Sort-of serious Final Fantasy poll

[owlmoose]

For some reason, the subject of who the real villain is seems to come up a lot in Final Fantasy discussions. Some of the games are straightforward in that respect (would anyone try to claim that Ultimecia is not the true villain of FFVIII?), but more of them are not. So I say we settle it, "once and for all."

Warning: this poll contains spoilers for Final Fantasies 7, 9, 10, and 12, if you consider the names of characters that might be villainous to be a spoiler.


[Poll #950173]

I've left out the older games, because of those, I've only played FFV, and I remember few of the plot details. If you want to discuss them in comments, feel free.

Comments

[rabbitprint.livejournal.com]

I based my answers off of a purely simplistic definition: if I felt the characters were motivated for the lust for personal power solely to benefit themselves, as opposed to following an ideal or seeking answers.

Under that reasoning, I felt that Hojo was in it more for his own glory of discovery than purely for the advancements of 'science overall,' that Garland's conscious manipulations were slightly more calculating than Kuja's understandable desire for life (it's been a while since I played the game, so my impressions are blurry), that Yu Yevon and Seymour both followed their own opinions of salvation for their people/the world (and Sin was only a tool) so none of them were really the villain to me, and I totally misread the options of FFXII so I somehow neglected Vayne, or else I would have picked him.

So oddly, my opinions of the villains in Final Fantasy really revolve around 'placing one's self above one's chosen group,' where group can either mean actual physical people, or a general ideal that's bigger than just a single individual. I'm so stereotypical!

[furitaurus.livejournal.com]

I'm so stereotypical!

But still valid :-)

[rabbitprint.livejournal.com]

To another degree, it's like this: I approach the games expecting to see different factions, different ideals, different perspectives, so standard definitions become very much discarded for me. Instead, the characters end up becoming judged by my personal standards of 'evil.' And for me, 'evil' is simply focusing more on personal selfish advancement than keeping in mind the larger whole you may be connected to.

But even that definition is generated by a rather practical survival instinct that's demonstrated each day, rather than higher esoteric ideals.

Ultimately, ambition that neglects to think outside its own goals is what I consider destructive to the larger entity, and thereby 'bad'. I just skip straight over any larger questions of cause-and-effect. There are so many factors going on, so many issues and motivations and debateable influences for who might be considered at fault, that I just cut right to the question of, 'who's forgetting the world doesn't exist solely for them?'

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

Simplistic but reasonable. But would you say that "I had to destroy the village in order to save it" is a valid defense for one's actions? (I'm mainly thinking of Seymour and Yu Yevon here, although the Occuria might also fit in this bucket.) I tend to say no, but it's an interesting question.

[rabbitprint.livejournal.com]

But would you say that "I had to destroy the village in order to save it" is a valid defense for one's actions?
See, I don't even get into those questions. ;) If you make the choice based on your ideals, and in following your ideals, then what else can you do sometimes? Even if it might not be 'the right' thing to do, there are so many standards existing in the world about what's right that you can't ever find one single thing that isn't considered wrong by somebody out there.

I consider Seymour and Yu Yevon's choice to destroy things in order to save them to be less villainous, because they wholeheartedly believed in their cause and felt that it was truly saving or protecting their people somehow. I guess, for me, it's somewhat basic. You could interpret my line to say that anyone is 'forgiven' as long as they believed in what they do, but that's not really what I'm trying to imply either; it's all about survival, I guess.

Let's take the more radical religious groups out there. Many of them most sincerely believe in what they're doing. They believe they're 'saving' the world, 'saving' other people, etc. And, I definately don't agree with them, and dislike having to fight against the ones I come into contact with on a regular basis. That's because what they do poses a threat towards the rights of my chosen 'tribe' -- the pack, my friends, my acquaintences.

Do I hate them, feel threatened by them, would beat the crap out of many in a dark alleyway if I had the option? Sure. Are they villains? No.

Why? They're doing what they believe in, enrolling themselves in a cause greater than their own personal power gains, or an ideal they feel is something they want to protect. I'm only doing the same, from my standpoint. Sure, we don't agree -- but I acknowledge that they may have their reasons to support their side, just as I have mine. I want to protect 'my tribe', to ensure their survival against what might be opposing them. They want to protect theirs.

Of course, that's just my very basic survival-oriented mindset. Malik likes to say to these kinds of questions, 'Ask the village what it wants,' and I consider that to be no help in such situations. ;)

[owlmoose.livejournal.com]

This is sounding a lot like moral relativism. Which I am not opposed to, especially not in theory -- I think you're right that a lot depends on context, and you can't always truly understand another person's context. But I personally start drawing lines of right vs. wrong and good vs. evil when you get into contexts where lots of people die. So I feel comfortable saying that someone like Seymour or Yu Yevon is a villain, even if they did truly believe in the rightness of their respective causes. Humanism trumping relativism, if you want to get all philosophy-class about it. ;)

[rabbitprint.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I have no problems with taking other stances on them; my viewpoints are strictly based around practical survival, which is also why I tend to be very grey-scale on the subject. If I had strong absolute perspectives about 'good' and 'evil,' I would be engaged in so many arguments with other members of the pack, I'd never get anything done.

I'm probably also jaded on the subject of death. That might tend to happen when your existance isn't recognized as a valid entity, though. ;)