R2 Turn 21/Character Discussion: Shades of Gray

[nayami.livejournal.com]

I wasn't going to address this episode. As I have told my friends, there is so much here that simply isn't explained. That is why this analysis may be wildly different from any of the others. It does not study the episode per say but instead how people view its players. As usual, please please please do not spoil for anything beyond 21.



We all know how Geass loves its surprises. Still, I feel they are dangling us just for shock value now, and it's a little nerve-wracking, especially when it comes to character analysis. So this is where I will place the blame for so much of fandom's reaction of late and not on the theory that maybe some people just don't get the idea behind Geass. Is it crack? Certainly. Can it be train-wrecky? Without question. But for all its problems, one truth remains: When Geass is bad, it's REALLY AWFULLY BAD but when Geass is good, it's AWESOME. And what makes it awesome? The mere fact that it twists and questions the mere notion of perception. I have long argued there is no good or evil in Geass. That is the point. And 21 may be the best example of this concept in a while.

Lately, I have heard/seen a lot of "OMG CHARLES AND MARIANNE ARE SO EVIL." No. They are not. They are simply two individuals who made a choice. They wanted to save humanity, unite it and eliminate conflict. But some may argue that conflict is the essence of human nature because conflict represents choice, free will. Lelouch presents another take on this with his explanation of why people lie: Because they have a purpose. Still, who is to say that peace/safety is not worth the sacrifice of free will? A parent limits a child's choices to keep them from danger. Noble intentions. Ones that come from the heart. Marianne and Charles wanted a world of peace and unity. And to achieve it, they made choices.

No, the point behind the parent scene, which I will admit was baaaaadly paced and at times incomprehensible, is not to go "EVIIIIL" or even "oooh that's why Lelouch is messed up." It is to show a parallel. A parallel that Lelouch sees. Lelouch sees his parents actions as selfish and disregarding the thoughts of others, corrupting their ideals. But Lelouch also feels that he has done the same and resents himself for it. "Yes, just now I came to know myself." Again, whether Lelouch or his parents are right or wrong doesn't matter. What matters is how the characters see themselves. And in this instance, Lelouch sees himself as in the wrong. He doesn't force God to bow to his will, rather he implores, he begs. It's a wish, a request.

Now as to whether Charles and Marianne were bad parents. Oh god yes. Terrible. They abandoned their children, just as Lelouch says. But keep in mind, Lelouch is also a bad friend. He leaves those worried about him behind, he kills those they love and he makes life-altering decisions for them without their consent. Lelouch is a terrible friend. But this doesn't mean Lelouch doesn't love his friends; nor does it mean that Charles and Marianne didn't love their children. We get that from the scenes we do see of the family. That is a loving family. Ideals simply were given greater importance. So it is with Lelouch.

But this is where the tricky part comes in. Does that make Lelouch good or bad? Should we side with him? Does it matter? Again, we have a character who clearly loves people to obsessive levels, whose "dying" thoughts are only of them, who advocates choice (young Lelouch choosing to get his own food and choosing to defend Nunnally by himself; older Lelouch choosing Geass and also withholding on Geassing eternal obedience... before he goes nuts), who protects people (lying to Kallen to keep her away) and who is very much still a child. But the same character is also selfish (using love to justify imposing will over a person's future), hypocritical (denouncing others for living based on ideals when he does the same, urging others to choose and still using Geass to rob choice), murderous/vengeful and a terrorist. That Lelouch is a hypocrite is an essential part of his character. It is also why Lelouch, nor any of the other characters in Geass, can be judged with a moral compass. Their beliefs are lies to them. Lelouch's love/concern for people is true (helping people just for the sake of it). This doesn't mean he can't be a real asshole.

It ultimately becomes a choice of what the character sees as good and bad, a choice fans shouldn't naturally adopt. The creators even advise us to view things from other perspectives. This is the point of the disillusioned soldier in 14, of Euphie's saying that Clovis used such soft colors, of Suzaku himself at times. And the interesting thing about Geass is that characters recognize this. Suzaku himself says in 21 that neither Shirley nor Euphie revealed Lelouch's identity, even though they could have and arguably should have. They each had their own perception of Lelouch, even knowing of Zero.

Lelouch and Suzaku come to a sort of consensus in the World of C, realizing that they have been pushing their ideals regardless of what the person they're fighting for might think. Suzaku questions Lelouch's validation in Nunnally, just as Lelouch questions Suzaku's validation in Euphemia. "So?" It is not the same irreverence Lelouch previously showed toward Suzaku when he admitted to being Zero in Stage 25. No, it is a question, a challenge. So what does that mean to you? So what do you intend to do? Lelouch doesn't come to his decision to stop his parents on his own. Suzaku encourages it, pushes him on. (I will add this is not the first time Suzaku has pushed Lelouch. As a child he dismissed Lelouch's sad laments about losing his title and promises to make him emperor if they work together. In return, Lelouch reminds Suzaku that being children should not stop them from making a difference. Both assertions seem to have tragic results.) "If you want results, you have to do something." Not that much different from his challenge to Lelouch in Turn 17. Someone else can take on "And that method leads to denying something" because yeah that hurt my brain. As always, the boys are making choices.

Fandom has for the moment backed away from its flaming hatred of Suzaku, motivated by Lelouch's supporting him. But nobody knows what's going on at the end of 21. It could either be an elaborate plan or the boys might simply be insane. Should we automatically be ready to forgive everything they do because they are the protagonists? Should we even make a judgment at all? They are characters, and all that really matters is how they are seen by themselves and other characters. People are people, driven for whatever reason. And that is what Geass represents, when it's not going on wild meme-worthy tangents. Love or hate the characters for who they are and what's important to them, not for which side they play for. Again, 21 brings this point HOME. Positions are changeable; alliances unsteady and perceptions open to interpretation.

And we are left with two individuals making a choice.


Miscellaneous points of note:
- What is Jeremiah up to all this time?
- C.C. is hella inconsistent here.
- V.V. was a jealous/obsessive bitch. A little like his nephew.
- Where is Schneizel going with his comments at the end?
- Why in Gino so bothered by Lelouch's new position?
- What will Kallen be doing with Lelouch next episode?
- Where does Bismarck stand on all this?
- How much of Anya's life was her own and how much was influenced by Marianne?
- AHAHAHAH Black Knights AHAHAHAH.

Comments

[klingon-jedi.livejournal.com]

I agree on CC here. I also think she's not entirely pleased, or at least doesn't know what to think of Lelouch now.

I think Bismark was in Scheizel's pocket the whole time. He just knows patience like his master.