Quote:
Originally Posted by 2323mike
What do you mean by "Xykonishly evil", exactly? Is it "completely devoid of any even remotely positive morale traits"? Or is it "Evil boss of a group of antagonists"? Or "beyond redemption"? Or "one who strives for the ultimate power at all costs"? Or something else? Sometimes it is hard to understand Buffyishly phrased statement.  |
I mean that he has no redeeming qualities. Which isn't quite the same as having no remotely positive moral traits--although considering how warped his concept of "love" in "I do happen to love you" is, that may also be true. He is not capable of understanding why there is anything wrong with his actions; when confronted with actual morality his reaction is, "Huh, that's weird...okay, kill the gladiators then, since my son unaccountably doesn't want to enjoy seeing them horribly tortured."
Quote:
|
Because I think that would be a display of shallow morality on Elan's part.
|
Sure. There just isn't a way Tarquin can not be a deficit to any happy ending, although fortunately (...or unfortunately, depending on one's point of view) the happy ending question was only about This Story, not about Elan's life. You believe differently because (let me know if I'm paraphrasing you incorrectly) you consider the fact that Elan has a plan which he believes will deal with the problem of his father in some morally satisfying way to trump any in-comic evidence of Tarquin's irredeemability. I don't; I consider the in-comic evidence overwhelming and "Elan thinks he can do it" to carry little or no weight. We'll find out who is right when Rich's thumb is better.