ravka's greatest love machine

Very funny when people use "the darkling killed grisha too" argument as their response to people saying he cared about his people. This guy subjected himself to using merzost—which we learn through Alina's pov feels like tearing yourself apart—instead of sending grisha in battle even when his army easily outnumbered Alina's and had majority of experienced ones on his side. Yes, he killed the soldiers of his rival's army during a war? But he has saved far more than he killed.

I can’t help but find it funny whenever certain Shadow and Bone fans discuss the Darkling’s character and dramatically ponder over his motivations while lamenting what could have been. Like, I agree that he’s a complicated character…just not complicated I’m the way they’re thinking of.

For them it’s like:

“Ah you see the Darkling is such a well-written character because of his nefarious hunger for power cloaked by sympathetic motives. He seeks a noble goal but alas! If only he wasn’t so corrupted by power and just approached the issue of Grisha liberation with diplomacy and talked some sense into the Tsar! Such a simple thing…and yet his greed won out.”

I have found that many criticisms of the Darkling’s larger goals are based on the assumption that his goal is based in a personal desire for power and not a collective one. The idea that his goals of freeing Grisha from exploitation and servitude are not genuine, but rather something that obscures his hidden greed and selfishness. My biggest gripe is that this sort of commentary on the Darkling’s character always reads as a bit self-congratulatory for what is (in my opinion) a misreading of his character.

Also, I heavily dislike the idea that all it would take for him to achieve liberation would be tactics like working within the system, diplomatically appealing to the Tsar or just generally appealing to the humanity of the ruling monarchs. I have to wonder: do these people honestly believe that oppressed groups of people obtain human rights by politely appealing to the ruling class? In Shadow and Bone, the Tsar is not only incompetent but also a serial rapist with unchecked power who benefits immensely from the servitude of Grisha. So why on earth would he just give them rights when he gains so much by keeping them under his thumb? Relying on the mercy and meagre charity of a corrupt ruler is a futile game that will end in failure.

“Oh but his hunger for power-!” His hunger for power that would enable him to do what? At the end of the day, Aleksander needs power to achieve liberation for the Grisha and to protect them from the existential threats they face on nearly every side of the conflict. Tell me, how is he going to accomplish anything from a position of servitude and powerlessness? Would it be more noble of him to just sit quietly and wait for the Lantsovs to come to their senses and realize that Grisha are deserving of equal treatment? How much do the Grisha stand to lose by prioritizing civility and diplomacy when their lives are at stake?

In this situation, power was not a want, but a need. The fact that the narrative consistently frames his quest for power as a bad and greedy goal is so naive and backwards because realistically there is no way for him to accomplish it otherwise! This is echoed in Alina’s efforts to save the country through the Morozova amplifiers and being chided for her greed as a result. Either way, this story has some strange priorities when it comes to discussing oppression and liberation.

oh nooo they've been burning your people alive for being unnatural, keeping them in labs & breeding camps to experiment on them & making a religion glorifying their horrific murders for centuries now but HOW DARE YOU TRY TO PUT AN END TO THAT BY USING VIOLENCE?? YOU MONSTERRR!! — Shadow and Bone.

the darkling says “fine, make me your villain” because he is. what’s not clicking

you have two characters that are morally, tactically, and politically opposed functioning within the narrative as equally driving forces - where one is physically incapable of understanding the other due to the staunch moral messages and the web of unbreakable moral themes, and the other operates at a level of genre constancy that defies all subversion or broader nuance - and you’re equivocating over whether or not this line is a pathetic little attempt at erasing blame? please

I’m sorry but first and foremost the “make me your villain” line is not a character refusing to acknowledge his place in the narrative but instead a character that is fundamentally acquainted with his place in the narrative due to societal prejudice. and the fact that it holds major significance to his character because of his own desires to not only create an idealistic world where his people are safe but to also reach an age where he is safe, accepted for who he is, and loved by his people for his devotion to them and the decades of sacrifice he gave to make them safe is pretty important.

anyways. “everyone is a monster to someone. since you are so convinced that I am yours, I will be it.”

queer women ♡ aleksander morozov

the antis are right though we do need to see more of alina killing the darkling. preferably them both killing each other in increasingly horrific ways throughout history and building up a centuries long two person war

“Character A didn’t love Character B because they hurt them” discourse is truly terrible because it assigns a moral value to love that simply does not exist. love doesn’t actually mean anything about someone’s character. it doesn’t make someone’s actions toward another any better or any worse, it doesn’t prevent atrocities, and it doesn’t prevent abuse. 

love is a worthless emotion when it comes to morals because it simply holds no bearing on them. true love doesn’t exist. there is no better or more pure version of love. in the end love doesn’t mean anything. it’s a non-emotion. it’s the child of passion and affection and dedication. doing something bad doesn’t preclude a feeling of love, because a lack of love isn’t a requirement for immoral actions, and morality isn’t a requirement for feeling love.

aleksander didn’t love alina discourse is irrelevant and dismissive. it’s ascribing a virtue to a character that we can simply never know the truth of, because we never get his pov. saying he didn’t love alina because he hurt her ignores the true depth of the harm he caused, and the emotions they both feel in relation to each other.

it’s a shallow argument used to elevate purer forms of “love”. mal is alina’s true love, so he could never hurt her (even though he does). aleksander hurts alina, so he could never love her (even though he is capable of it). alina cannot love the villainous darkling because she is good (even though this conflict is a facet of her character and complexity). and in applying the idea that love is always good and always moral, the fandom forces all character interpretations into a black and white dichotomy of evil and good when people don’t exist in such states and never will.

this is what I mean when I say the antis in this fandom hate the darkling so much that they flatten every single other character by extension. I have never seen a fandom so determined to hate the villain that they not only destroy their favorite characters completely, but also somehow erase the persecution of an entire people and ignore the very essence of the world state.

and aleksander did love alina discourse is almost exactly the same, because I’ve only ever seen it used to defend how good he is and to excuse his actions. his ability to feel love and the fact that he may have loved alina has no bearing on his morality at all.

we know that aleksander can feel love. we know that he is capable of feeling empathy, sympathy, and compassion, to such an extent that it drove him for literal centuries down a path of complete self destruction in an effort to save a people who resented him. but his ability to feel these things and the possibility that he might have felt them for alina don’t actually mean much for his character or his ability to be “good”.

framing his love for alina as a redemptive device feels shallow. love drives people - it drives him to fight for his people until he literally dies. but love isn’t moral, and feeling love for her doesn’t mean he can be “good”. especially when that “good” is a passivity that goes against the very core of his character.

for those lacking reading comprehension, I will clarify even further. using love or the ability to love as a sign of a character’s good or redemptive potential is harmful and belittling. even people who hate the darkling should recognize this, because it is a major facet of alina’s character and the way abuse functions within a relationship. 

the fact that antis are so willing to erase alina’s connection to the darkling and her love for him is telling of their complete inability to properly understand or analyze her character. not only that, but it shows how much they value the idea of a perfect victim. they are blinded by a moral aversion to nuance, and so flatten her into nothing, erasing her traumas as well as her strengths and complexities, and her completely normal and human reactions to the events in her life.

to be quite honest, antis and fans of the darkling should be upset with the way she is so disconnected from him in the show. because it is a major change to her character as well as a significant portion of the message about abuse and corruption attempting to be told. ascribing morality to love in any way makes your character one dimensional and their arcs flat and uninspiring. it empties all meaning from your messages and your themes. and this could not be more apparant than in the way alina is not allowed to even display an ounce of sympathy or affection for the darkling anymore.

the show attempts to remove alina from all nuance so she can be free of criticism (as do her fans and darkling antis) and in so doing they reduce her to nothing but the darkling’s perfect little victim. alina cannot love or sympathize with him because he is evil and has hurt her. the darkling cannot love her because he is evil and has hurt her. all of their actions are as shallow as the writing. if alina sympathized with the darkling or showed she still in some way cared about him, she may be condemned just as much as real people who sympathize with him are condemned by the fandom, and so all complexity and depth must be stripped from them both to avoid this outcome.

someone replied to this post bringing up what the darkling did to genya, as if that in any way correlates to love or the darkling’s ability to do so. and it is just further proof of this fandom’s inability to think critically or participate in fully nuanced literary analysis. because in a post saying “love has no bearing on morality and cannot excuse bad actions” their reaction to me even implying that the darkling can feel love is to bring up the harm he’s caused. as if that correlates to his ability to feel love, or alina’s ability to love him, or even the other people he’s hurt, such as genya, who at one point put her trust in him and must still be feeling the affects of it being broken.

stop flattening these characters into ridiculous caricatures. saying a character loves or doesn’t love a character means nothing about their morals. saying a character is attracted to another character, no matter how bad that character is, says nothing about their morals.

alina’s shame in regards to her greed and her attraction to the darkling is a functional part of the series that is supported by the messages and themes. and even fans have taken to incorporating that into their analysis, as if it is in any way correct, and is not simply a black and white enforcement of puritanical ideals within a highly biased narrative structure.

I am telling you right now that I have never seen character or writing analysis so bad as that in the anti corner of this fandom, because there is no capacity for nuance - because to even engage with nuance or the darker implications is to face being outcast from the ‘moral’ side of the fandom and to be declared immoral.

so I’m going to state this again: love is not moral. greed is not inherently immoral. thought crimes don’t exist. and using christian fundamentalist moral arguments against factual readings of a text is not the comeback you think it is when what you’re usually arguing against is a criticism of the christian fundamentalism littered throughout the text.

What did Alina’s dream sequence in Siege and Storm signify for her character arc?

So there’s one scene in the grishaverse trilogy is especially puzzling to me. In fact, I find it so bewildering that if I ever got the chance to meet Leigh Bardugo and ask her a question in person, it would be: “What did Alina’s dream about the pony cart even mean? And what was your reasoning for writing it?”

Here is the scene in question:

I don’t actually think this scene is bad. In the right context, it informs the reader of some critical character details that prove to be significant later in the story. Also, it tells us a lot about Mal and Alina’s relationship. Firstly, it shows us that Mal loves Alina and imagines a future with her, he wants to solidify their relationship through marriage so they can always be together. But, it also demonstrates Mal’s flagrant disregard for Alina’s well-being when it comes to their relationship. The fact that he expresses a desire to marry Alina directly after Ana Kuya compares being a wife to being a donkey (or cattle) tells us how Mal is content with compromising on Alina’s well-being if it means they stay together.

It just seems so contrary to the actual ending. Why would you, as a writer, include this scene when it seems to make a case more against your endgame couple than in favour of it? Especially when the message from this dream is echoed later on in the book when Alina and Mal clash over her responsibilities to Ravka. Mal consistent in his negativity towards Alina’s powers. He is visibly in a better mood when she hides her abilities and becomes agitated when Alina is either using her powers or embroiled in matters concerning them.

You might brush off this scene as the ramblings of a little kid too young to understand what he’s saying. But since Mal is a fictional character, his actions and words (in whatever context) carry meaning that is linked to the greater themes of the story. Why have him say this if not to point out the major flaw that defines the Malina relationship?

Truthfully, Mal doesn’t know who he is without Alina. The two of them became each other’s everything when they were very young and have bound their identities to one another. Because they experienced tragedy very early in their lives, they cling to each other for safety to the detriment of their individual development. It makes sense, but this codependency is only ever romanticized by the narrative and is never examined critically.

The ideal conclusion of the Malina narrative would be the two of them finding independence and ceasing the sabotage of their current relationship. Because if they stay in their current state, they will never leave the meadow of childhood and remain trapped in a state of immaturity and underdevelopment.

There’s something to be said about Mal finding the courage to go in his own path and grow up into a fully fledged adult. His statement in this scene is a reflection of the childish attitude he maintains through his adolescence. It is demonstrative of a self-centred and codependent mentality Mal has and why he must outgrow it,

Except that never happens.

Reblogging @myimaginationplain ‘s tags because of how real they are.

And foreboding is the perfect word to describe this scene. My heart sinks when I read it and then it sinks even more when I remember that it later becomes a reality for Alina at the end of the trilogy. It seems like such obvious foreshadowing that it makes the existing ending even more absurd. I really dislike the how LB completely glorifies the codependency of Malina, painting it as romantic and pure even though it involves so much sacrifice and struggle on Alina’s end while Mal is blithely just living life.

Alina literally harms herself just to stay by Mal’s side and he offers zero reciprocation (not that that is a healthy foundation for a relationship but…) I cannot believe that LB wrote THIS depressing scene and expected readers to be happy when Malina was endgame.

we forgot to teach your boyfriend media literacy and he completely misunderstood all the themes and narratives. yeah the underlying message too. he got tricked into believing in-universe propaganda and is writing a longpost about it now sorry

Haven’t been drawing a lot lately, i am glad i could get me some time to do this. I have read and listened to a lot of books and book series lately, and the Grishaverse has been great to listen to while working. Love the world, the characters, the magic,I have devoured the 3 books in no time, I obviously have personal opinions about what happens and what could have happened but the quote under the illustration is one of my favourite moments on the whole series.

Late to the bandwagon but glad to join in.

Very Mucha inspired, love me some art noveau references <3

I can’t help but find it funny whenever certain Shadow and Bone fans discuss the Darkling’s character and dramatically ponder over his motivations while lamenting what could have been. Like, I agree that he’s a complicated character…just not complicated I’m the way they’re thinking of.

For them it’s like:

“Ah you see the Darkling is such a well-written character because of his nefarious hunger for power cloaked by sympathetic motives. He seeks a noble goal but alas! If only he wasn’t so corrupted by power and just approached the issue of Grisha liberation with diplomacy and talked some sense into the Tsar! Such a simple thing…and yet his greed won out.”

I have found that many criticisms of the Darkling’s larger goals are based on the assumption that his goal is based in a personal desire for power and not a collective one. The idea that his goals of freeing Grisha from exploitation and servitude are not genuine, but rather something that obscures his hidden greed and selfishness. My biggest gripe is that this sort of commentary on the Darkling’s character always reads as a bit self-congratulatory for what is (in my opinion) a misreading of his character.

Also, I heavily dislike the idea that all it would take for him to achieve liberation would be tactics like working within the system, diplomatically appealing to the Tsar or just generally appealing to the humanity of the ruling monarchs. I have to wonder: do these people honestly believe that oppressed groups of people obtain human rights by politely appealing to the ruling class? In Shadow and Bone, the Tsar is not only incompetent but also a serial rapist with unchecked power who benefits immensely from the servitude of Grisha. So why on earth would he just give them rights when he gains so much by keeping them under his thumb? Relying on the mercy and meagre charity of a corrupt ruler is a futile game that will end in failure.

“Oh but his hunger for power-!” His hunger for power that would enable him to do what? At the end of the day, Aleksander needs power to achieve liberation for the Grisha and to protect them from the existential threats they face on nearly every side of the conflict. Tell me, how is he going to accomplish anything from a position of servitude and powerlessness? Would it be more noble of him to just sit quietly and wait for the Lantsovs to come to their senses and realize that Grisha are deserving of equal treatment? How much do the Grisha stand to lose by prioritizing civility and diplomacy when their lives are at stake?

In this situation, power was not a want, but a need. The fact that the narrative consistently frames his quest for power as a bad and greedy goal is so naive and backwards because realistically there is no way for him to accomplish it otherwise! This is echoed in Alina’s efforts to save the country through the Morozova amplifiers and being chided for her greed as a result. Either way, this story has some strange priorities when it comes to discussing oppression and liberation.

sorry but I found alina's greed attractive I hope she wants more I hope she wants everything and I hope she takes it all

“alina was at her worst-” she was thriving. what, you think sun gods shouldn’t get to cause a little ruination as a treat? I can’t hear you over the complete destruction of everything because my girl actually ate. as she deserved.

“he brings her down to earth-” yeah well I hope she floats into the sky and becomes a supernova

you can aim for my heart, go for blood, but you would still miss me in your bones

The Darkling, Villain coding and Shadow and Bone’s abuse narrative

The abuse narrative is Shadow and Bone is actually a pretty reassuring one. It imagines a world where the “evil” people are easily identifiable and possess visual indicators of their wickedness. The narrative doesn’t feel the need to recreate any true-to-life instance of covert manipulation because it already conveys that by way of coding Aleksander as villainous.

While Leigh Bardugo has spoken about the way Aleksander’s good looks aid him in his evil pursuits, we are never actually shown significant evidence of that idea in the text. Although Alina is certainly affected by his good looks in terms of her physical attraction to him, we seldom see this in other characters throughout the trilogy. That being said, even when Alina IS very much attracted to him, that attraction is still swayed by her underlying prejudice and suspicions of him due to his role as the Darkling. Aleksander’s beauty is used superficially if we are to understand that it helps him covertly manipulate people, because how does it give him any tangible power?

It certainly doesn’t seem to help him convince the King to care about Grisha and it doesn’t seem to have much influence over the Grisha of the little palace as well (considering that a portion of them defect to Alina’s side after S&B). So my question is, what purpose does his beauty serve in the story? How does it build up the trilogy as an abuse narrative?

My answer to those questions would be that Leigh Bardugo relied too heavily on superficial indicators of villainy to create a more surprising twist and in the process, conveyed a shallow view of a supposedly abusive character. To supplement this, she claimed that it was Aleksander’s beauty that allowed him to manipulate and abuse others but also fails at communicating that through the actions of her characters. At best, the abuse narrative is perfunctory.

Any reader could gather upon first reading Shadow and Bone that Aleksander was a sketchy dude. Hot, but sketchy nonetheless because of how obvious it was that he was a villain. A dark cloak? Black hair? Shadow powers? Next you’ll tell me that his name has the word “dark” in it! But the story constantly tries to convince the readers that they have “cracked the case” and found the wolf in sheep’s clothing. Except this time, the wolf was just a wolf that the writer pretended was more disguised than he actually was. It’s more reassuring that way.

Baghra never telling Aleksander his father's name so there's no chance of him ever trying to seek him out or even grow attached to just his name or imagine a picture of him in his head, making sure that growing up she was the only person he remained close to and the only human relationship he experienced is so cold and manipulative like idk but that woman had issues.

And when he finds a person, who could be with him, she makes sure to ruin it before it has a chance to properly develop into something.

When I look at (mostly antis’) argument that Alina has full right to go against the Darkling, because he “wanted to enslave her”.

How is that different from average Grisha experience?

If they’re not actively hunted and murdered, they’re “free” to sell their services in indentured servitude. We’ve been told the “loans” are often impossible to repay.

In Ravka, the safest country we’re introduced, there’s mandatory military service. The only “older” Grisha we get to see is a tester for Little Palace. We’re also shown Grisha don’t expect to die in peace of old age. Does their service ever end?

Do they get some time to start a family, or are they expect to send the kids to nursery school and keep fighting? We know there are Grisha families. We know people are trying to keep them from owning property. We never see Grisha workers outside of Second Army. It’s safe to assume there’s the life before being discovered, and after…

Is there a non-military life after? Do they have any options or are they doomed to serve the crown untill they die? Again, from what we’re shown, it’s most likely the later. How are ravkan Grisha more than protected slaves to the crown?

slavery: a condition of having to work very hard without proper remuneration or appreciation.

So, how would (if it worked) be Alina’s life different from others?

The Darkling would have control over her powers, not mind. She’d have to use it when told, the way she’d be told. The same goes for orders from superiors (unless plot armor). You don’t follow them, you’re gonna be court-martialed, possibly shot. Except she can wash her hands of any responsibility this way. She physically couldn’t do anything but obey. (Poor suffering heroine.) Is that the part that makes it all worse? Not having the choice to disobey and die?!

How is an “evil” wizard making you shine worse than lazy king expecting you to clear his wife’s skin, water his crops, rid him of his depression? What makes her special aside from the author telling us she’s the heroine? Why is she any better than ordinary Alkemi? Just because light shines from her ass?

Also: Ravka under the Lantsov’s is an absolute monarchy, isn’t it?

Well, that means as a subject you have no rights. They will not participate in any decisions (especially one’s without power of Alina’s station. they are basically nothing in the eyes of the rulers). No one represents them and they have no possible way of making change.

And while The Darkling/Aleksander has carved out some rights for himself and for the grisha. he is also - at least until his coup - subject to the king’s decisions. Does that make him a slave?

It is not slavery. But in an absolute monarchy, the ruler could basically demand “do X” and people would have to do it as long as there is no significant uprising against the monarch to prevent this.

Calling this slavery is a very simplified view. Looking at it from a historical point of view, everyone except the royal family, is powerless in Ravka. They all have to obey the tsar. They all are bound to his wishes.

An Alina that wouldn’t have discovered her powers would probably not be important enough to be commanded around, but she also would have been only a playball for the whims of the rulers.

(Political systems are complex and yes I know even in an absolute monarchy there are people that work towards having some rights as the King/Royal family cannot do all tasks themselves. But let’s stay with the ‘easy’ definition here)

What is endlessly fascinating to me is that, as the previous two posters point out, very few people in this country have their own agency, and Grisha in particular have almost none at all. Alina being forced to obey the Darkling’s orders is exactly identical to Genya being forced to serve both queen and king, and every other Grisha being sent to serve in the Second Army. And yet, we’re told in the narrative that this life of servitude the Darkling has managed to carve out for Grisha is one of the better options for them in this world. 

It is endlessly fascinating to me that the narrative depicts the Darkling’s efforts to use Alina’s powers as bad, because in general all Grisha are forced to use their powers to serve the absolute monarchy. And the only person who is fighting that system is The Darkling. 

It’s so baffling that these dots are not connected lol. Grisha are murdered and dissected in other countries, but the Darkling has managed to carve out a place for them in Ravka. Great! But also, that place is one of servitude and reduced status compared to non-Grisha. That’s bad! Genya in fact is forcibly assaulted against her will by an absolute monarch. That’s real bad! All Grisha expect to live, but their lives will be spent in servitude in the military and they will almost inevitably die in the military too. That’s even worse!

When the only person fighting against this system is The Darkling, he’s the good guy here. If The Darkling is #BadGuy because he tries to force Alina to use her powers, then it must follow that the entire system that forces Grisha to use their powers for it must also be bad. At which point we have to look at motive. The monarchy exploits Grisha because it knows that they have very few options for leaving Ravka. Where are they going to go, Shu Han? Fjerda? The Darkling asks Grisha to serve his aims in particular because he is trying to create a different government that will not exploit Grisha in this way. He’s also trying to end multiple wars that threaten all of Ravka’s citizens, not just Grisha. 

Like guys, I hate to say it. If there’d been anyone else trying to change things in Ravka I may have more options to pick from. But the way the book and show are written, the only person fighting against this terrible system is The Darkling. If Alina had done anything it might be different. But as things are The Darkling, while Dark Lord Coded, is the good guy here.

The Darkling is the one who is morally in the right. I’m sorry, but that’s what it is. A character opposing him, especially a character as important to his efforts as Alina, is in a morally indefensible position. 

AGREED WITH ALL OF ABOVE!

It always bothered me that Alina’s narrative made it seem like someone in the position of a saint or a general could just not do what the Tsar demanded of them. That’s just not true. They would be branded as traitors to the country and probably publicly executed with a cheering crowd on top of that. There is no parliament shown, no higher council or nothing even roughly resembling a diet (for example Bohemian diet or the diet of Hungary from Austria-Hungarien era in Europe) that would limit the monarch’s reach. The Tsar is the one with absolute power.

The only thing even remotely appearing as some form of political control over the country from the the side of Ravkan nobility, was the assembly at the end of RoW during the signing of the peace treaty with Fjerda, where it was said they would demand Nikolai abdicated the throne if he was proved to be a bastard. That would be the only instance the nobility would be ever able to do anything about the monarch, and even then it necessary might not have been enough. If Nikolai had any neutrons left after he was brainwashed in KoS (and the author didn’t want to put Zoya on the throne so badly, which is another thing that pisses me off but whatever, Nikolai had a right to choose his successor because he’s got no children. The fact the prejudice is still going strong and nobody would just accept grisha queen - we’ll let that sleep for now) he would claim his parents are lying to discredit him intentionally as a revenge for their exile and those letters are fakes. He’s met his real father, what’s stopping Nikolai from tracking him down, unleashing Genya on him and then having him as a witness that no, he’s never met the Ravkan queen? Magnus would do it and not even blink in disagreement from what we’ve seen of the guy so far.

There is nothing for grisha to stand on, no power able to oppose, nobody to help in case the monarch decides he doesn’t need the grisha anymore. No save haven to run to. Either they please the current Tsar, or they’re out of the equation and back to square one aka being hunted as animals. Moreover the moment they step out of line the Tsar could just say a word and from a day to day the esteemed Second army general wouldn’t be anything more than another criminal (and that thing could be anything, especially when you’re member of a group of people that is still ostracized by common citizens. He could breathe wrong and it could be taken as treason). One wrong command, one badly understood comment, one mistake and everything Aleksander fought, bled and killed for in centuries would be gone during one evening. What’s stopping the Tsar from disbanding the Second army and making grisha his slaves working on the skiffs? What’s stopping him from taking all the ‘privilege’ Aleksander managed to earn throughout the years? (how insanely risky it was to talk about the king that way in front of Alina just to earn her trust? Also, Aleksander and Genya, why was their relationship deleted? There was so much trust between them and what Bardugo did? Threw it out the window, because ‘the bad guy’ cannot have as a friend anybody the audience likes apparently) Probably only Aleksander himself, because the moment he fails to be a good general or politician, especially under someone as Aleksander III, game over. Want to start again? 

Can you imagine how carefully and skillfully Aleksander had to maneuver the court? How many times he had to dodge the bullet by submitting to the whims of monarchs (I don’t believe for a second that Genya was the only one sexually assaulted by a Tsar)? How frustrating that had to be, when he knew how easy it would be to take the throne for himself? But he couldn’t do that until he had Alina, and by that I mean leverage on anyone opposing his rule by gaining control over the Fold. The Fold was a tool for ending the wars, yes, but also a insurance against the civil war. Who in their right mind would go against a man that can send human eating monsters at you, stopped the wars and is actually a capable leader? Not many. It’s historically proved that if the civil populations feels save and has generally good life, they are less prone to complain even if the ruler isn’t exactly to her liking. They complain, but they won’t rebel, most people don’t care about politics as long as they have full belly, roof over their heads and their children don’t need to enlist into the army.

So, in a political setting like this, Alina running away from the Little palace, is on itself a very dangerous thing for the grisha as a whole, not just Aleksander. And it doesn’t matter if she was kidnapped or not. It was Aleksander’s job to ensure her safety and that she stays under the crown’s control, which he failed to do. The one mistake I was talking about? This could be it, and Aleksander knew that. He was so desperate to find Alina not only because she was the key to ending the wars and grisha’s persecution, but also because there was royal punishment handing above his head. That’s why he immediately wanted to take the power, he couldn’t afford to wait until the Tsar found out about his failure and just hope it wouldn’t lead to his execution. Alina becoming his ‘slave’ was a small price to pay, when it literally erased his mistakes.

So yes, Alina being under Aleksander’s control was actually a very good thing for the grisha. By putting that collar on her, he essentially put her on his and any other grisha’s level. That’s why I think that this scene from the show: „Am I a prisoner?” „All of Ravka is.” is so powerful. Pity that my girl Alina has no idea what he’s talking about, because in her head it’s 21st century USA.

(Bardugo doesn’t understand basic human history lessons, but is still trying to push her morals onto them)

@fiora-miriel I was using the loosest, simplest definition of slavery, after all it is complex socio-political issue and a term used for specific times and regions.

Not one (1) magical girl having her powers controlled by evil wizard revolutionary. Compared to other Grisha, living as a pampered key to nuclear option is freedom-fighter’s wet dream.

ladylrbloom:

@ladylrblom

I’m gonna assume you mean the show.

Let’s start with the Stag:

Which compromise? When? Do you mean when a small unit of Second Army apprehended two deserters, one of them of high strategic value? Legendary Sun Summoner, widely known as a key to solve many of collapsing country’s problems? The one, who ran away of her own free will at the same time as Little Palace’s security was severely breached, at least two of it’s inhabitants murdered in the process? The very same one, who went after the most powerful amplifier known on her own, then tried to stop her general from claiming it the only way anyone knows works? As written above, for anyone, but the viewer, who was with her the whole time, she’s a spy or worse, hellbent on destroying Ravka and Grisha both.

There was no “failing to compromise”, that would require a discussion. A discussion would require two sides willing to solve potential problems. Not one unaware there is something to discuss, the other screaming bloody murder. That said, I believe show!Sasha would be willing to try Alina’s way, if she didn’t disappear the way she did. You can clearly see in sixth ep, he believed she was kidnapped, and was pretty upset, when he learnt she abandoned him and the cause she claimed to care about the very same morning.

As for the collaring, it didn’t give him control over her, but her powers. And not even completely. He just gained sort of veto in case they will disagree about their use. Her powers are important asset for defense of a whole country. That’s the fantasy aspect, you can’t have that IRL, so you can’t apply 21st century Earth-morality.

She’s a part of the army. As written above, for Grisha it means life-long service. Alina deserted. Her motivation, however weak, doesn’t matter, she left her post without permission and endangered all Grisha serving the Crown. The only reason she wasn’t executed on the spot are the very same unique powers she was partially relieved of. The funny part is- it’s not even presented as a punishment, but strategic necessity. General Kirigan didn’t do it to make her reconsider her priorities, but to ensure he won’t lose crucial component of his country’s defense.

You could be angry however you want, but if you had, let’s say key to nuclear weapon inside your body and its using didn’t hurt you- quite contrary-, fucking off with it Saints-know-where, fully aware it’s gonna cost thousands of innocents in prolonged war would make you awful person and taking your feelings into consideration instead of, let’s say, lovely house arrest and a nice couple of guards, would be complete moral and strategic failure.

To quote book!Aleksander: He has a nation to protect.

You don’t have to ship it, but Alina gave General Kirigan no other choice. And the way she was treated after was hardly something another common soldier would experience. More like nobility in house arrest.

First of all: people really need to stop putting Alina’s feeling above the fates of thousands of people and whole country on top of that. Her emotions don’t matter in this scenario. They can’t matter. Just like Kirigan’s can’t.

(another hypocritical thing Darkling antis and Malinas do. They scream: oh no, Alina’s feelings got hurt! But then they don’t stop and think how Aleksander must have felt in this situation. Like… either you think about the emotions or you don’t, you can’t just choose both.)

Anyways. As said above, in the show Alina has her own tent, her hands are not handcuffed, she can move freely and has nice clothes. AS A PUNISHMENT FOR DESERTION! And she’s pissy about it. The worst thing is that she acts like his angry wife, not like a prisoner. Honey, if you wasn’t overgrown lamp, your head would have a hole in it.

Can we please stop being angry at General for actually acting like one?

book!Aleksander would take one look at this, scoff and lock her inside of a cell without a second thought and it still wouldn’t be appropriate punishment. Alina needs to grow up.

Alina is Complicit: A Genya Analysis

I’m having these feelings of intense rage over Alina’s character and needed to write about them: 

Marie and Nadia

Isilel left a brilliant comment articulating a point I couldn’t put into words:

The idea that you need to tear down other women and view them all as competitors except for a select few “good ones” is an extremely harmful outlook that is continually reinforced in this book and I do not like it.

(Under the cut: tw for assault)

Keep reading

Oh my god, I remember first reading that line where Nadia and Marie are gleefully mocking Genya and King and I was so thrown off by the tone of it that I was convinced they think the relationship between the King and Genya is consensual and Marie and Nadia were partaking in just another early 2010s YA book trope of slut shaming. Because I really cannot imagine anyone in real life acting that way otherwise???

I think the real kicker for me, is later when Genya says

And I knew she meant Marie and Nadia.

But what convinced me that Marie and Nadia knew it wasn’t consensual was that Alina is able to tell so easily. Alina who is extremely unobservant and blank internally knows that Genya isn’t the king’s mistress. She never seems to have any doubts over whether it’s actually consensual.

And Marie and Nadia have the benefit of context and living in the Little Palace for years. They’re framed as gossips, always knowing everything about everyone.

It stands to reason that they’re far more well informed than Alina.

So, when Genya bears her “shame” with such despair and with the acknowledgement that “everyone knows.” I took it to mean she meant them, the people who would hurt her most if it was widely known, her age group of Grisha who she’s never felt accepted in before.

So, I was utterly enraged. And nearly unable to continue reading when, after Genya confesses this to Alina, she walks into the Winter Fete with Nadia and Marie at her side mere moments later.

There’s not a thought of anger or guilt in her head. Not a drop of shame or regret.

Although, I could be convinced it’s just bad writing on LB’s part. But this isn’t just dropping the ball, it’s like she dropped the ball, tripped over it, face planted, and broke her nose.

juneisafantasyaddict:

kasamira:

juneisafantasyaddict:

kasamira:

juneisafantasyaddict:

And then Alina dares to “forgive” Genya her “betrayal”, when all she did was witholding some stupid letters and actually acting as a soldier.

One thing I think is good to note is Alina has always been the underdog in her life before going to the little Palace.

She was never the person who was able to stand up for others, she was the one being stood up for. She’s only ever had Mal as a friend, and we see how he treats her.

I don’t think that she even knows that you should defend a friend like that, Mal certainly doesn’t defend her.

He wants her weak and reliant on him, she’s used to that. She has no idea what to do with her newfound privilege.

She could, should, stand up for Genya, but I don’t think ever realized that.

And with a friend like Mal, it’s not too surprising she also stood by other nasty people even when disagreeing with them. She’s used to that.

All that said: yes, her standing by and saying nothing makes me cringe. If that had been a growing moment, showing how awkward she is in friendship when she later defends the friend in the same position (showing how she’s learned, how she now knows how to stand up for others and use her position to aid them) it could’ve been very cool! But it’s not.

The thing about Alina is that while, yes, she’s not the most amazing main character in the world, I love her for much the same reason I love the Darkling. Because she COULD have been so much better and more interesting if written with a defter hand. 

The fandom does doyalist readings on Aleksander all day (as they should, I love them and have written my own fair share of takes about him) but then switches over to Watsonian readings for Alina. As if she isn’t just as trapped by the narrative that dictates that she’s never allowed to want anything.

So Aleksander’s evil actions are a result of Leigh going ‘over the top’ and ‘making a less interesting character choice’. But Alina is ‘stupid’ and ‘doesn’t make choices’.

In my mind, Alina isn’t ALLOWED to make choices by the author. She isn’t given moments to shine by the narrative (except when she’s with the Darkling). All of those moments are given to Mal or Nikolai or others. She is robbed of agency even in her own sacrifice of her power at the end in which it is taken from her for something she never really did.

Alina COULD have had a really interesting arc. COULD have been more active. COULD have been more interesting. But her author never gave her the space to be so and shamed her at every turn.

And that’s the kind of female character I’m gonna spitefully love. Because she’s mine now. I’m writing fanfic with her and giving her an arc with agency and no one can stop me.