Tales from the Dawn #3: "A Question of Life" (Hermes)

[SentioftheHoukai]

These short stories are rarely pure lore pure dumps of new information, and this year in particular has been more internal character studies, which doesn't make them invalid. And for Hermes- I'm thankful that he and Meteion got at least one (even if I am in the camp of wishing for some focus on any of the dozens of other options and societies instead of the Ancients - but if it had to be Ancients, Hermes was the only POV I think had anything remotely interesting or valuable to say at this stage. I want Ahewaan or someone from Yedlihmad or Palaka's Stand to have a short story, or at least Vrtra but I have a strong feeling his will be next year.)

Hermes as a character I loved his writing and his role, which this short story only enforced, even if I would not rank him in the top ten of a personal favorites list. And I know a key element to that is in my immediate family where no one is neurotypical, the sibling I am closest to has been hospitalized due to clinical depression more than once. Which is why every reveal of Amaurotine society was making my skin crawl, because even before EW and Hermes was introduced into the plot, I could see ones like him and their predictable anguish in a so-called Paradise. Hermes is a fantasy antagonist - but he is written where his coded depression feels far more realistic than Emet's pure fantasy's variation on an immortal's grief. Where Hermes's desperate actions -which he acknowledges are desperate and hypocritical (Not the Only Villain to Do This)- are harmful and hypocritical and the grasping to legitimize his feelings and existence.

My favorite minor details were the reasoning for Meteion's blue feathers and the spectrum of dynamis rich planets. But that's also the Green Lantern Mogo fan in me.

...........

You kidding?!

Ancient society would be agreeable, not condemnable to an autist. ~Signed, an autist.

If Sundered society was anything like all of the forumgoers here, telling me off and stifling me for having a view of life and reality and society then I'd probably try to do to Eorzea what Hermes subjected Eitherys to. And all of y'all would fight me, not pity me and invent reasons why I was secretly right about what I critiqued.

Also, I'm currently undergoing treatment for depression due to the deaths of the Ancients in Endwalker and how it made me feel compounded by the fact that I now live alone by myself.

[RyuDragnier]

EDIT: That was mostly a placeholder for an actual response because...wow. Senti, if this is giving you actual depression to that point, you should not be playing the game right now, and should take a break from it and these forums for a while. Seriously, it's not good for your mental health if it's causing you that much duress, and you need to avoid the thing causing the issues, including thinking about it (easier said than done in some causes, I admit).

[Brightamethyst]

Twilight #1: Yugiri during the war, with Gosetsu. Like the Seto story, we knew they had adventures but never saw them.
Twilight #2: Merlwyb and her father. I think this was entirely new information, I don't remember this coming up before.
Twilight #3: Fordola and Yda. Outright new information, we didn't know they'd met. Also technically a situation like Azem; this is the only writing about Actual Yda, we've only heard about her before.
Twilight #4: The Sennas form the new Gridanian government. Outright new info, we never knew they pushed for this.
Twilight #5: The Ishgard one. Mostly 'we knew this must have happened', although we never heard about Ishgard's children under Thordan before, so there's that.

Last year's stories tied directly into the EW role quests. (though we didn't know it at the time)

[tokinokanatae]

He straight up tells you he doesn't know who that is when you pick that option.

He literally says, “How would you know that name?”

That’s the opposite of asking who someone is. Again, it’s extremely obvious if you look at the way he talks about himself in the Aetherial Sea, that he still identifies as Hermes. He talks about the things Hermes did in the first person.

[SentioftheHoukai]

Thinking on it, there's one of 4 possible people for the 4th/final story. Hythlodaeus, Varshahn/Vrtra, Ahewann...and Azem.

As much as I'm hoping that we won't get another story about the ancients, I would definitely like Hyth to be the focus character if we do get one. Maybe instead of extended focus on Endwalker events, we could get a wild day at the Bureau of the Architect or something.




The game already touched on the "emerges generations later" but it was something to do with the erased memories specifically getting etched deep in his soul and emerging later – which of course was his darkest and most nihilistic moment and a degree of despair he could barely cope with.

Personally, I've got this hunch that the final story is gonna be from Venat's perspective.

I hardly think he's lying to himself, because at the end of the day Amon is a scientist, he's a guy who does a lot of analysis and thinking. He holds Hermes' memories at a distance from himself and took VASTLY different things from them, essentially using them as proof of his own outlook more than anything else, but they aren't nothing. When we come down and call him Hermes, he reacts, but less in the sense of this really hitting home and more like if someone brought up something you didn't know anyone remembered from second grade; it knocks him off-kilter and gets him to talk, but it's very clearly (even directly stated to be) not something he holds too closely.

We never saw a pre-Ascians Amon, so it's impossible to say how much the full perspective of who Hermes is changed him if at all, but it's definitely not that it created a new gestalt entity. It's more that the Amon afterwards was 'Amon with a stock of Hermes' memories, which he mostly just took some REAL bad ideas from'.

I agree with you, at least for the "being a science guy" art. Of course, I also think Amon's full of shite (and himself, of course) since for all his complaints and condemnation of mankind for it's ennui and cruelty he was literally heading up the Syrcus from where it all stemmed. Kiiiiiiiinda makes him look like a hypocrite. If he can lie to himself and block out his own culpability to that extent, then he can block out the fact he was Hermes too. Makes me take anything he claims with a big grain of salt, after all why wouldn't he wish to ignore the fact he was once Hermes, the man who would watch the world burn out of a petty grudge? It would belabour his point, and make his condemnations of mankind ring rather hollow indeed.

[Lurina]

Hermes is one of the better written characters in Endwalker, but I think it's interesting how completely polarized a lot of the reactions to his character are - either his experiences are a damning indictment of Amaurotine society's lack of empathy and demand for total conformity, or he's just a self-obsessed jerk.

I think what's going on with him is pretty complicated, because he both has a point and doesn't. Despite what he assumes, I don't think there's any basis to think that the other Ancients genuinely don't care about him and are just looking for a basis to dismiss his feelings - Hermes seems blind to his own success and privilege in a sense, having risen to a very high station in society with lots of people around him genuinely happy to be working with him and helping him with his projects. Euauthe, who comes up in this story, expresses concern when you poke her in the game even when he's not around. But I do think it's fair to say that Amaurot lacks intuitive empathy when it comes to suffering, both of other people and of wild creatures. A lot of the flippancy with which they treat creations in Elpis, though not particularly remarkable when contrasted with our own treatment of animals in the real world, comes from being unable to really conceptualize fear and anguish because they've developed a culture that avoids causing those responses in people so effectively.

If you do the quests in Elpis, you discover that none of the problems with Ancient society that Hermes describes himself having are unique. You find Ancients both struggling to cope with the death of their peers, and having issues with the treatment of creations, as well as just some other non-conformist weirdos in general. However, what might set Hermes apart is that he's clearly severely clinically depressed; he's not sad for any reason wholly rooted in reality, his brain is just like that. He is and will probably always be melancholic by nature. In the real world, sorrow and loss are so common that most everyone can relate to them regardless of whether or not it's inherent, and this way even people who never really be fully content can find catharsis and self-acceptance through their communities. But the Ancient world, lacking this critical mass, leaves the small minority of people in that state where the only way they'll really find relief is to go out of their way to seek very specific connections with individuals... Which, of course, is one of the hardest things for a person who is already mentally fragile to do.

Feelings that cannot be released wholesomely turn poisonous. Hermes has obviously developed a complex where he sees himself as utterly alone, and that has become self-reinforcing. People not only don't get him, they don't care and want him to shut up. People are cruel and worthless, the world is cruel and worthless, he is cruel and worthless. It reaches the point where he can't even see beyond his own feelings to those others. When one of the Meteia dies, he can only conceptualize it in terms of how it's making him suffer. His once justified anger and empathy for the discarded creations of Elpis has now become putrid and solipsistic; his thoughts are not of their pain, but of his second-hand pain.

I think how people respond to him will largely depend on how they conceptualize mental illness generally. Is a society that cannot account for every type of mind flawed, or is it just those people who are flawed? We all draw lines regarding which types of dysfunction are deserving of sympathy and which are deserving of contempt. In our society, chronic depression is usually met with sympathy, but other issues like narcissism and sociopathy are considered flaws in an individual that they have the responsibility of managing, or else face punishment. And some, like bipolar disorder, are on the periphery in terms of social conception; some people are very sympathetic, while others will treat you like you're toxic waste.

If we eliminated suffering to the point that depression became incredibly uncommon, would it also be seen as a 'selfish illness'? Is the fact that we regard any mental illness that way at all a flaw in society? To what extent should society change to accommodate those on the fringe, and how should it change, when often all that binds a people together is shared experience in the first place?

[Lyth]

I'd say that the reactions around Hermes' actions are actually surprisingly unified, on a point, in that everyone seems to acknowledge that what he did was wrong irrespective of whether they enjoy his character or not. It's just a question of whether you want to acknowledge that he actually belongs to Amaurot or whether you choose to other him. And this largely comes down to whether his behavior fits in with your narrative of them collectively being superior beings that were justified in mass slaughtering our people to get what they wanted.

I personally find Hermes' interactions with Emet throughout Elpis to be most interesting, in the way that they are foils as characters. Hermes is relatively non-confrontational, and given the option, he seems the sort to maintain the status quo simply to preserve the peace even if he disagrees. You do also get the sense, though, from both this short story and the Elpis events in-game, that he feels compelled to continue down this path simply because he's been pushed into a corner and 'there's no turning back'.

Emet is very much the opposite, in that he'll quite readily force a confrontation in the name of something that he believes in. There's no coincidence that the person who speaks just before Hermes crosses the path of no return on top of Ktisis is Emet. I just think that it's one of those 'emotional intelligence' situations in which you can see the blow-up coming a mile away, including the lighting of the match.

Most stories about fantasy races are by and large still a reflection of our own society on some level, because you can only write from your own reference point. We live in a society in which reason and thought are often viewed as superior to empathy and emotions. But our world is filled with both, and you can't alchemically separate them into twain like Lahabrea and not!Lahabrea did. It's also interesting that this distinction often gets unnecessarily gendered (see: first page of this thread). As humans living in an irrational world, we all need to learn to wield both aether and akasha equally well.

'A mind all logic is like a knife all blade, it cuts the hand that wields it.'

[SentioftheHoukai]

Hermes is one of the better written characters in Endwalker, but I think it's interesting how completely polarized a lot of the reactions to his character are - either his experiences are a damning indictment of Amaurotine society's lack of empathy and demand for total conformity, or he's just a self-obsessed jerk.

I think what's going on with him is pretty complicated, because he both has a point and doesn't. Despite what he assumes, I don't think there's any basis to think that the other Ancients genuinely don't care about him and are just looking for a basis to dismiss his feelings - Hermes seems blind to his own success and privilege in a sense, having risen to a very high station in society with lots of people around him genuinely happy to be working with him and helping him with his projects. Euauthe, who comes up in this story, expresses concern when you poke her in the game even when he's not around. But I do think it's fair to say that Amaurot lacks intuitive empathy when it comes to suffering, both of other people and of wild creatures. A lot of the flippancy with which they treat creations in Elpis, though not particularly remarkable when contrasted with our own treatment of animals in the real world, comes from being unable to really conceptualize fear and anguish because they've developed a culture that avoids causing those responses in people so effectively.

If you do the quests in Elpis, you discover that none of the problems with Ancient society that Hermes describes himself having are unique. You find Ancients both struggling to cope with the death of their peers, and having issues with the treatment of creations, as well as just some other non-conformist weirdos in general. However, what might set Hermes apart is that he's clearly severely clinically depressed; he's not sad for any reason wholly rooted in reality, his brain is just like that. He is and will probably always be melancholic by nature. In the real world, sorrow and loss are so common that most everyone can relate to them regardless of whether or not it's inherent, and this way even people who never really be fully content can find catharsis and self-acceptance through their communities. But the Ancient world, lacking this critical mass, leaves the small minority of people in that state where the only way they'll really find relief is to go out of their way to seek very specific connections with individuals... Which, of course, is one of the hardest things for a person who is already mentally fragile to do.

Feelings that cannot be released wholesomely turn poisonous. Hermes has obviously developed a complex where he sees himself as utterly alone, and that has become self-reinforcing. People not only don't get him, they don't care and want him to shut up. People are cruel and worthless, the world is cruel and worthless, he is cruel and worthless. It reaches the point where he can't even see beyond his own feelings to those others. When one of the Meteia dies, he can only conceptualize it in terms of how it's making him suffer. His once justified anger and empathy for the discarded creations of Elpis has now become putrid and sophistic; his thoughts are not of their pain, but of his second-hand pain.

I think how people respond to him will largely depend on how they conceptualize mental illness generally. Is a society that cannot account for every type of mind flawed, or is it just those people who are flawed? We all draw lines regarding which types of dysfunction are deserving of sympathy and which are deserving of contempt. In our society, chronic depression is usually met with sympathy, but other issues like narcissism and sociopathy are considered flaws in an individual that they have the responsibility of managing, or else face punishment. And some, like bipolar disorder, are on the periphery in terms of social conception; some people are very sympathetic, while others will treat you like you're toxic waste.

If we eliminated suffering to the point that depression became incredibly uncommon, would it also be seen as a 'selfish illness'? Is the fact that we regard any mental illness that way at all a flaw in society? To what extent should society change to accommodate those on the fringe, and how should it change, when often all that binds a people together is shared experience in the first place?

The main difference I see between real life society and Ancient society is the massive magickal power gulf, otherwise it quite resembles many places we live in now; at least when stood in comparison to the Sundered world. The World Sundered is essentially the third world country to the Unsundered World's first world. Not truly lacking in any real woes, but the disparity in the "idyllic nation" nature of them is nevertheless rather stark. I think the biggest differential however, is how in the real world we do not empathize with the magickal equivalent of a glorified school shooter. We support their victims, and nail that murderous son of a b***h to the wall. The moment you take your own suffering out on the innocent, you forfeit your right to understanding.

I personally find Hermes' interactions with Emet throughout Elpis to be most interesting, in the way that they are foils as characters. Hermes is relatively non-confrontational, and given the option, he seems the sort to maintain the status quo simply to preserve the peace even if he disagrees. You do also get the sense, though, from both this short story and the Elpis events in-game, that he feels compelled to continue down this path simply because he's been pushed into a corner and 'there's no turning back'.

Emet is very much the opposite, in that he'll quite readily force a confrontation in the name of something that he believes in. There's no coincidence that the person who speaks just before Hermes crosses the path of no return on top of Ktisis is Emet. I just think that it's one of those 'emotional intelligence' situations in which you can see the blow-up coming a mile away, including the lighting of the match.[/I]

I'd say Emet's "reaction" and "method" are more justifiable, personally. "Forcing a confrontation" gets far more results, and with greater degrees of control over the outcome than Hermes' approach. Doing a Hermes and bottling up your feelings and misgivings, leads to precisely what we saw in Ktisis Hyperboreia. An explosion of your own negative feelings and biases that can no longer be stemmed or controlled. The flaw in Hermes' reasoning is his inability, or perhaps his unwillingness to see that others did care and were struggling with him. It's hard for me not to see him as a villain, due to his actions not what he suffered from. Once you inflict your own inner pain on the undeserving, you are no longer eligible for treatment and pity.

[Cleretic]

Ancient society would be agreeable, not condemnable to an autist. ~Signed, an autist.

Ancient society is horrifying and condemnable to me.

Signed,
Another autist, although one that prefers not to use that term or to define herself by it.

You speak for you, and you're allowed to, but you do not speak for all of us; your opinion may be informed by your neurodiverse nature, but it is not the inevitable consequence of it.

Personally I think that Amaurot is the place we've visited that I'd least want to live (excepting, you know, legit uninhabitable regions). Mostly because it's way TOO conformist; I'm quite happy in my own niche, but I want to define it myself, not to have society declare it for me.

My own experience with autism (both my own and in knowing others with it) actually says that the most friendly nation to that experience we've visited is probably either Thavnair or Sharlayan. Weirdly, the deciding factor is probably more where your comfort zone for food is than anything else; they both have very... distinct culinary identities, for better or worse.

And to reiterate what RyuDragnier said: yeah, if you're legitimately in treatment for depression because of a fictional story, you should distance yourself from that story rather than continuing to embed yourself in it. It is clearly not doing you good.

Last year's stories tied directly into the EW role quests. (though we didn't know it at the time)

They were, and I loved it. But I was going through to determine what we already knew that the stories expanded on, and showing that while most of ShB's were either outright new information or fleshing out something we'd only had lightly described before, this year's have been almost entirely focused on taking an event we've already had described to us to a relatively significant degree, and expanding on it even more.

[Thenightvortex]

Ancient society was unequivocally based and better than the sundered world in almost every way. I’d live there, cause the prospects look amazing.