[Spoilers] Venat's motive

[EaraGrace]

The word "failures" could really mean anything there, but even assuming that was what they meant, it doesn't make it any less silly…

You’re right that it would be odd that She didn’t give different advice if She knew exactly how the events played out. Allow me to try to give an explanation, some is speculation I admit, but I think there’s good reason to think this way. First, it’s not clear exactly how much detail we went into about the Flood and the events that led us there. We obviously discussed Emet and the fact that we killed him, but beyond that? Uncertain. Second, if we assume She knew a a Flood of Light would happen at some point, fmy understanding of the time dilation between the source and the first, the Flood and it’s events happened after Hydaelyn had intervened in our fight against Ultima, and thus had lost Her ability to communicate. After all, the period between when Minfilia left and we arrived was over a century on the First. With that in mind, it seems logical to conclude She couldn’t communicate at that moment. Those are my explanations as we don’t have a canon reason of course.

Like, I'm not saying you can't be charitable towards the script, and use incidental dialogue like you're doing to interpret it in a way where her actions as a character loosely make sense one way or another…

While Endwalker obviously was hampered by Covid, I don’t think we have evidence the writing or the characters were impacted. And yeah I think people are gonna have different interpretations, of course. I’d say the same would be true for any character we could discuss. Also the vague piece, I don’t think they’re vague at all. I think the information and lore points are clear, their implications and interpretations however, have impacts that go beyond the word for word reading. I don’t think that’s the writers intentions or fault.

So instead of a clearly written and objective Venat, we end up with a sorta build-your-own-Venat kit, where everyone can focus on different suggestive moments and lines to create their own motivation for her. The result is that most people like her, but barely anyone has the same interpretation of what was actually going through her head when she did the stuff she did.

Actually, I think the question of what was motivating her and driving her is perhaps the thing most clearly shown. The story makes it clear why she did what she did, what’s up for debate is the how of it. The actions, steps taken and the overarching plan have spots where we just don’t know what was going on. The same is true for other characters, like Emet. People still discuss how exactly the 13th was to be recovered, whether Zodiark could’ve been freed before then, or whether Emet wanted to die when we faced him in Amaurot. That’s just the consequence of having a lot of story to cover.

[Lurina]

Actually, I think the question of what was motivating her and driving her is perhaps the thing most clearly shown. The story makes it clear why she did what she did, what’s up for debate is the how of it. The actions, steps taken and the overarching plan have spot where we just don’t know what was going on. The same is true for other characters, like Emet. People still discuss how exactly the 13th was to be recovered, whether Zodiark could’ve been freed before then, or whether Emet wanted to die when we faced him in Amaurot. That’s just the consequence of having a lot of story to cover.

I mean, I don't agree with this at all. This thread is about how the narrative offers differing and semi-contradictory explanations of her actions, and if you read any conversation about her here or elsewhere, people both positive and negative on the character have wildly different understandings of what fundamentally motivated her. Even putting the time loop stuff aside, I can't even count how many times I've seen people insisting how the Sundering was singularly about protecting the sacrifices and not about how suffering is actually good, while other people in the same thread are arguing the exact opposite. It makes it kind of exhausting to even try and talk about the character.

I'm not seeing a contradiction personally. Venat chose to close the time loop because she judged the actions of the ancients and their attempts to revert to their past through blood sacrifice to be unacceptable AND because she wanted to give our future a chance to survive. The time loop closing is simply a means to her ends.

It's the distinction between "Venat Sunders based on a belief that it will save mankind on some moral or intrinsic sense" and "Venat Sunders out of a pragmatic desire to recreate this future she already knows exists". One is a ideological choice, and the other is a strictly utilitarian one.

Maybe that distinction doesn't make sense to you or doesn't feel important, but the ambiguity and mixed messaging makes her character feel very indecipherable to me.

[EaraGrace]

I mean, I don't agree with this at all...

Ok, and I would point out that just because someone believes that doesn’t mean that’s actually the case or that the narrative contradicts itself.

On the issue at hand we have the quotes from when we meet Venat in Elpis and she asks about our story. When we tell her that our past can’t be changed, but their future can, Venat says:

Venat: How very exciting. I’m quite fond of delving into the unknown-and there’s naught more unknown than the future. Until a moment finally arrives, we cannot know for certain what will come to pass-regardless of our supposed foreknowledge. So you needn’t worry for us.

This quote makes it clear how she views future events and ultimately how foreknowledge is inconsequential to their outcome. We can argue she’s wrong, or that she changed her mind, but this is word for word her views on the matter when we meet her. On whether she may have adjusted her view since, there’s not much to off of. The only things I can find are her quotes when we leave Elpis and when we meet her on the boat to Sharlayan, which are directly tied together.

Venat: You may find your world to be very different. Or perhaps the erasure of our friends’ memories has sown the seeds of a conjunction between us. We cannot know until the moment is at hand. So shall I strive to do my best, taking naught for granted as I walk my path.

My interpretation of this, given the previous quote, is she’s is saying that while it’s possible our times will converge, we can’t know for sure, so I will do my best to respond to what happens, never assuming it is assured it will be resolved.

Now she does say:

Venat: Fare you well, my light of the future. Till we meet again.

which could be interpreted as her saying she expects our times to converge. But like she said, even if she thinks it likely, the fact that there is uncertainty means that acting as if it’s certain to occur is unwise. Thus I don’t think it would play into her decision making preconjunction.

When she appears to us on the boat, she says

A conjunction has begun to form; an intertwining of your time and mine. Wheels shudder and turn. Conflict looms-monumental-which will decide the fate of the world and all life upon it.

Stating the conjunction has begun to form, as well as her earlier statement that the seeds for the conjunction have been sown, lead me to believe that in Venats eyes, the timeline connection can only be truly said to have begun with the events of Endwalker. This echoes the uncertainty that she spoke about previously, as well as (to me) saying that she didn’t conceive of the events preceding this being for the purpose of maintaining this conjunction.

Others can interpret differently, but I think we can say that Venat did not believe solely the timeline and the events that she became privy to were set in stone.