On Venat's Role in the Story

[CrownySuccubus]

My interpretation of that interaction is quite different. Looking at the exact quotes of Meteions descriptions of the various civilizations she never describes them as perfect, nor does anyone but the civilizations themselves do so.

Meteion states in her narration: "Farther still existed a star without strife...where none remembered life's trials--or its joys. What its people had game from ease, they had lost to apathy."

She does not say, "a star 'believed to be' without strife". She calls it a star where there wasn't any. This implies that they were as "perfect" (within the specific subject of eliminating suffering or strife) as they believed themselves to be. They legitimately accomplished eliminating all struggle.

They were done with life.

Yes. Because they believed that since there were no struggles left in life, there were also no joys.

snip

I reject the very idea that eliminating any (known) form of suffering would also eliminate any possible form of joy. For example: some people take joy in merely looking at nature. There is no struggle in this, nor should there be.

Also, this:

"A curious traveler visited our star--a bird which proffered these questions: "What meaning does life hold? For what do you strive?" I could find no satisfactory answers, only bittersweet memories of an age long past."

Is widely accepted by most interpretations that it was Meteion who sowed the initial seeds of doubt to the people of the Plenty. it's also likely they would have eventually reached this conclusion on its own, but her questions seem to have served as a catalyst.

That works for games but were talking purpose in life.

Name just about any type of game or sport and you will find lots of people who find them to be one and the same.

snip

Monotony may be depressing to some, but not to others. For example, the neurodivergent often find repetition with no discernible purpose to be soothing and comforting. Related to what I said before: you could ask 10 people what is "perfection" and get 30 different answers, and the same is true for "meaning" or "purpose". A lot of people find joy in doing something they are good at for no other reason than the fact that they are good at it, even if that thing has no significance to anyone else and will mean nothing after they die. Again, I find the idea that this concept is beyond super advanced ancient aliens to be unbelievable.

(1/2)

[CrownySuccubus]

(Continued)

=I think you and I are closer on this than we appear, its just where you see contradiction I see part of the core message. There is no perfection, just different paths that all lead to Dead Ends. They may have saw the path to its end, but perfection was never in the cards to reach.

I don't agree, simply based on the fact that we are told, in objective terms that these stars were without strife or suffering or any problems whatsoever. That, too me, is so semantically similar to "perfection" that it really doesn't matter to me if we interchange the terms. Even if we go by the exact wording and claim these stars were "without strife", my point of this being a semantic contradiction stands. They MUST mean "without KNOWN strife" and not "without any possible strife", but if that were the case, then the very fact that they felt enough strife to kill themselves is nonsensical.

Again, why exist for the sake of it? If you've seen all you can, done all you can, then why bother. Why linger in "enlightenment?"

But did they? This again brings up the semantics issue: what have they seen? They were surprised to find Meteion, so clearly the Plenty haven't seen everything. Did the Ea see everything and know everything? If so, that again raises the question of things like time travel and other realities (we know that alternate dimensions like those of FFXV, FFXI and The Witcher canonically exist).

And on the matter of whether is realistic for them to be asking the same question, I think the fact that thinkers millennia old still dominate philosophy would suggest that it is indeed probable they would ask the same questions. Hell Kant and Mills are centuries old and they represent a debate that still rages to this day.

You are correct. But these concepts completely blindsided these supposedly intelligent and advanced civilizations. We may not have answers after millennia of debate, but they never even started a discussion.

snip.

Like I said, I know that this was the intention, but the story conflates "suffering is INEVITABLE" with "suffering is "NECESSARY". This is a common problem with Mono no Aware as a concept.

she did so thinking humanity was strong and must be so in order to survive this calamity. And so she forced them to face that.

Venat's methods are uncomfortably social darwinist. She allowed humanity to suffer so that eventually, the survivors would be strong enough to face what she deemed they were currently unable to.

If she had told them and they still decided on the course they were on, would that change what she needed to do?

That wouldn't be her decision to make.

If my life choices lead to my death at age 55 instead of age 95, that does not revoke my right to choose it.

(2/2)

[KageTokage]

One of the fish guide entries for Ultima Thule mentions it was first discovered by the Ea during the "space time exploration" phase of their civilization, which would suggest they've seen...a lot.

The Plenty are just shallow people that became bored with everything. Removing all sad/bad/whatever things does not mean you can't still be interested in something.

I didn't notice it initially, but down below their supposed paradise you can see the barren, broken husk of what was presumably once their star, and the roots of their World Tree reaching down to it. It makes me wonder if perhaps the tree itself was engineered to somehow grant them the perfection and enlightenment they sought but at the cost of their star, though perhaps that answer will be given as the "cultural restoration" project of Stigma 4 progresses; presumably through the Omega questline as it hasn't done anything new just yet.

Given how deeply the Ancients cared for their world, I struggle to believe they would allow it to meet with a similar fate willfully, nor do I think they would suffer from stagnancy with the aid of intelligent creations to introduce fresh ideas into their society.

[Rulakir]

Given how deeply the Ancients cared for their world, I struggle to believe they would allow it to meet with a similar fate willfully, nor do I think they would suffer from stagnancy with the aid of intelligent creations to introduce fresh ideas into their society.

Not only this, but the Final Days were literally seared into the aether of their souls. Going back to 'normal' was never a realistic possibility regardless of how much they would've wished it (kind of reminds me of the end of Krampus). Plus, I found it difficult to believe based on what we knew of their society that had they been told of potentially disastrous future outcomes that they wouldn't have actively worked against those possibilities. I disliked the premise that we're not going to tell people why they should change, expect them to anyway, and then condemn them for not living up to expectations they weren't aware anyone had.

By the way, am I the only one who noticed the similarities between The Plenty and this scene from the movie Knowing?

[EaraGrace]

Meteion states in her narration: "Farther still existed a star without strife...where none remembered life's trials--or its joys. What its people had game from ease, they had lost to apathy."

She does not say, "a star 'believed to be' without strife". She calls it a star where there wasn't any. This implies that they were as "perfect" (within the specific subject of eliminating suffering or strife) as they believed themselves to be. They legitimately accomplished eliminating all struggle.

You misread what I said. Meteion does indeed say it is without strife but she does not say it is perfect. As I said

Looking at the exact quotes of Meteions descriptions of the various civilizations she never describes them as perfect, nor does anyone but the civilizations themselves do so. And they were very haughty.

Yes. Because they believed that since there were no struggles left in life, there were also no joys.

I reject the very idea that eliminating any (known) form of suffering would also eliminate any possible form of joy. For example: some people take joy in merely looking at nature. There is no struggle in this, nor should there be.

And yet nature is finite, especially if what is left of its lacks competition or struggle. There's only so many birds to see.

Also, this:

Is widely accepted by most interpretations that it was Meteion who sowed the initial seeds of doubt to the people of the Plenty. it's also likely they would have eventually reached this conclusion on its own, but her questions seem to have served as a catalyst.

I... and I say this with respect to this individuals, do not care if its widely held. I need to see why people think that. Looking at the quotes of left behind by the Plenty, I saw no evidence in the English version. The quote itself does not, "I only had bittersweet memories, and thus did I realize the fatuity of existence." Perhaps that's me asking for an arbitrary level of certainty, but if we are to claim that the question is the catalyst we need to be certain that is the case.

Name just about any type of game or sport and you will find lots of people who find them to be one and the same.

And ask those selfsame individuals whether they would play for eternity. Even those dedicated to a sport would find it grating after millennia. Add in the fact that you've eliminated all known sources of anxiety and disappointment and you have pretty empty competition.

Monotony may be depressing to some, but not to others. For example, the neurodivergent often find repetition with no discernible purpose to be soothing and comforting. Related to what I said before: you could ask 10 people what is "perfection" and get 30 different answers, and the same is true for "meaning" or "purpose". A lot of people find joy in doing something they are good at for no other reason than the fact that they are good at it, even if that thing has no significance to anyone else and will mean nothing after they die. Again, I find the idea that this concept is beyond super advanced ancient aliens to be unbelievable.

And I find the idea that we could continuously engage in the same action for millennia without issue unbelievable. Even those who are neurodivergent would not find join in it after centuries.

I don't agree, simply based on the fact that we are told, in objective terms that these stars were without strife or suffering or any problems whatsoever. That, too me, is so semantically similar to "perfection" that it really doesn't matter to me if we interchange the terms. Even if we go by the exact wording and claim these stars were "without strife", my point of this being a semantic contradiction stands. They MUST mean "without KNOWN strife" and not "without any possible strife", but if that were the case, then the very fact that they felt enough strife to kill themselves is nonsensical.

We are actually in agreement then on the semantics. The point I'm putting forward is that to a civilization interested in its own perfection or interested in eliminating strife for itself eliminating all strife known to it is accomplishing the goal of eliminating strife.

But did they? This again brings up the semantics issue: what have they seen? They were surprised to find Meteion, so clearly the Plenty haven't seen everything. Did the Ea see everything and know everything? If so, that again raises the question of things like time travel and other realities (we know that alternate dimensions like those of FFXV, FFXI and The Witcher canonically exist).

They're surprise was about equivalent to when a stranger knocks on my door :P I think if an alien visitor arrived on my planet for the first time and I was capable of feeling joy or surprise or really anything but ennui I would react a bit more.

And once again the Ea did not need to know the minutae to have explored every possibility to avoid heat death.

Let me ask this question. Do you think that a civilization of rational beings, given incredible amounts of resources and time, would conclude what the Ea did if they hadn't explored all possible routes? We can ponder whether they tried this or that, but more important I think, we should be asking why they wouldn't have already tried and written off those solutions should we not? Aren't we holding the game to an unfair standard in saying they have to lay out every possible failure that we can think of?

You are correct. But these concepts completely blindsided these supposedly intelligent and advanced civilizations. We may not have answers after millennia of debate, but they never even started a discussion.

I see less blindside and more outright rejection.

Like I said, I know that this was the intention, but the story conflates "suffering is INEVITABLE" with "suffering is "NECESSARY". This is a common problem with Mono no Aware as a concept.

Suffering was necessary to defeat Meteioin, as suffering was inevitable in general. Meteions strength and song comes from those civilizations who came to believe that existence is suffering. Thus to overcome it one must accept suffering as an inevitability, and still conclude life is worth living.

Venat's methods are uncomfortably social darwinist. She allowed humanity to suffer so that eventually, the survivors would be strong enough to face what she deemed they were currently unable to.

I think she'd agree!

That wouldn't be her decision to make.

If my life choices lead to my death at age 55 instead of age 95, that does not revoke my right to choose it.

And thats a position I deeply respect and have thought about for some time. When faced with the destruction of all what becomes justifiable, is it right for her and her group to make that choice for others, does the fact that the Ancients decision would mean not only their lives ending but all life ending change the calculus? Ultimately my feeling is that it is a moral dilemma that I don't begrudge anyone to disagree on, but I would side with her. Simply because I hold that life is worth living and extending for as long as possible, full knowing that the end is unavoidable and destined.

I do however think that the Ancients own violations of others rights made the Sundering inevitable. The life that was to be given to Zodiark has the same right, and the necessity of Dynamis manipulation/the need to face despair meant that no real alternative existed. To prolong your own existence, knowing that your posterity would in turn be doomed by that action, is not held within your right to choose in my view. I understand that they did not know that at the time and I recognize that adds complexity, but I do believe the third sacrifice showed that they would be unable to face Meteion so long as an alternative seemed to exist. But that is something I recognize comes purely from my own perspective.

[EaraGrace]

I didn't notice it initially, but down below their supposed paradise you can see the barren, broken husk of what was presumably once their star, and the roots of their World Tree reaching down to it. It makes me wonder if perhaps the tree itself was engineered to somehow grant them the perfection and enlightenment they sought but at the cost of their star, though perhaps that answer will be given as the "cultural restoration" project of Stigma 4 progresses; presumably through the Omega questline as it hasn't done anything new just yet.

Given how deeply the Ancients cared for their world, I struggle to believe they would allow it to meet with a similar fate willfully, nor do I think they would suffer from stagnancy with the aid of intelligent creations to introduce fresh ideas into their society.

One small note on whether the Ancients would stagnate. Hermes raises that idea in his speech following the Lykaons euthanizing, and Emet says that he understands his argument but finds the reasons behind his pain hard to understand. Venat as well seems to conclude that too, given the post expansion a and a.

But the idea of the Ancients running out of concepts is actually raised in Shadowbringers as well, by the Ancient npc we meet in the Community Cohesion side quest.

Gentle Amaurotine: All things considered, it could've been worse. Just the other day I was attempting to conceive a white-haired lion, when all of a sudden this exquisite eagle alighted on the nearby railing, giving me quite the shock─and dramatically altering my initial concept!
Yes, indeed, it was a most unexpected development, but not an altogether unwelcome one. Great strides are often born from unexpected impetuses.
But even inspiration has its limits. For all the wonders we have wrought, I do wonder if there will come a time when we have fully explored the potential of our powers─when there is truly nothing left unmade, and only iteration and imitation and stagnation remain...
But such esoteric matters need not concern you, little one!

Just thought this was an interesting piece of dialogue in hindsight, especially given this is a creation of Emet as well.

[Tehmon]

Suffering can be a vital component in inspiration.

Consider G'raha Tia and the Ironworks, who deviced the means to time travel and teleport people across the shards.
Consider Hermes, who became knowledgeable of an extremely vital yet very much unknown source of energy.

Neither of these things were achieveable without a considerable amount of suffering. Neither of these were things that ancients were extremely privy to either, as in time travel and dynamis. And in the case of time travel, why would ancients want to partake in such when they cannot fathom the idea of a calamity so massive that would require time travel. The acknowledgment of pain, suffering and things going horribly wrong is a great source of inspiration.

Perhaps accepting suffering as inevitable and something that can cause even the mightiest of ancients to falter, it would've inspired creations, technology and feats that would've influenced the way they tackled the Final Days, and upped the threshold of limited inspiration. But that is purely speculation.

[KizuyaKatogami]

Suffering can be a vital component in inspiration.

Consider G'raha Tia and the Ironworks, who deviced the means to time travel and teleport people across the shards.
Consider Hermes, who became knowledgeable of an extremely vital yet very much unknown source of energy.

Neither of these things were achieveable without a considerable amount of suffering. Neither of these were things that ancients were extremely privy to either, as in time travel and dynamis. And in the case of time travel, why would ancients want to partake in such when they cannot fathom the idea of a calamity so massive that would require time travel. The acknowledgment of pain, suffering and things going horribly wrong is a great source of inspiration.

Perhaps accepting suffering as inevitable and something that can cause even the mightiest of ancients to falter, it would've inspired creations, technology and feats that would've influenced the way they tackled the Final Days, and upped the threshold of limited inspiration. But that is purely speculation.

And maybe they would have, had they been told the truth of the final days and Venat had been forthcoming with the knowledge. Consider that the only reason people were able to get out of those situations is because they had the knowledge handed to them. Again, imagine if after we learned the final days was coming, we said nothing. We played dumb and acted as though we didn’t know what would happen. The ancients did suffer, we see this throughout the various quests in Elpis and we get a glimpse of it in Pandaemonium. It was their suffering that gave birth to a being who was able to shield and protect the planet for thousands of years.

[Skyborne]

Summoning the most powerful, large-scale, and amibitous creation that would serve as the "Will of the Planet" that even Hydaelyn paled in comparison to in order to "rewrite the laws of creation" and reinforce the weakening celestial currents and save their planet from destruction by necessity I'd say is pretty innovative, personally. And it also inspired Hydaelyn in turn, since apparently her powers of enervation were something never seen before.

But it didn't align with her philosophical views and she did not approve so it doesn't count.

e: now I have the mental image of the Convocation cloistered in their chamber hotly debating and drafting up The Zodiark Plan, with Venat's face pressed up against the window going "No! Accept suffering! *bang bang* Accept suffering! *bang*"

[EaraGrace]

And maybe they would have, had they been told the truth of the final days and Venat had been forthcoming with the knowledge. Consider that the only reason people were able to get out of those situations is because they had the knowledge handed to them. Again, imagine if after we learned the final days was coming, we said nothing. We played dumb and acted as though we didn’t know what would happen. The ancients did suffer, we see this throughout the various quests in Elpis and we get a glimpse of it in Pandaemonium. It was their suffering that gave birth to a being who was able to shield and protect the planet for thousands of years.

Their suffering was extremely limited, with the more severe cases being shunted off and ignored. Erichthonios being thrown into Pandaemonium, and indeed the fact the Convocation would just destroy the place if they found out about what’s happening, is not exactly a great sign.

“No paradise is without its shadows” and all.