Quote Originally Posted by Brinne View Post
What I'm getting at with the Ardbert comparisons is not a personal attempt on my part to defend either Ardbert or Emet, to clarify...
I will definitely agree there's a strong precedent for the "solitude and isolation will leave you a terrible, broken human being" narrative, and I noticed that initially with Yotsuyu and Ysayle, though on my part I'm not sure I'm thrilled with their (continued) take on it. I said this in my analysis of Endwalker, but I always found the message that life is a meaningless void and you're better off dead than without a support network behind you to be a pretty dreadful one, considering how often these circumstances are beyond our control, and I was dismayed how traumatised and isolated characters are are frequently seen as wounded animals that need putting out of their misery. Which is why for all my emphasis on his past actions, I'm not actually saying I want Emet condemned and forever scorned as a villain for what he did, because what he went through was an absolute tragedy, but something closer to what we wish for with Venat - a more open and appraising look at his character outside of what the story tells us we should think.

This also ties in to why I don't really find it totally viable to compare Ardbert with Emet, since I see the latter as more on par with Venat in terms of the scale of his actions. If you look at it from their mindset, to Ardbert's mind, he was causing destruction to save something of his world after he brought about its near total annihilation, but the Source would live on and eventually recover - Emet, on the other hand, wanted nothing less than the erasure of Sundered life and history completely. So it's sort of, yes, you're right in they did both did terrible things for what they perceived as doing the right thing, and the writers no doubt wanted to continue that isolated narrative with them, but do I think that their implying Ardbert had justification for his actions is also giving something of a pass to Emet? Not quite.

I think your reading of this is a totally valid interpretation based on the text itself, but it's also explicit it's not the writer intent or interpretation at this point.
Do you not think? I would have said the writers did intend for Emet to be setting himself up for inevitable disappointment, even if that wasn't his conscious intent. JP translations can be a little tricky since the vocabulary employed often carries different nuances to what we would first assume, but when they talk about pure-hearted intentions I see that as their saying he truly wasn't deceiving you, and he was genuinely receptive to being proven wrong - but that could simply never happen due to Emet's own distorted thinking, though he didn't realise that himself. I think that really came through in Through His Eyes - even his child, possibly the Sundered figure most in with a chance of getting close to Emet and breaking through his barriers, was simply not enough to able to tear down those biases and change his mind. In the end, he was unable to accept our mortality as anything other than a weakness, as opposed to a fundamental part of life, and rather than taking anything meaningful from it, losing his son only embittered him further. At that point, you have the sense of fighting a battle already lost.

That being said, I completely sympathize with...
Ironically, I lean the other way - seeing the fans be extraordinarily sympathetic towards him (the "Emet-Selch was right all along!" faction in equal parts amuses and concerns me) made me want to rip the bandaid off the darker parts of Emet's character and view him critically, because honestly, he is such an endearing and enjoyable character it's admittedly incredibly tempting to view him in this broken, tragic light, and I've even been guilty of it myself in the past. But after revisiting the story since the saga finished (I suppose I was waiting for the end of the story before really jumping into a character analysis) I don't believe it's quite accurate to do so. But I understand why so many do.

All of this, for sure, I can nod along with and happily shake hands on, haha!

(And yes, Emet and Hermes's interactions were insanely good. One of my favorite parts of Elpis and of both characters.)
There were a few times in Elpis the arrow really did hit the bullseye, and it was so good and so terrible (and I mean that in a positive way, if that makes sense) - like when Emet broods outside after the meeting and wonders what it must be like to grieve something so intently, I was just strangled crying noises.