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

[KariTheFox]

Why would you imagine being a familiar if you lived in ancient society but not a familiar, mammet or even animal when considering current Etheirys?

Because familiars can be people with souls, a Mammet or an animal not so.

Actually, now that I think about it being an auspice and hanging out with all the other auspices would be ideal, I'm changing my answer to that.

[Lurina]

In the Ancient society, I suppose I'd be a familiar. Which kind of turns how good existance is into a dice roll, maybe I'd be a familiar for someone who values me as an equal and research partner, which would be the best possible outcome. Or maybe I'd be a familiar for one of those ancients who thinks it would be fine if a creature in Elpis killed me, which would suck.

I'm not sure the Ancients really had a 'class' of genuinely sapient familiars. Having done all the quests in Elpis, many of the researchers seem shocked that you're capable of understanding complex ideas and especially that you have a soul. One of them even gets kind of uncomfortable about the implications.

The vibe I got was that cases like Meteion are still very fringe, and people didn't really know what to do with them. There was probably a cultural conversation to be hard there.

...also, yeah, it seems like FFXIV is kinda strange about how it treats sapient beings generally if you squint... Like, the Mammets in Island Sanctuary are for sure sentient. But it seems like they're basically slaves? Except we pay them? But then the Ancients also canonically pay us during Elpis, which comes up repeatedly? (What do the Ancients use money for? How does that even work?)

And then you have quests that establish random creatures like the Yeti are sapient... Even though there are multiple quests where we basically murder them to make fur coats...

I feel like we're not supposed to think too hard about this stuff.

[redheadturk]

Thank you for mentioning the mixed social tolerance for bipolar disorder, btw. I wasn't even going to mention my family, but some of the tone towards Hermes offended me out of silence.

Sorry, I have no pity whatsoever for the guy who was responsible for nearly destroying the universe. None. And Hermes is a crappy example for either depression or bipolar.

Oh, btw, the Ancient world encouraged people to be who they were and use whatever natural inborn gifts they may possess. Societal norms were aimed toward outward appearance rather than who you were as a person. And you weren't in danger of being lynched for being gay/trans/what have you. Ya know, unlike here.

[SentioftheHoukai]

Sorry, I have no pity whatsoever for the guy who was responsible for nearly destroying the universe. None. And Hermes is a crappy example for either depression or bipolar.

Oh, btw, the Ancient world encouraged people to be who they were and use whatever natural inborn gifts they may possess. Societal norms were aimed toward outward appearance rather than who you were as a person. And you weren't in danger of being lynched for being gay/trans/what have you. Ya know, unlike here.

They're right. Venat was looked at as ever so slightly strange but was still heavily respected. There's a dude with pink spiky hair standing right bloody there in Elpis, and at least one example of a fantasy transgender person in Ancient society's narrative framing. It's ludicrous to me to see so many assume because Emet-Selch created Allag and Garlemald near 10,000 years after his people's demise (something that they excuse Amon, Hermes' reincarnation for when the guy ran the Syrcus; the root of all Allag's worst depravity) as meaning all Ancients were primordial proto-Adolfs. Also, Hermes' narrative framing is an atrocious example of one with mental health. He is practically suggestive that it is the norm for depressed people who are different to go on a glorified massacre, and people here applaud that. THAT'S what I take offense to. If you'd remove yourselves from your sea of headcanon for even one second, you'd see clearly just how welcome a society like Amaurot would be for you. Whoever you are, whatever you like to do they support it. That's more than you can say for any society I know.

I empathize a fair flipping bit with Hermes, I'll have you know. I merely disagree with the outcome, his chosen course of action. You think I haven't wanted to go and destroy everybody who in my delusions mistreated me? But when my head clears, I realize that form of violence and hate wasn't the answer I was looking for. Similarly, I don't hate Venat despite what most probably think. I just see her as misguided, and her chosen course as morally deficient.

[KariTheFox]

Oh, btw, the Ancient world encouraged people to be who they were and use whatever natural inborn gifts they may possess. Societal norms were aimed toward outward appearance rather than who you were as a person. And you weren't in danger of being lynched for being gay/trans/what have you. Ya know, unlike here.

I think in order to claim that the Ancient world is more tolerant of lgbt people, we would need to see them be actually represented by the story. And since we barely see any confirmed repesentation of lgbt people, or examples of bigotry towards them anywhere in the sundered or unsundered world, I think there's just zero information to go on there.

[Brinne]

And then you have quests that establish random creatures like the Yeti are sapient... Even though there are multiple quests where we basically murder them to make fur coats...

I feel like we're not supposed to think too hard about this stuff.

The huge presence of quests like this - there are also quests that establish trolls as sapient! - quests where you help bring forth creatures specifically to kill them for ritualistic purposes! - makes it all the more sort of mind-boggling and ill-thought-out, at best, that the writers chose to go the direction of "they cull creations and wildlife sometimes in a callous way" as some kind of stern moral check upon the Ancients. I realize this is my complexes and my fixations, in large part, but now every time I do one of those quests that involve "surprise, Yetis are sapient!" or "this Sharlayan researcher wants you to go massacre a bunch of creatures to make some cool cologne!", I partially get thrown out of the game. There is always that nagging voice in the back of my head jeering "ha ha, guess we also don't respect life and deserve to have our entire civilization destroyed - oh well, bicolored gemstones go." It's an unfortunate aspect of the broader damage Endwalker's approach did for me to the game's worldbuilding fabric as a whole.

As far as LGBT things go, I think a friend put it well that the extremely on-the-down-low acknowledgment - if any exists at all - probably best seen as a reflection of the limitations of both the writers and the audience. But again, there are at least the Strong Implications present with Artemis in terms of both sexuality and gender. The Sundered also have that one minor sidequest NPC couple as well, though, too. But it's hard for me to believe that the Ancients put a lot of stock in gender and appearance, given it was known and accepted they could alter their bodies at will, and their understanding of the fluid nature of souls within the reincarnation cycle.

Honestly, one of the things I personally found "comforting" about the Ancient world, from that "both physically and mentally chronically ill/neurodivergent" angle, was the sense of how eager they seemed - even if sometimes it was a bit overbearing and misguided - to reach out and help those who were struggling or who might be deficient or lacking in aether manipulation. (I would presume that, given their abilities, most physical disabilities we know of were a non-issue.) Hythlodaeus, terrible at aether manipulation, was the front-running candidate for one of the highest seats in government. The researchers in Elpis who recognized your thin aether and promptly panicked in their rush to make you an aether smoothie to help. In Pandaemonium, Erichotonios has a complex about his lack of talent in most magicks, due to his complicated relationship with Lahabrea - however, from what we see, he has good, supportive relationships with all the other Keywards, and another highest-ranking-government-official figure rather vehemently stands up for him exactly as he is when Hesperos does try to disparage him for it. In Amaurot, when there was no judgment about your inability to use creation magicks on your own, but instead pretty even-toned support and proffered and prepared assistance, I thought, "oh, they have disability accommodations! How wonderful."

[SentioftheHoukai]

I think in order to claim that the Ancient world is more tolerant of lgbt people, we would need to see them be actually represented by the story. And since we barely see any confirmed repesentation of lgbt people, or examples of bigotry towards them anywhere in the sundered or unsundered world, I think there's just zero information to go on there.

Why then, given the lack of any evidence, can so few on here see the Unsundered World as anything but this uber-fascist superiority bigot utopia based on what Emet-Selch did in the modern-day, Sundered era then? Why is everyone on here so incapable of applying the defense you just gave, the one so many here are so fond of equally?

You cannot condemn or praise a society for a set of virtues or flaws, then turn right around and do the polar opposite to another based on the same or similar premises. Not logically, and not if you wanna be taken seriously in any forme of legitimate debate.

[Alleo]

Sorry, where is this dialogue you're talking about, exactly?

Sadly I dont remember. I think its just two NPCs standing somewhere having speech bubbles when you pass them. Might be near some building since they just got accepted? Of course there might be different dialogue in languages other than Germany.

They just stuck to me in my playthrough because they were just another small hint the devs dropped that it was not all just paradise. Of course it could have also been a hint at their fate. That they would become part of the sacrifice.

Edit:
Since this topic is now so much about where we would live, I honestly would say that I do not want to live in FF14 at all. I would just end up death a few weeks after getting there. (And I would miss modern technology way too much)

If I am forced here and have at least some connection I would choose Il Mheg. I absolutely love the look of it and if the Pixies like me, nothing bad will happen there. (Add the bonus that there are not many people to interact either) I would move into Uriangers old house and read and relax all day.

[Hurlstone]

I can't help but wonder how long history stretched prior to the time of the Ancients, because it's mentioned that they created their paradise and things were not always as they were.

Perhaps they used to behave more like the sundered folk in some time still further past, and some manner of unpleasantry caused a large scale societal/cultural reform into their present state.

You know after all this talk of the Ancients that is something I have wondered a fair bit. Just how did they become this near-utopia society we hear about? Few civilisations grow without blood on their hands, so I would not be surprised at all if they did match the more ‘Sundered’ cultures before they where elevated. Another reason why the Ascians are repulsed by them, perhaps. I doubt we will ever really get a answer in-game as we move away from that chapter, but this is where I think it would be neat if FFXIV and its writers expanded their storytelling into different mediums. WoW lore may be trash in-game, but I used to read the novels that accompanied them and there where some really good ones. I would totally read a story or encyclopedia showing the Ancient history.

Personally speaking, I can see why people would say they want to live in that society most out of all the ones in the game, though I do not think we really know enough about the Ancients or Amaurot to really say objectively that they are the perfect utopia some hold them to be. I admit I have not done the Elpis side quests so that could form a better picture, but for me at least it still feels like we only know a fraction of who they are. We are seeing their society through a small lens, and often through the gaze of Convocation members who hold a privileged rank, and Ascians who have endured centuries of pain, suffering and hate. Plus one persons idea of a Utopia may not match anyone else. Like, what do they do with criminals or those who decide they want to do something that does not ‘serve the Star’? How do they react to the different people and civilisations? Are they isolationists or do they open their borders to others? What type of social hierarchies outside the Convocation exist? Personally speaking I find a ‘perfect’ society free of any flaws or criticisms to be rather boring in a storytelling sense. Slight tangent, buts its one of the reasons why Star Trek: DS9 is my second favourite show of all time. I adore the utopia idea of the Federation and Starfleet, but DS9 is not afraid to show how that system is not immune to hijacking, fear or free from flaws. As one of the best characters says, ‘Its a easy to be a saint in paradise.’

Edit:
Since this topic is now so much about where we would live, I honestly would say that I do not want to live in FF14 at all. I would just end up death a few weeks after getting there. (And I would miss modern technology way too much)

If I am forced here and have at least some connection I would choose Il Mheg. I absolutely love the look of it and if the Pixies like me, nothing bad will happen there. (Add the bonus that there are not many people to interact either) I would move into Uriangers old house and read and relax all day.

I 100% agree. Even in the most civilized places of Eorzea I doubt I would survive long for multiple reasons, and Il Mheg is mny favorite zone. Let me go live with the Nu mou! I think I would get on better with them then the Pixies haha.

[Brinne]

Honestly, at this point in the narrative, the question of "was Amaurot really perfect/a utopia?" seems both functionally useless and sort of disingenuous to me. I think it's very clear at this point that no, they weren't perfect. They had problems, they had struggles, they had flaws. They had strained family relationships. They had conflict. Their society was still one capable of producing malicious individuals like Athena.

But again, at this point: so what? It's a self-defeating question, one meant to set up the Ancients to unavoidably fail to pass muster. And now that we've expanded so much upon the texture and details of Amaurot proper, and them not being perfect lends itself to that - of course not, of course they couldn't be, because they were people, who were generally doing their best - which is far more affecting. With the "perfect? y/n" framework, the conversation basically ends at "no," and to be honest, it sometimes seems based around a motivation of "spiting Emet-Selch, the individual, who did harm out of love for them [so we must denigrate all that he loves]" than an actual consideration of the Ancients as a race and a culture as a whole. (I mean, if you hate Emet-Selch - totally fair, he's an asshole who has done plenty of incredibly horrible things. But I think it's less fair to take your resentment of one displaced member of a culture and extend that distaste to the entirety of all the people and practices within it, so to speak.)

But if we can put aside the question of "were they perfect" we can start asking other things, with more capacity for nuance - were they good? Was their society one designed to reduce harm as much as possible, in good faith and benevolence? And in that regard, we get to Lurina's question - is it even possible or desireable for a society to "optimize" to the point that individuals like Hermes and Athena would become complete impossibilities? Is it even possible for a society to eliminate people on the margins altogether and suit everyone's needs to accommodate their happiness? And on the narrative level, going back to the choices of Endwalker regarding the Sundering and their destruction - was their loss a tragedy, one worthy of unambiguous mourning, or are we supposed to take it as a "cautionary tale," and how does that work in the context of the rest of FFXIV?

And even putting aside the question of "perfect" (doubly useless because "perfect" is a subjective term that will vary from individual to individual to begin with), are they an affecting demonstration for some of us that, while not perfect, perhaps better things as a society may in fact be possible? (Obviously, for me, the answer is yes - and their destruction does amount to meaningless tragedy we're left to grapple with the reality of, because I strongly reject the just-world fallacy or the associated rationalizations of "well, they were no angels, and surely brought it on themselves.")