#so basically the characters are personified weapons that were given human forms so they can protect history from being changed

[hoodie-prince-kid-archived]

i think this is the first personified objects/concepts/whathaveyou anime ive watched that isnt problematic and is also super exciting and engaging and has l o r e and isnt flat-out parody

[lazulimaya]

French Canadian Witchcraft: Symbols, Guardians and Divination

(forgive the long post, but this is information I’ve been collecting through personal experience and Beltane Lowen’s book, along with lectures and other scholarly articles I’ve read.)

Symbols

Le fleur-de-lys: Can be used as a symbol for the Trinity, the triple worlds. The flower, the lily, is a symbol of purity and was often placed with the Virgin Mary (hence, a Goddess symbol). It of course also displays the sacred number 3. 

(Oh, this is my favourite painting done of Madeleine by Georges de la Tour, she just looks so pensive and looks like she’s learning lots of things, and the skull is just such a nice touch, a very witchy painting for me. ooh and fun fact: this painting was the one Ariel had in the Little Mermaid!)

Deities and Spirits

Saint Anne: The mother of the Virgin Mary, this saint was very popular among the French Canadians and Acadians living near the sea. Her feast day is July 26. She is matron saint of carpenters, single women, orphans, children, equestrians, grand-parents, housewives, lace workers, lost things, seamstresses, miners, clothes sellers, poverty, pregnancy, birthing, people who work in stables, teachers, sterility, and sailors (she protected against sea storms). I look up to her when I sew and keep my home clean and fresh. Her symbols are the threshold or a door, and books. She’s the matron saint of Brittany, and therefore, has Celtic connections. Her colours are green and red. 

Saint Marie Magdeleine: She is the matron saint of the Magdalen Islands (where my great-grandma came from). She was one of the female disciples of Jesus. She’s matron saint of women, spiritual revelations, of those that love to ponder and study, and discoverers of sacred mysteries, visions, apothecaries, jewellers, perfume makers, and pharmacists. I look up to her for vision quests and when I study witchcraft. She’s also someone I associate with sex, love, and the true meaning of loving someone for who they are. She’s been in religious debates among scholars if she was Jesus’s wife or not, but the mere implications that she could be are very appealing to me Pagan-wise, so there). I know, she’s been written as a repentent prostitute, but that was an addition made to the Bible long ago by a Pope so she’s not that for me. She’s witnessed Jesus’s crucifixion, burial and ressurection, so for me, she is a figure with which to work with spirits and death and rebirth. So I call on her for scrying and divination.

Virgin Mary: One of the prominent mother goddess figures, her symbols are cerulean blue, white and the lily, She protects women and children. I look up to her for learning love and compassion. 

The Devil: while the Church has painted a horrid image of the Devil in their structures, the Devil appears a lot in French Canadian folklore. He’s often there as a figure of temptation and getting seduced to act out of socially accepted norms (Church, right?), but, one could argue that there’s a primal wildness to this figure, as the French Canadian habitants were often very fearful of the forests when they came here. Some stories have heroes meet him in the forest, sometimes accompanied by little spirits and elves. He can transform into different beings, and sometimes, he appears as a fellow Voyageur (hence the liminal and sometimes dangerous aspects of the wilderness). He brings young women to dance wildly (something the Church frowned upon heavily, so let’s dance!!) In some stories, he helps build churches (I know, what the heck?) but the structure never ends up finished or it gets destroyed repeatedly. He’s basically a figure of mischief and wildness, of total chaos in the natural landscape, much like the Horned God. 

The Fée (from the Lecture: Erik Lacharity and Morrigane Feu “Les Dames Fées: Ladies Fae in French-Canadian Traditional Witchcraft”, Raven’s Knoll Workshop, 2018.) There were rules of engagement with dealing with the Fée. Stories of the Fée were roadmaps for people. When someone meets them, it’s because they’re embarking on a life-changing journey. Stories with “Ti-Jean” are like this. Crossing a road, stream, forest, or taking a right turn at the crossroads, they meet a Fée. In French Canadian tradition, Fée doesn’t mean belle fée. Fée meant something that is enchanted with the means of affecting fate. This is no ordinary stick, it can do something. The Fée would give them something to help them, usually in sets of three. The exchange that took place, the hero had a quest but usually, there’s something in it for the Fée. An example of this is a talking horse previously being a stable boy, and at the completion of the journey, they turn back to their forms. Depending on the setting of the storyteller, ex: Acadia, there were lots of stories with the ocean, boats, nets etc. In the interior, there’d be forests and valleys, barley and cakes. The geographical context matters. The Raconteur makes it so that you yourself are in the myth because of your geographical location. Trou des Fées: a little cave or a little crack in a rock and leave an offering of cream or milk. Normandy, Gasgogne, Picardie, Belgians, they came here, and they had fairies called les lutins. Little red-bonneted fairies, really good blacksmiths, more dwarf-like. They’d sharpen tools too. When Ti-Jean is on his quest, the Fée can give him a knife to defend himself or to deliver someone from imprisonment. Three main classes and areas of affinity for the Fée: those that take on aspects of the woodlands (the Queen of all the Animals/Birds etc) they were very straight-to-the-point peoples. The Fée as protectors, about 30-40 stories of those. Others were sorcerers or magicians. Some Fée would give advice and help the hero. Stories where lost loved ones were some of those. Many of these stories featured Princes and Princesses, kingdoms, etc. because the settlers came here before the Revolution, so it was still important to them. French Canadians, almost all their divination and magic was centred around their love, sex and family life. These are reflected in the stories. For magical objects that the hero would have, sometimes it’s a stick, sometimes a napkin (when you set it on the table a whole feast would show up), little pieces of iron, and if you set it down it becomes a cookstove. Animals of the Fée would help you: Eagles and Horses, they were the big deal. Eagles and Horses were passenger animals in and out of the Fée land. Hero is coming out of subterranean kingdom and there’s this giant Eagle there and offers him passage out of the Fée lands, but he needs sustenance. Use your magical knife and cut off a chunk of your thigh and feed it to me. Ok… but he got a passage. It’s about sacrifice. Little lessons are all hidden in there. Formulas came with using these implements. Ex: This stick can beat people up. If robbers come and take my stuff, I’d take my stick and say “Joue mon gourdin!” and the stick would beat everybody up. “Napkin, give me food!” and poof, food. It’s not about the big magical words, you already have a tool that you know is Fée and it’s a simple command. Every animal that is white is Fée. “Adieu Aigle” and you’d turn into the Eagle. Whoops. The French Canadians were super practical people, just do the thing. They had no time for frilly stuff. Archetypes are super fluid in this tradition. Never pigeon-hole the Fée. Ladies Fée is a type of Fée. Dames Amorphosées: shape shifters, ex: The White Cat, usually very very beautiful, the cat hops into the pail with four toads and she turns into a Princess. Another form of transformation is the whole aspect of going from the pauper to the Prince/Princess. Sometimes it was a curse, but other times it was to disguise themselves. Woodland Ladies Fée: you’d encounter them in the forest, and they had dominion over something, like Birds (super connected to the Fée). With the male aspect, there were beings like the Eagle King or the Ant King (they’d be more specific with their animal dominions). Elemental Ladies: personifying fire and water. Both those elements were big deals. Blue Bonnet Lady: she’s frustrating for the hero, sometimes blowing out his match when he’s cooking pea soup. The Lady comes in on a cloud in the fog. Fog is a big deal. There are Courtly Ladies, like Fée Princesses, and lots of items she offers are scissors, twine, thread, things that are tied to female weaving magic. Sometimes the pauper and the princess switch roles, sometimes they’re the same person. The Witch is another figure. They can have Fée Witches. These were not the type of witches you want to meet. Some stories have the hero stumbling over this thatched hut, and you can stay for lodging, just feed the good oats to the black horse, and beat the white horse to a pulp. The white horse is actually a Prince that she transformed. So he takes the white horse away. The Three Sisters, they come up often in French Canadian folklore and healing traditions. In stories with giants that want to eat humans, replace them with pork and barley bouillon, make a type of beer with raw dough makes the water boil without it boiling. When superintendents of New France were coming here, wine became less available, so French Canadians often made spruce beer, given the lack of hops. There’s a reason why in France they go “We love our wine!” and we go like “we love our beer”. A year and a day and forgetfulness is a big motif in stories. Gifts: magic weapons, animals, objects, transportation, social status (pauper to princess), riches, love (gets a bit non-consent, but in those days there was not a whole lot of consent in marriage, that’s why they were so preoccupied about who they’re going to marry, so they can psychologically prepare).Go to the threshold of the woods, where the Fée usually are, sit down, and offer your offerings. Clearings are good too, the beings you encounter can surprise you. White animals, characters from stories, etc. Following the steps of the story can allow you to write your own story with that formulaic narrative of the old tales. If you read the tales and use them as guides and embark on the hero’s journey, lots of wisdom can be attained. Stories became mixed with Irish folklore, because when the Catholic Irish came over, we bonded with them and created new stories. 

Historical Archetypes and Associations

The Voyageur: The liminal figure in its own right, voyageurs were known to shift and adapt endlessly to their environment and cultures they found themselves in, whether in French Canada or among Indigenous peoples. Can be linked to the Wild Man. They combined their Catholic rituals with the mythologies and cosmologies of Indigenous cultures. They’re temperamental figures, but knowledgeable off the beaten path to keep you alive.

The Raconteur: The storyteller had an important place in French Canada, telling stories as old as the first settlers in North America and sometimes from the old country. Some of them were itinerant, asking for food and lodging in exchange for a story. They were known to stretch stories for multiple nights, ending on cliff-hangers. They weaved tales together, and had vast repertoires. They’re learned figures, with silver tongues and enchanting qualities.

The Violoneux: The violinist or fiddler, a key figure in French Canadian culture. They had an innate sense of rhythm and song, and could bring a whole room to dance. The jigs and reels are also inspired from traditional Irish and Scottish music, as the two cultures mingled. 

The Bewitched Canoe: It’s a popular story of French Canada. It’s a variant of the Wild Hunt. One version, written by Honoré Beaugrand in 1892, tells it like this: some loggers get lonely in their winter camp on New Year’s Eve, and wish to go home to visit their families. The Devil appears to them to offer them an easy and fast way to go back to their homes through a flying canoe, as long as they get back before dawn, otherwise, their souls would belong to him and they’d go to Hell. The embark, and they arrive home, partying the night away. They almost arrive to the camp by the skin of their teeth, but the Devil lets them go, mysteriously. This legend comes from the Poitou region of France, where an english nobleman named Gallery loved hunting. He loved it so much, he skipped mass. As punishment, he was cursed to ride in the skies for eternity, chased by horses and wolves, like a Wild Hunt. When the French arrived in North America, they combined this Wild Hunt variation with the Indigenous realities of using canoes as modes of transportation. Some stories have the voyageurs or loggers ride the skies every New Year’s Eve for all eternity, and in some versions they escape Hell. Consequently, New Year’s Eve is an important day for French Canadians, and is very liminal in its aspects. 

Divination

Most French Canadian divination traditions revolve around the family, love, and sex. Back in the day, they were very concerned with whom they’d end up marrying, if their child would carry through an illness, or how their family and love life was fairing.

Lowen described some divination methods that can be applicable to a French Canadian practice, namely: playing cards, dice, reading tea leaves, mirrors and crystal balls, dream interpretation. 

[feathersandblue]

Hi!I love your meta about black sails characters and I've read your last one about flint's real motivations and how much more human silver is.One of the biggest critic moved to silver is about madi, and the fact that he betrayed her stopping the war without her consent. That he has taken away from her a possibility to free the world from slavery. A cause for which she was ready to die for and to see him dying too. And for this betrayal he doesn't deserve and won't obtain her forgiveness...

Everyone is entitled to their own interpretation, and canon does not really answer the question what their future relationship will look like - or rather, it indicates that while reconciliation is possible and Madi might be willing to forgive him, their relationship will never be the same.

I don’t think canon really backs the idea that she won’t be able to forgive him. The fact that Madi comes to him in their last scene is pretty telling - it’s meant to indicate that Madi is changing her stance, rather than Silver. If the creators hadn’t meant to imply that they would still be together in some form, they could easily have their last scene be a shot of Silver looking at her longingly from a distance, and she turning her back on him and walking away. 

Of course, we also have a very concise statement from the show’s creators: 

“The way you see them at the end, they’re in the same frame but they’re yards away from each other. Emotionally, that’s as close as they’ll ever get again.”(x)

So I think it’s made pretty clear that Madi does forgive him, but that it’s not really the same after. And how could it be? Silver has betrayed her. There are fundamental differences between them that have now become obvious, which at least Madi hasn’t really been aware of before. He’s not the person she thought he was.

Concerning the fact that Silver stops the war without her consent, and that this makes him a bad person … well, I have a couple of problems with that. 

1. One of them is a distinct one-sidedness in the way people look at their relationship, where Madi is treated basically as a saint, and Silver as an illoyal boyfriend who doesn’t support her and her cause as is his duty. But in a romantic relationship, both parties have obligations toward each other, it can’t be just a one-sided thing, no matter how much we relate to one partner and their goals and ambitions.

It’s also important to point out that if Silver had acted the way she wanted him to, Madi would be dead. Madi only survived the entire ordeal because Silver chose a wife over a war. If he hadn’t brought the cache, even though Flint and the maroon queen opted against it, the governor would have shot her. 

It’s also only fair to  mention that the choice between a noble cause and the life of a partner is not one that you can dictate to anyone. It’s a deeply personal decision. The fact that Madi’s life was more important to Silver than vice versa is not something you can really blame Silver for. 

“You may think what you want of me. I will draw comfort in the knowledge that you’re alive to think it.”

I imagine it’s pretty difficult to remain perpetually pissed at a person for saving your life, going forward. 

When Madi was imprisoned by Rogers, she wasn’t willing to bargain for Silver’s life. It was her choice. I don’t see anyone pointing out that it would have been her moral duty as a romantic partner to think of Silver and what they had together, that she is a horrible girldfriend for putting her beliefs first. 

And yet I see people say that Silver’s failure to act in a way that reflects her beliefs rather than his makes him a bad person. 

In a relationship between two equals, there is no such thing as an obligation to defer to your partner in such a profound way. There is no way to justify why Silver should have to defer to Madi. And yet parts of fandom consider him a horrible human being for failing to do just that.

So really, that one-sidedness, where people look at things only from Madi’s point of view - one that emphasizes her marginalization as a black woman and comes with the premise that Madi’s wants and needs clearly exceed Silver’s - that he’s a horrible boyfriend for disregarding her priorities, which are so much nobler and more important - is something I can’t share or support. People often judge their relationship from a position of real life activism, where the fact that Madi is fighting slavery is a killer argument. In my personal opinion, regarding their personal relationship as well as their historical situation solely from that perspective is somewhat reductive and simplistic.

2. The second problem that I have is the assumption that Madi was entitled to that war, as if war was some sort of possession or property. It was “her war”, and then Silver “took it away from her”. You might recall what I said about Flint personifying that war in my previous meta post. So according to Flint, Silver is a ruthless murderer; according to fandom, he is a thief. 

But no matter how you twist it, war is not something that people have a right to, because war always requires the partcipation of other people. It requires soldiers to do your dirty work. If you are a war leader, you have to have the support of your troups, you have to lead them into battle, you have to order them to fight and kill on your behalf.

I’ve already written extensively about how Flint acts as a leader, but there’s one thing that can’t be denied, and that’s that he’s willing to put his own life on he line, fighting side by side with his men. He’s doing more than his own share of dirty work, he’s usually part of the boarding crew or the vanguard. It’s rare that we see him stand back while others do the killing. 

When it comes to Madi, on the other hand, we have an entirely different situation. Madi is the heir of what is framed as a hereditary monarchy, she wasn’t elected into a position of power, she’s awarded that position - stepping into the footsteps of a leader who is “priestess, governess, warlord.” Her authority is absolute, she even takes pride in making it obvious to Silver in 3.08. that her men obey her without question. But Madi doesn’t do the dirty work. She doesn’t spill blood. In an era where war still means a lof of close combat, Madi steps back and lets other peope fight her battles. 

What right does she have to this war, morally speaking, when that war demands the obedience and the sacrifice of other people? A position of authority where you can order people to die is not something that any human being, no mater how much we like them, should be entitled to.

Imagine there’s a war, and no one shows up. (*)

Basically, what Silver and Julius do in the finale, is to make that war so singularly unattractive to people that they are no longer inclined to show up. They are no longer willing to kill and die on Madi’s behalf because, guess what, they, too, value their own lives and those of their loved ones more than they value the prospect of a long, bloody war that puts their own freedom at risk and has very little chances at success.

Tough shit. It almost looks like it’s been Madi’s war rather than “their war”, as she so succinctly phrases it in her conversation with Rogers. Madi felt so confident speaking on behalf of her people, but then it turns out that she never actually had their vote. It should be mentioned that Madi herself has not experienced slavery first hand - not the way that Julius, Max, Ruth, or her mother and her father have experienced it, who are all far less enthusisastic at the prospect of a war because they know how much they stand to lose when England retaliates. 

I am going to copy & paste a couple of praragraphs from one of my earlier posts here. 

Fandom often treats Silver as if he were taking away Madi’s agency, but that’s not really what he’s doing.

By removing Flint and the treasure from the picture, Silver basically dissembles the nukes and cuts the finances of a war that he considers a fucking nightmare, which, and I don’t think anyone can deny it, is a valid concern. Flint, as a war leader and a brilliant tactiction, second to none, is more of a force of nature than a man. His reputation, his tactical genius, his ability to overcome the greatest odds, and his ability to get people to follow him are nothing short of amazing. So really, the analogy of Flint being the nuke - the devastating weapon of mass destruction - is not far off. And of course, the treasure is both a media-effective means of propaganda and a valuable resource. 

Both Flint and the treasure, however, are also not something Madi had a right to, or at least, her right to them did not surpass Silver’s.

Silver has bled, and spilled blood, for each of these things.

Silver was a key player in securing the Urca gold in the first place. He bled for the cause (lost his leg in Charles Town), he was part of the Walrus crew which made Flint’s name what it became in the aftermath of Charles Town. He was the one who served as Flint’s quartermaster, he was the one who sailed with him into that storm, he is the one who went with him through the doldrums. When Flint made the bargain with the maroons, he made it under coercion - because the maroon queen threatened the lives of him and his crew. But it was Silver whose intervention forged that alliance. Without Silver, Flint would have given up in that cages, and all of our pretty pirates would have ended up dead either from torture or slave labor, or slain during their escape. 

Madi, on the other hand, got that war handed on a silver plate (pun intended). She was living on that island, and, like most young people, struggling to forge her own identity by establishing herself in opposition to the more protectionsist rule of her mother. Along came a bunch of pirates who offered her a shiny war, as well as the war leader to fight it for her, a man with the persuasive power to convince her mother to support it.

Madi’s war relied on Flint - his tactical skills, his willingness to sacrifice anything and everything for the cause. It also relied on Silver, who put his life on the line again and again, torturing, killing, and descending into darkness. Silver was reluctant to step into that role, and we can see, during season three and four, how he struggles not to let that darkness consume him. Long John Silver is also not something that Madi has a right to. Nor, and that is where we get back to 1, is his unwavering support and loyalty even when it goes against his beliefs, especially since she doesn’t seem willing to offer the same.

When I say that Madi’s war relied on Flint, there is also another aspect to it, wich ties back to the previous meta about Flint and his reasons for fighting. Madi’s war relies on Flint being fucking miserable. 

The thing that Madi seems most upset about in 4.10 is the fact that Silver sent Morgan to Savannah to look for Thomas Hamilton. 

But why would Madi be upset about the fact that Silver sent someone to find out whether his best friend’s lover might still be alive? I mean, let’s assume that the Spanish invasion hadn’t happened, that Morgan had returned with the good news that Thomas was alive, imagine Silver had told Flint, there would have raided the plantation to free Thomas, and there would be a tearful reuion of two lovers. How on earth could Madi possibly see this as a form of betrayal? 

Maybe because Silver, and Madi herself, knew that Thomas being alive would be a game changer for Flint. Looking for Thomas - which is all Silver did in that moment, it’s not as if he’d really been planning to imprison Flint there at that point - can only be considered a form of betrayal if they both knew exactly that Flint was only willing to fight that war because he was so lost to his grief and rage that it drove him to such extremes, if they both knew that Flint was born “out of great tragedy”. But it’s Flint that Madi’s war relies on. Not James McGraw. 

All these things - the treasure, Flint, Long John Silver - they do not belong to Madi. There is a certain irony in the fact that Madi used Silver’s considerable skillset - his cunning, his inventiveness, his power of persuasion, the legend of Long John Silver - to fight her war, but that is is this exact skillset that is then used against her to end it. 

Of course, Madi is free to do as she pleases. If she wants that war so desperately, she can go and try to find some likeminded people who help her fight it. She can find the outsiders, the rebels, the other “scattered objections” and form her own army, wage her own war, if that’s what she thinks is right. Build her own resistance. Do it the hard way. She can send someone to Savannah to find Flint and free him. She can do a lot of things to make that war happen.

But she won’t do that, because she isn’t stupid, and she’s not like Flint, who was so consumed by his war that he simply could not let go of it. Madi has other things to live for, thankfully. For sane people, a war immdiately gets a lot less attractive the moment their chances of winning decline. Madi is a good leader to her people, and she’s a good person. She would not waste lives and resources in a war that no one wants.Silver did betray her, and I’m not saying she has to forgive him. But I think it’s important to acknowledge that Silver’s motives and reasons are no less valid than hers, and that taking out Flint and the cache did not mean denying her agency, because if her agency relied on these two things, then it was never real to begin with.

3. Third, what bothers me is to look at Silver’s betrayal of Flint and make it about Madi when it was never about her in the first place. I know we all look at the show from different pespectives, but I think it’s fair to say that Silver and Flint, their individual arcs and their complex and fraught relationship, are central to Black Sails. In Silver’s story, Flint is the antagonist, and the conflict between Flint and Silver and its resolution has very little to do with Madi - if anything, she’s a catalyst that contributes to brings things to a head. Accordingly, the idea that Madi’s wants and needs should be the determining factor in Silver’s decision-making seems quite absurd. Flint may be Madi’s nuke, but first and foremost, he’s Silver’s … friend, alter ego, antagonist, partner, captain, whatever you want to call it - this overwhelming influence in Silver’s life.

The relationship between Silver and Flint is complex, fraught, full of landmines. There’s a co-depenency that’s not quite healthy, a power imbalance that only changes in Silver’s favor in season four - and there’s a tentative, hard-won friendship between them. And in that situation - with their shared history and everything they’ve been through together - should Madi’s wants and needs really be the deteminigg factor in Silver’s decision-making? Or should it be his own moral compass? 

Of course, the situation in Black Sails is more complex than that, there are other factors to keep in mind - first and foremost, the issue of slavery, which, as I’ve said before, is a killer argument all on its own. How can Silver possibly turn aganst Flint and Silver when they fight for a better world without slavery, for a revolution? If he doesn’t want to fight, he can just walk away, can he not? 

But the thing is, people who tend to say that rarely look at the whole thing from Silver’s point of view. There is a distinct lack of willingness to put themselves in his shoes. 

Silver is in a position of an individual having to make a choice. Jack has arrived with a clear agenda, one that gives Nassau a chance at peace. From Silver’s point of view, Flint is entirely driven by rage, the intent “to see the world burn” - as someone who is decidedly not an idealist, Silver simply cannot focus on these far-away visions of a better future the same way. And in that situation, confined by his own experiences and worldview, Silver is left with two options: side with Jack, secure the peace and the freedom of Madi’s people, stop Flint, and keep Madi safe. Or turn against Jack, enable the war and let Flint set the New World on fire, then lose both him and Madi either trough a violent death or by leaving them behind. War or peace? The decision, in this moment, is not an easy one, but I think it displays a lack of understanding to suggest that with Silver’s and Flint’s relationship right at the core of it, with everything that stands between them - the things Silver has seen Flint do, the murder and the insanity and the gambling with lives, and the things Silver himself has done on behalf of the war - that Silver acting according to his personal beliefs makes him a villain, or that it is his moral duty to support his girfriend’s ambitions - the very girlfriend who, at this point, is only still alive because he’s already “betrayed” her once by prioritizing her life over the cause.

So, after all of that, we are still left with a couple of things that cannot be denied.

1. Silver acted behind Madi’s back, and he betrayed both her and Flint on a personal level. They had no reason to suscpect he would turn against them (though I would argue that there were signs, they just didn’t pick up on them), which further contributes to the sense of betrayal.  

2. Silver put a stop to a war that was meant to abolish slavery. We cannot conclusively say that it was the right choice (but neither can we say it wasn’t, as we have no means to determine what the outcome would have been).

It’s of course perfectly okay to have personal opinions about all of these things, or to think that Madi should not forgive Silver. But I can’t help but think that a lot of the criticism levelled at Silver is a consequence of a very limited viewpoint that is rooted in activism, not in empathy - to an extent where the entire thing becomes a black and white thing, where Madi gets awarded all the oppression points that forever put her on a pedestal of moral high ground, because SLAVERY! 

Perdonally, I don’t think that this viewpoint acknowledges the complexity of the issue at hand, something that the show itself is actually very good at. 

—————————————-

* The original phrasing, of course, is “Sometime they’ll give a war and no one will come.”  The variant used here is a re-translation of the German version, “Stell dir vor, es ist Krieg, und keiner geht hin.”