiven, no question!

Anyway. I do think it’s funny how Zuko’s successful redemption is all fine and good until the idea of him dating Katara comes up. Suddenly he’s a bad guy again. (Damn it, Zuko, how dare you not know about the flying bison’s Tragic Previous Weeks in spite of not being there to see it!)

This is technically in response/as an addition to a post on the supposed ‘double standard’ in the fandom between Zuko and Jet as Katara’s love interests, but it’s been so long since it was posted and I figured the OP would be entirely uninterested in my word vomit, especially after like one and half years—so, separate post. I added a link for those interested. There's a cut because this got quite long lmao.

In short, the post supposes the argument that though Jet would’ve made Katara kill people (something Zuko very much Did Not Do, no matter what you think about The Southern Raiders), he cleaned up his act after this. Zuko, on the other hand, did lots of Really Bad Things to Katara & Co. with far more frequency than Jet did and got redeemed after a multitude of episodes doing Various Things Moste Evile. To then slap Jet with The Toxic Ex-label and see Zuko as the ‘healthier’ and ‘better’ option creates a Double Standard(™) within the fandom, which is supposedly bad and not an arguably incorrect reading. 

But the differences in fandom perception between Jet and Zuko as Love Interests for Katara (one of which canonically, and the other potentially and apparently talked about in the writer’s room) are easily explained, as can the Supposed Double Standard—just by thinking about it from Katara’s viewpoint, or even the audience’s. Because, well, the worst things Jet ‘almost’ ended up doing didn’t happen because of outside interference only. 

That’s the important bit here. He 100% would’ve drowned an entire village just to get rid of a handful of Fire Nation soldiers, had Sokka not managed to evacuate everybody. He 100% would’ve grievously injured two people who, as far as Jet and everybody else were aware, were refugees who might not even be firebenders — considering nobody else saw Iroh heat up his tea, he could’ve been wrong — in an attempt to prove his own hunch. Had the guards not been there, had Zuko not been able to fight back with swords, Jet would’ve genuinely attempted to wound them for as much as a puff of smoke. And Jet consistently involves bystanders (innocent or not) in his desperate quest to harm and defeat the Fire Nation: the Gaang (and particularly Katara, through explicitly manipulative means) and the villagers in Jet; Zuko, Iroh, and the people in the teashop in City of Walls and Secrets. Additionally, we don’t see more violence from him because he’s not a main character like Zuko is—though it’s implied that Jet beats up villagers who are supposedly in cahoots with the Fire Nation often, only agreeing to turn over a new leaf when he, Smellerbee, and Longshot decide to move to Ba Sing Se. 

Zuko explicitly and frequently doesn’t harm people: that, or it isn’t important to the plot. He doesn’t burn down the village on Kyoshi, he literally only manages to lightly singe it. He threatens people with violence frequently but never actually goes in for the kill. I’d argue that the most explicitly violent thing he does in Book 1 is breaking Aang out of the Pouhai Stronghold—for his own ends obviously, but if it’s spelled like treason and sounds like treason, it’s probably treason. When he thinks of robbing the pregnant couple while he’s on the run, he stops himself of his own volition; when he considers using Appa to catch Aang (this was a point made against Zuko in the post), he’s unaware of what Appa’s been through prior to that point and sees him as no more than an animal used for travel, much like the ostrich horse he stole earlier in the season. 

Zuko’s schtick throughout Book 1 and 2 is that he doesn’t want to think of the consequences of his actions. His plans are never fully complete. He doesn’t think of how he’s going to get a chained, notoriously slippery little eel of an Avatar to the Fire Nation, and he doesn’t think about what would happen to twelve-year-old Aang after they got there—which is horrible of him, but it also shows an odd, ignorant kind of innocence that you’d associate with a kid who’s got a hard time telling right from wrong. Like, I love Zuko dearly, adore him even, but kiddo doesn’t think ahead until the Book 2 finale and even that’s debatable. He’ll eventually start thinking ahead a little bit but for the most part, he doesn’t. Not saying that takes away responsibility, because it absolutely doesn’t, but it is telling of Zuko’s character: he’s an ‘act first, think later’-kind of guy, all ‘fuck around; find out; maybe success’. His sole goal throughout Book 1 and 2 is going home, without even thinking on how to get there beyond like, Avatar in my custody => back in Fire Nation with Avatar => dad loves me again. And he says that his only intention is to go home too, in Ep 2 of Book 1:

Aang: If I go with you, [He holds his staff in front of him as an offer, making sure Zuko understands that he does not wish to continue fighting.] will you promise to leave everyone alone? [The camera cuts to a side-view of the area, Zuko's men still surrounding him, spears poised. After a brief moment of hesitation, Zuko erects himself and nods in agreement. Aang is apprehended by Zuko's men, who take his staff . . . ] Zuko: [Boarding the ship up the walkway. Determined.] Head a course for the Fire Nation. I'm going home.

(Added emphasis for my point)

Zuko is not the Big Bad. He’s not The Largest Threat. He never is. In Book 1 it’s Zhao, in Book 2 it’s Azula, and in Book 3 it’s Ozai. Zuko is a consistent threat, yes, but not a particularly large one no matter how good of a fighter he is. Because he’s presented to us as a disastrously hurt and traumatised little brat who we, the audience, are supposed to feel sorry for, and slowly grow fond of. Because we learn in The Storm that the notion of “caring for others is weak” has literally been branded into him. Because he keeps getting back up to fight, but consistently holds back. We are shown that he knows, on some level, that what he’s doing is wrong: the text suggests that Zuko is actively suppressing his morals. And by the time Zuko hires an assassin to ensure the Avatar is dead, we know that Zuko is incredibly unhappy with his choice(s) and is desperate to be safe; that he’s uncomfortable but wants to be comfortable; that he’s incorrect about the source of his fear while he’s back in the palace. The audience is shown this explicitly. 

By contrast, we’re shown that Jet is fully aware that those villagers will die. He’s fully aware that, if he manages to prove the two refugees are firebenders, they’ll be arrested and probably mutilated (if the hand-crushing is any indication). I love Jet and his character, but he’s supposed to be the example of poisoning yourself with your hatred, anger, and hurt. He’s revenge that goes too far, because he doesn’t allow himself closure. He knows the consequences and isn’t shown to care for them, as long as his goal is furthered.

And there is the small, but significant, difference between the two characters: Zuko initially just wants to capture the Avatar, is purposefully remaining unaware of what will happen when he does so, and is clearly shown to change, while Jet just wants to punish firebenders and is very aware of what will be necessary for him to do so, with a handful of lines of how he ‘stopped being like that’. And honestly, Jet is far more mature than Zuko is for quite some time, regarding the violence of war—basically as mature as Zuko eventually becomes at the tail-end of his redemption arc. But Zuko’s maturity is at that point healthier, because he doesn’t want to genuinely do harm. 

In regards to their separate relationships with Katara, there’s these fantastic points that @sokkastyles made in reply to the post:

The fact that Zuko actually did change and Katara actually forgave him makes ALL the difference. [ . . . ] The thing about Jet is how manipulative he was with Katara. He not only almost made her kill innocents, but he lied to her about the man he attacked having a knife when he was called out, so that Katara would see her as righteous. Someone who is willing to lie in order to make themselves seem good and someone who says they are going to change but then does the same things doesn’t have a good track record, and that’s a more troubling relationship dynamic than someone who acts as an upfront enemy but then sincerely changes.

And: 

I do think it makes sense to focus on manipulation being worse than being a cartoon villain when we're talking about personal relationships. I think many people can relate to having someone like Jet in their lives who seems nice but who lies and manipulates to justify their own bad behavior despite repeatedly claiming that they will change. Not that many people will experience being tied to a tree by someone who wants you to tell them where the Avatar is, and it is completely reasonable for people to be more forgivable of things Zuko did as a villain than things Jet did to Katara when he claimed to be a friend.

I actually don’t have anything to add to this, lol. It’s succinct and well-worded.

Lastly, in addition the relatability and the relationships being different (the manipulative, emotionally hurt, and self-proclaimed anti-hero versus the initially childish, explicitly confused and desperate cartoon villain, plus the girl they hurt horribly), there’s also the problem of Jet not being a main character. Jet is a relatively well-written side character, whilst Zuko is very quickly established as a main-ish character with his own POV (as the writers decided during the conceptualisation that he’d be joining Team Avatar eventually). Zuko’s troubling, self-destructive nature that has been forced upon him and his Tragic Childhood is shown in high definition. The audience is supposed to eventually be okay with Zuko and hopefully like him, slowly adding puzzle pieces to complete the picture of a horrific earlier youth and treatment by nearly everybody he knows except Iroh. Something like this isn’t necessary with Jet, not just because he was already incredibly likeable and understandable from his introduction and onwards, but also because he’s neither a villain nor a main character. 

There’s multiple reasons as to why Zuko is often seen as the ‘better’ option, just like there are multiple reasons why Jet and Zuko are compared so frequently—they’re both traumatised teenage boys who ‘rebel’ to get some semblance of control back, but we see Zuko change into a kid anyone would be a little bit proud and fond of and that doesn’t happen with Jet. Double standard or not, Zuko and Jet are different characters who the writers also treated very differently, on purpose. It makes sense to me that the audience would think Zutara is the ‘less bad’ or far better option. We know far more about Zuko than we know about Jet; and Jet’s redemption arc, if we can even call it that, halts permanently when Zuko’s is reaching the height it for him to go into a freefall, ultimately culminating in a genuine redemption. We, the audience, know this. So does Katara.

[justanotherdumpingground]

Personal Opinions on Choices Villains

In this post, I'm covering the antagonists of the series, not subordinates (e.g. Cecile Contreras) and side villains no matter how loathsome they are (e.g. Priya Lacroix). However, I'm not including everyone, such as those who are too early or appear in multiple books in the same series as significant characters but are villains in one or two books (one of the villains I will mention is an exception).

Everett Rourke: I seriously despise Rourke, both as a character and as a villain. Saying that I hate him for his heinous actions isn't enough. While I acknowledge that he's a force to be reckoned with, most of what he says and does boils down to him being an egomaniac who wants to take over the world just to satisfy his ego. This kind of motive is really shallow and makes him a mere plot device. The only moments I admire about him being more than just a villain is his fondness for Olivia Montoya, such as the way he talked about her. But even then, he liked her just because she gave birth to a child he considered perfect in any way. In short, I find him a pathetic and short-sighted individual. Would be really fitting and satisfying if there's an option to flip him off. At least it was cathartic to see him go crazy in the Vaanu ending.

Azura: I feel like she's less like a character and more like a plot device, so there's little I could say about her other than her being a psychopath who wants to conquer places and prolong her own life by sucking other people's life force. Reminds me of Rourke in some ways.

Luther Nevrakis: He is, in my opinion, one of the best villains Choices has ever produced. Not only does he exercise his acumen well to the point of posing a challenge against Kenna, but he has understandable motives that still doesn't excuse his actions. I understood his frustration at the disunity of the Five Kingdoms against the Iron Empire, even as I despise the massacre he perpetrated at his fellow rulers at Stormholt. Compared to his son Marco and henchman Bartel Gremley, Luther maintains his composure and guile while brokering deals with his enemies and uses them for his own ends.

Rowan West: I'm glad he has motivations that don't necessarily boil down to solely god complex, making him a compelling villain in his own right. It started with his childhood experiences that lead to his talk of wanting to help humanity evolve. That, and coupled with his competence as a villain and persistence, makes him someone I can fear and respect at the same time.

Dorian Delacroix: I find him rather forgettable aside from his resemblance to Donald Trump. Not to mention his offer comes across as fake and paper-thin. He practically exists to give Sebastian some sort of challenge in him. I mean, I like Sebastian more since The Sophomore, Book 2, but it still doesn't erase his initially selfish behavior in The Freshman, up to and including committing a crime.

Nathan Sterling: Nathan is a bland and inept villain with shallow motives for being bad, really predictable when it comes to him being the culprit behind the car crash and the mastermind behind the pranks, and an utter failure at covering his tracks. To quote Kaitlyn if she records his monologue: Drop the evil mastermind monologue, you knock-off Draco Malfoy!

Anton Severus: Anton takes the bad stuff about Nathan Sterling (bland and inept) and applies it to a nation. Sending a bunch of assassins to target the bride (or brides), only for said assassins to end up defeated is an example of his failure as a villain. If you're plotting to overthrow a country's government, you better succeed in doing what you have to do, and Anton fails big-time. Even his motives for becoming king are weak aside from wanting to have all power for himself.

Jonathan Spencer: Another forgettable villain. I feel like he's there to give Matt a chance to stand up to him the moment he was exposed as the one who leaked the secrets.

Viktor Montmartre: Viktor is no doubt a poorly written villain who not only commits sexual assault towards actresses and ruins their lives if they don't comply, but also gets away with a mere slap in the wrist. I get that the story involving him is supposed to be based on the #MeToo movement, but it gets shoved aside in favor of building up Thomas Hunt as a forced love interest. It's distracting. Not to mention that he's pretty much a mere plot device with passing reminders of his importance to the story. Not saying that I should change him, because he's supposed to be a monster like Azura and Rourke.

Silas Prescott: I like that he really cared for his family and tried to bring his late wife back, though it certainly doesn't excuse his heinous actions. In terms of effectiveness, he pretty much succeeds in what he does, particularly having Hazel get info on the MC. Nevertheless, he's an acceptable challenge.

Trent A.K.A. ex-fiancé: What can I say about this guy? All he does is being an utter douche to his ex-fiancée, such as cheating on her, roughly grabbing her, and even conning her into signing a marriage certificate. Granted, the latter is partly the protagonist's fault for not consulting with others, but it still shows how much of a jerk he is. I have mixed feelings on his disappearance, however. I was relieved I didn't have to deal with him anymore, but also felt that having closure with him costing diamonds is a disservice to the plot, since it explores a character's motivations. Even with the closure, cheating on his fiancée was a stupid move in his part.

Aunt Mallory: Oh, boy. Where do I start? Her actions are consistently loathsome while her motives came too late. She even continued being horrible (giving real weapons to kids, casually suggesting that her daughter give her child up for adoption against her will, tampering with her niece's boat, etc.) even after she mentioned her history with her daughter, which shows that she made a choice and must face the consequences. Unfortunately, she gets away with nearly killing her own niece and future nephew-in-law, which makes it all the more infuriating.

Brian Crandall: Oh, Brian's definitely one character I really detest with a passion. On one hand, it's easy for me to dismiss him as some mere bully, but on the other hand, his actions and motivations are more than just being a bully. His lack of remorse without compelling concerns, selfish attitude and mindset, creepy gestures towards Myra, and refusal to see his own mistakes are the topreasons. I think PB did the right thing by characterizing him as unlikeable as possible, as it's their intention to do so. Even worse is that he comes off as persistent even in presence. It's like I can never escape from him.

Principal Amanda Isa A.K.A. Ashley Faris: Since her dictatorial rule in Berry High, I suspect two different things about her: either she was sincere in enforcing order and discipline by going too far because of her bad experience with chaos, or her policies were ultimately a facade to cover her criminal activities. I wasn't surprise that the latter was true because she picked Morgan, a notorious opportunist, as hall monitor. As for Isa herself, I really hate her for her actions and motivations. Sure she was indebted to a couple of criminals since she fell for a pyramid scheme that ruined the three of them, but that doesn't excuse what she did, especially since she probably should've turned Phantom and Blackbird in. Still doesn't make me hate her as much as I hate characters worse than her.

Max Warren and Kara Sinclair: I swear, these two are the kind of people I love to hate, but even then they pale because they don't do something genuinely threatening, like usurping the club leader positions from Julian and Mia, respectively. That would've made them threatening, I guess.

Danielle: Honestly, I find her rather pathetic and immature because of her obsession with Rory that reaches possessive levels. She knew what she did could've injured the Class Act protagonist, but she did it anyway. Even if she didn't know about the true purpose of the play was no excuse for her misdeeds, which screams Aunt Mallory to me. Moreover, what she said in the premium options didn't even explain the reason why she considered Rory her friend. I wish she develops differently, however. And what's with her motivations being paywalled?

Redfield A.K.A. Jane Marshall: Oh, this is an interesting one. I find Jane (and Redfield in general) a very interesting villain because she still maintains her childish personality even after becoming Redfield, which warps her way of helping her old friends. Even after her rejection and rampage, she still retains a childlike view of what's right and wrong. She's dangerous and tragic at the same time, and I like that.

Countess Henrietta: I swear, for someone meant to be a villain, Henrietta has the personality of a walking cliche. Sure she wants Edgewater and lives in an era where women had less rights compared to nowadays, but her behavior and characterization just boils down to unnecessarily abusive towards others, including her own husband and son. I feel like Duke Richards is more of a villain than she is, though that was because his establishment as one was gradual and just the beginning. I swear, I'm starting to find her slightly less unbearable, but if Pixelberry pulls a Mallory on her (have her do horrible deeds that threaten people's lives yet expect sympathy in the end), I'll be furious.

Duke Tristan Richards: I find it a bit funny that he quickly dwarfs Henrietta in terms of the threat he poses. That aside, he's utterly vile like Rourke and Montmartre and has shown no humanizing qualities thus far. All he does is act like he owns everything and that he's the only person that matters. Sick of his attitude.

Jeff Duffy: Like Luther Nevrakis, Jeff Duffy is a very well-written villain who not only succeeds in his goals, but also has a sympathetic motive that still doesn't excuse his actions. It helps that he has a really scary grin when his true colors are revealed. Sure I'm angry at him harming Kate, but I can also step into his shoes as he gets angry at the Sterlings for ruining his life. In the end, I chose to let him die in the Endurance while saving Pierce, who I think deserves to watch his family's legacy crumble.

John Tull and Hayley Rose: These two are interesting villains that surprise me in the end. While their actions are despicable, their motivations show them as still human. Tull going great lengths to protect her daughter, who was wronged by several men. That makes them interesting villains in their right.

Adam Vega: This one's tough. I find him an effective villain when it comes to gaining good publicity, framing Adrian, and gaining the upper hand in some situations. What bugs me is how and why did he start adopting Gaius Augustine's agenda. I mean, he was rather shocked about it when Gaius revealed his master plan about a century ago.

Gaius Augustine: He may not have a lot of free screentime, but he has proven to be an interesting villain who works behind the scenes for a long time, and effectively, no less. There's still not much I could see of him so far, but here's hoping Bloodbound, Book 2 treats him with justice by making him a three-dimensional character with believable motives that explain his reasons well while not whitewashing them.

Garret Redmond: Honestly, this guy comes across as forgettable. I know that he's a threat to the Oakleys and Mendozas (attempted to bribe them, then damaged the Oakley ranch by burning the barn and destroying the fence), but I see nothing much in him besides being a ruthless and corrupt business tycoon.

Martin and TJ: Honestly, these two piss me off because all they do is treat other people, including their co-workers, like dirt for no real reason. Even worse, TJ forcefully grabbed MC, which shows his willingness to cross the line. What I find outrageous is that we don't get to see their reactions to their defeat in the finale. The only assuring thing about them is that they're intended to behave that way.

Rose Waverley: Eh. I get that Rose is paranoid, pessimistic, and suffering from a mental illness, but whether being undead has warped her mind or her behavior was naturally that wasn't fully explained in detail. I think she could've been more interesting, if only THoBM isn't so short.

Ivy Fisher: OK, so I feel like I should hate her for taking advantage of the competition with Carson's help, but the truth is I don't. The reason is because I was reminded by Adam/Handsome Stranger to not take game moves personally, so I wonder why the love interests start taking offense at her targeting my protagonist? It's like they know the reason to participate in the competition is to have fun, yet they disregard it anyway.