#the environmental storytelling of “revolutionary” being in red

[liketwoswansinbalance]

Why Rafal Might Still Be a Never and Rhian Might Still Be an Ever

Alternate title: Fall Could Have a Double Plot Twist and Here’s Why

I consider this to be my ultimate thematic theory, but really it’s nothing that new or revolutionary. Except, the Old in disguise. I don’t blame Rafal for his major trust issues. I really don’t. Because, so much is environmental and conditional. That is the backbone of this post.

First, could the cover of Rise have been a red-herring, intentionally misleading? (With Rafal on Good’s side and Rhian on Evil’s. Their helmets are not swapped however.) What if all along their swapping sides was a double plot twist?

Side note: The cover of Rise could be unlike the cover of book 1. The opposite in fact, as book 1’s cover revealed the truth. Sophie was on Evil’s side, Agatha on Good’s.

Plus, the helmets are more directly tied to their heads, their selves, their souls. However, the castles are settings. They are situational, circumstantial, environmental, conditional. A person being there (at their designated School) is dependent on circumstance and their nature, yes, but locations can change. Rafal changed his location by traveling. Rhian changed his by shaping it with his architectural projects. They are not in the same place they once were in. Helmets could also change, but helmets are more intrinsically personal. They are personal belongings, and are still more directly tied to, and physically close to a person’s head and thoughts. Also, armorers do specifically make custom helmets sometimes.

Maybe, Soman only intended to make us believe:

Rafal = Good

Rhian = Evil

Only to double-subvert it. I wouldn’t put it past Soman because he likes sowing seeds of confusion.

Also, unless it’s for a really intentional juxtaposition: would Soman really use the same, old Sophie and Agatha plot again but with a tragic ending? I think he tends to favor novelty to keep his storytelling fresh, even if there are often parallels. I know Fall wouldn’t have the exact same plot, but Rise comes close. Functionally, this duology could have the same plot as The School Years, even if the individual events, pivotal points, and pacing are different. But still. Why would Soman repeat himself if instead, he could double-subvert it? Why not? His plots are always clever. Or, is that too predictable?

Then, there’s this:

"It's not who we are. It's what we do."

If I have misquoted this, please correct me. This line has been said by Lady Lesso (who opposed Rafal’s New Evil) in TLEA and toward the end of Rise, by Rafal himself. Yet, we have to keep in mind that Rafal said it first, in the prequel. So, actually, he could have changed and turned cynical over time. He could have lost sight of his own original Balanced perspective, turned extremist, as seems to be the case in TLEA when it’s compared to his characterization in Rise. Assuming it is actually him in TLEA and not someone else. So, it boils down to this. He lost sight of his own philosophy. And, I think I have an idea as to why. Because, in TLEA, he tends to put more weight on who they are, the students' and Sophie's souls, than what they do.

And, losing sight of his own philosophy could easily be explained by any measure of trauma, loss, the other effects of war on his psyche, the passage of time, the anticipated effects of Neverland and its politics, constant betrayal, or other interpersonal human experiences, with people, to change his outlook on what human beings are. And, to change his outlook on what their souls are fundamentally determined by. I say this because the one change we haven’t yet seen in SGE is a true conversion from one side to another. Thus, a change in philosophy is more grounded and internally consistent with the series as a whole than introducing new magical rules. (Hook breathing Rafal’s soul could contradict this.) Throughout it all, actions could change alignments, but souls never did. No matter how hard Sophie tried, she couldn’t be Good; she could only do Good.

In other words, too many bad experiences could make Rafal see some people as inherently bad or as traitors because he’s too overwhelmed by all the new information bombarding him in the tireless paroxysms of the plot to be able to separate individuals from their individual actions. He’s no longer seeing clearly. He is forced to double down and trust his judgment more than ever over other people because he can’t trust others. And, Rhian is no longer even a trustworthy sounding-board. Not that he ever really was. Rafal was always Rhian’s sounding-board.

If the only feedback you ever get is your own, then your thinking will become twisted because there’s nothing external to moderate it, or to tell you you are going crazy in a self-imposed echo chamber. I bet Rafal will absolutely refuse to listen to anyone ever again, with a few minor exceptions of Rhian, until it's too late, and he’s gone over the edge of sanity. It’s all his fault for not communicating. But, it’s the plot keeping him from doing so in the first place. The fog of an impending war could be getting in the way of the clarity of his vision. And, the prophecy only goes further to muddle it up because of its inevitability. People are not consistent, and he’s only seen the part of themselves they’ve presented to him. But, he can’t realize that now. Because, he’s flooded with more and more on his plate.

Categorizing people automatically rather than being able to separate all individuals from their actions is also easier, faster, and more efficient in that it spares you more pain that way, than to weigh every action or what they do.

Thus, I believe Rafal is still Evil in nature, but has done Good and is capable of Good, under certain conditions or in certain circumstances. And, this could be thematically significant. That the brothers always have a choice, in what they choose to do.

And, even though Sophie is firmly Evil, she has done genuine Good deeds. She's capable of Good deeds, especially in regards to Agatha, so who's to say the same logic doesn't apply to Rafal in regards to Rhian and Rhian only. Aside from when James Hook reminded Rafal of Rhian. That’s a whole other kettle of fish. Thank you to @eatgan for sparking the idea.

Rhian could bring out the best in Rafal, considering he's a (supposedly) Good influence. He loves his brother, and love can cause someone to act out-of-character.

And, Rhian's "love" (read: infatuations) could have easily done the same to him. People will do anything for love or perceived love. “The most dangerous person in a fairy tale is willing to do anything for love.” And, this time around, in what will be the TLEA/full-blown war of this duology, that person is him. Rhian is dangerous in how he's inconstant and (emotionally) unstable but not because he's inherently Evil, like Sophie was. He only has the potential to do Evil for love. Then, there's the factor of love driving people insane. Rhian could be Good, and still be the murderer. Being Good doesn’t absolve him from all suspicion. Fratricide and Evil are not mutually exclusive in this context. Rhian did almost kill Fala. This possibility of Rhian being the murderer might be almost as likely as Rafal being the murderer. Rhian doesn’t have to be Evil to do it.

Love brings out the worst in Rhian, but that's natural or at least common. Because apparently, the not-100%-pure-Good-but-still-Evers Evergirls were absolutely brutal as first-years in book 1. And, I bet Good became vain and egotistical because of Rhian's lasting influence. The Evergirls didn't uphold all of Good's standards until it really came down to it. Until a test. The test of war. So, maybe, the Great War will bring out the brothers' original, assumed, or true natures. If they are indeed what we assumed them to be, and not swapped.

Thematically, this would all be consistent with TLEA and not contradict Soman's earlier messaging, or so I think.

Sophie’s Good deed wasn't erased for all the Evil she's done, as Agatha says in her mirror-twin-souls speech at the climax of TLEA. It still remains, and it will never change, that singular act of befriending Agatha when Agatha was alone. Again, Rafal doesn't need to be an Ever to do Good deeds. The same applies to Rhian. He doesn't need to be a Never to do Evil. The morality of the series was always intended to be grey after all.

Rhian always seemed Good-intentioned, and I still believe he is an Ever. I just think he was led astray from his true nature. Because, if Evil is capable of Good, then Good is capable of doing Evil. Even if Good doesn't become Evil, even if Good isn't being Evil, it can do Evil. Especially, in the name of Good. Especially, if it prioritizes Good results over Evil-leaning actions. Rhian could have accidentally fallen into a “The ends justify the means” mindset.

So, basically, Rhian and Rafal's Good and Evil statuses don't have to change. They can be the same as they always were. How they once were and assumed themselves to be. It wouldn't be contradictory. It would make sense.

Plus, then there's also the point that the brothers are having a particularly abnormal year, given the Storian’s behavior and the unusual case of Aladdin, so their responses could follow suit, and would be reasonably abnormal to match their fraught times. Or, out-of-character from what they're usually like.

To recap, there's still a chance that Rafal is a Never, and Rhian is an Ever, and that it’s only their actions, their deeds, their behaviors, that have betrayed themselves. They could still be their originally-assumed true selves, exactly how the Woods conceived them, and exactly how they thought themselves to be.

[mariyamavliwala]

Blog Post #02- Open-World Storytelling in Games

The purpose of this blog is to investigate one interesting approach in environmental storytelling, where open-world games have become a world without depending on dialogue. Works I will be covering are The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Journey, each representing how environmental storytelling increases immersion and emotional attachment to the players. Lastly, I'll explain my point of view about this approach to storytelling in how gaming shifts to be a peculiarly engaging form of storytelling.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is an Environmental Narrative?

First and foremost, environmental storytelling refers to how stories are told through the setting, architecture, and layout of a game. Semiotics, by definition, is the study of signs and symbols and what they mean. Environmental storytelling works in much the same manner, offering "clues" through ruins and artifacts and spaces that players must interpret.

This is perhaps best summed up by writer Henry Jenkins, who claims that "narrative architecture" allows game settings to hold story fragments that players assemble through their exploration. Thus, one can say that environmental storytelling is an aspect of the improvement in the gamer's experience whereby the environment dynamically contributes to the storytelling.

As presented in the Game Maker's Toolkit video, "Environmental Storytelling – How Level Design Can Tell a Story" by Mark Brown, this video goes deep into how games can tell great stories using their environments without having to use spoken or written words. I chose the subject because environmental storytelling is just one of the most interesting areas of game design, at the same time being an important technique in boosting the player's immersion and providing a game world with life. This storytelling technique will let players organically discover a narrative through exploration of the environment rather than having it directly delivered. This, somehow, gives the feeling of immersion since the player seems to uncover, piece together fragments, and interpret for himself or herself.

It talks about how the worlds themselves can be a canvas for telling stories, how the objects in space can reveal history, culture, or even the emotional state of the characters. A worn doll on the floor of an abandoned home, for instance, may reveal a lot about the abrupt departure of its residents. The most potent narrative device in video games like Uncharted 4 and The Last of Us 2 is the environment. Without stating the specifics of what happened, a player may discover handwritten notes, photos, or even bloodstains that help put together a story. These are the kinds of discoveries that are satisfying.

Overall, this video discusses the high potentiality of in-game environmental narrative. It postulates that with everything-from world-building to level design-working together in harmony, the environment could tell stories that are as powerful as any cutscene or lines of dialogue.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild – A World of Silent Stories

Let me give a little background using The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. Upon its release, its open-world design was considered revolutionary. By hiding clues in the landscape, it asks the player to piece together the past and understand the ramifications of the world's history; the environment itself is a key part of the storytelling. In this way, environmental storytelling keeps the player active within the unfolding narrative. Story breathes through the landscape in Breath of the Wild - the ruined temples, decayed structures, remnants of a world past prime. Players will put together a greater tale of storytelling sans words as they explore. This is also explained rather nicely in an article on Medium that explains how the world tells the story of the aftermath of Hyrule's fall through the medium of ruins, weathered monuments, and forgotten shrines.

I remember the first time playing it, finding shrines dotted around the overworld and how their design and positioning in abandoned areas really reflected the decline of the kingdom, with shrines being almost like silent reminders of a civilization lost. They made me contemplate the natural forces that molded this region. This type of environmental storytelling invites reflective contemplation. The world is to be explored and interpreted, not merely a place to be traversed. Every decaying building, every shattered statue, every serene woodland all contribute to the story being told. The weather and day-night cycles are examples of natural phenomena that enhance this storytelling technique. This is one of those games wherein everything-from the weather down to the architecture and the landscapes-tells the story of a people now extinct, proving the adage that not all stories are told by words. Sometimes, at times the most poignant of stories are spoken by surroundings.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Red Dead Redemption 2 – The End of an Era

Next up is a masterclass of narrative and world-building in equal measure: Rockstar Games' Red Dead Redemption 2, set in the late 19th century. It uses the richly composited and elaborately detailed environment to make a statement for the end of the Wild West, examples including abandoned mining towns and overgrown railways that dot the expanse of the map.

In Red Dead Redemption 2, for instance: Limpany is a town abandoned, burnt to the ground, and it's a tale of corruption and tragedy without one line of dialogue. When first found, players can learn of the town's fate through visual clues-the charred buildings, scattered belongings, and a ledger that would suggest local corruption. These visual elements are all that's needed to communicate the story of loss and ruin. This is best conceptualized by the writer Ayn Rand, who said that it is the environment that one dwells in which shapes character and dictate the course of a character's actions. In this story, the settings are practically active in changing the characters. Arthur Morgan's campsite changes throughout the video game as his inner struggles do, along with the unraveling of the Van der Linde gang. For me, the beauty of Red Dead Redemption 2 is in how meaningful it can make every corner of its world feel. It's a game that begs to be explored, observed, and reflected on, crafting a very personal narrative experience.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Journey – A Silent Pilgrimage

Finally, Journey by thatgamecompany pushes environmental storytelling to its limits by removing dialogue altogether, providing a unique example of how a game can convey deep themes and emotion without using a single word. The result is a minimalist yet profoundly emotional take on environmental storytelling, using color and terrain to evoke feelings of strength, despair, and rebirth. This is a multiplayer game where the player travels across the vast desert, ruins, and snow-capped mountains with a random companion whom one cannot talk to. The only means of communication is a musical chime, which fosters a unique sense of connection.

The best I can describe it is by referring to the murals scattered throughout the game. Ancient ruins, tall sand dunes, and hidden murals speak subtly of the rise and fall of an ancient civilization, leaving much to players for interpretation. Later in the game, the shifting landscapes-from sun-drenched deserts to icy peaks-serve as a reflection of highs and lows that are part of the emotional journey. It can be understood best through an article which appeared in The Gemsbok in which a crystal explanation has been given on how environmental design in the game of Journey evokes emotions among its players. Each landscape of the game isn't mere backdrops, part of the character's emotional arc. Due to the minimalist design in its core, this game has another meaningful benefit: it allows the player to project their interpretation onto the story, which turns it into a very personal playthrough. From the research done on the topic at hand, I find that not only was this an amazing idea for a narrative, but it also showed how simplicity in design can evoke powerful emotions. One could also argue that the video game use of the soundtrack complements the environmental storytelling in ways that enhance emotional impact.

In all aspects, what has been discussed on the blog proves that environmental storytelling, by allowing players to explore and find a narrative at their pace, possesses some transformative power. Games such as Breath of the Wild, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Journey are perfect examples of how this technique in storytelling can be stretched to show that environments can tell complex narratives, evoke emotions, and convey themes with no need for dialogue.

Therefore, environmental storytelling can be called a cornerstone of modern game design, joining players into the very fabric of activity within the game. One can quite clearly see from these representations that the environment in games is way more than a background; it tells its story.

Sources:

Jenkins, H. (2004). Game Design as Narrative Architecture. In N. Wardrip-Fruin & P. Harrigan (Eds.), First Person: New Media as Story, Performance, and Game. MIT Press.

Brown, M. (2017). Environmental Storytelling – How Game Worlds Tell Stories. [Video]. GameMaker's Toolkit. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwlnCn2EB9o&list=PLvMOqDcNPWsQ7aX0ndSiN9x861QRbhOKM [Accessed 24 December 2024].

Mulholland, J. (2021). Game Design: Environmental Storytelling. Available at: https://medium.com/@johnmulholland/game-design-environmental-storytelling-3574aff0ff2b [Accessed 24 December 2024].

Nintendo. (2017). The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild. [Video Game]. Nintendo.

Rockstar Games. (2018). Red Dead Redemption 2. [Video Game]. Rockstar Games.

Thatgamecompany. (2012). Journey. [Video Game]. Sony Computer Entertainment.