Avatar the Last Airbender

[Ashen Lilies]

I'm just going to pop in and say that it's incredibly easy for us, as intellectuals analyzing the show, to point out the non-evil uses for blood bending. But consider Katara, who is only around 14 years old (little more than a child), and whose first encounter with the form was it being used in the most horrible and violating of ways, kidnapping people, making them act against their will and even attacking their own friends, and whose second encounter with the form resulted in her nearly killing a dude. It's entirely within reason for her, with those experiences, to swear off blood bending entirely, and fail to explore its more benevolent uses, assuming they exist.

That's all in-character reasoning though, of course. I won't touch on the way the show handled it/treated it, as I don't feel particularly strongly on it either way.

[Psyren]

I don't think it's "benevolent," any more than I think shooting lightning or razors at someone would be "benevolent."

I do think it's much more practical, for reasons I've already stated.

Who did Katara almost kill? When she went on her mission with Zuko, she bloodbent the first (who turned out to be wrong) guy to stop him from firebending. When they realized it wasn't him, she held him a bit longer so they could question him and moved on to find her true target.

The second guy (the right one), she did come very close to killing - but with ordinary waterbending (icicle spikes), not with bloodbending.


There are no examples in the show of the so-called horrors of bloodbending. We're told its wrong somehow, then the main character shows no qualms about using it herself (with no repercussions), then it's never mentioned again. Lord Seth hit the nail on the head here.

[Ashen Lilies]

Because everyone in the TV show always takes the most practical option, and never makes a bad, knee-jerk reaction to reject a power that was used to kidnap people by hijacking their very bodies, and then forcing her brother and her best friend/love interest to very nearly kill each other.

I'll admit to be being wrong about the second instance of blood bending, but I think the first instance was more than enough.

I'm not trying to defend the way the show handled the morality of the power, or set it up and subsequently dropped it, or say that blood bending is a evil mean cruel power that is only used by baby eating baddies and has no other practical use than to violate people their little dog to. I'm just saying that I think it made sense that Katara as a character would reject the power, whether she was right to do so or not.

What I am disappointed in, is her failing to utilize the other techniques she learned in that episode. I know she managed to freeze the rain in The Southern Raiders, but did she ever again pull water from plants, or from the air?

[RedBeardJim]

What I am disappointed in, is her failing to utilize the other techniques she learned in that episode. I know she managed to freeze the rain in The Southern Raiders, but did she ever again pull water from plants, or from the air?

Did she ever again have any need to? She had pretty free access to water whenever she needed to waterbend after that point in the show.

[Lord Seth]

It can also be used to pretty reliably kill someone.

So can tons of other things in the series, and remember, as far as I know, bloodbending was never stated to be capable of killing someone (I suppose you could force them to walk off a cliff or something...but that's a lot less efficient than just piercing them with an icicle or something).

Narrative convention: all the training between Hama and Katara in that episode was there to show the audience just how dangerous bloodbending can be without showing someone explode in bloody and meaty chunks.

There was, as far as I remember, never any indication nor implication whatsoever that people could in fact explode from it.

And while bloodbending is a tool, it's still a tool with the most dangerous and cruel designs.

As opposed to, say, just killing people outright. Which bloodbending actually lets you avoid.

By the way, I'm actually having trouble seeing how bloodbending is any more "cruel" than energybending. Bloodbending is temporary. Energybending is permanent. Truth to tell, most if not all of the arguments on how bloodbending is so awful seem to apply to energybending.

A) It was vaguely foreshadowed (as has already been pointed out.)

The existence of the Lion-Turtle was vaguely foreshadowed. Nothing else was. And as I've pointed out, whether the existence of a Lion-Turtle was established makes no difference in regards to whether energybending was a deus ex machina or not. Whether it was never shown even once or if it was well established Lion-Turtles existed really makes no difference in this matter. I don't know why some people complain about the existence of Lion-Turtles coming out of nowhere; it really is irrelevant to the issue.

B) It must be remembered that in mythology Lion Turtles represent the hand of god. So it is literally Deus Ex Machina. In my opinion this makes the Lion Turtle one of the most brilliant pieces in the show.

How? Whether something's a literal or figurative deus ex machina, it's still a bad deus ex machina. Heck, a writer actually entering the show and breaking the fourth wall in giving Aang the power might've been an even more literal deus ex machina when you get down to it...that doesn't make it brilliant (though it would make it more honest).

If you're wondering about evil bending, what about Toph? She imprisons several people in metal once she learns metalbending (e.g. the two schlubs sent to take her back to her parents, and the dai li agent she locks in the support column underground.) And she was the world's only metalbender at that time. She even locked the former two in with the key. Those people were left to starve to death/die of thirst with no bender on the planet able to free them, including themselves - and that's assuming anyone even found them in time. Isn't that "dangerous and cruel?"

I forgot about that. And remember, that was played for laughs. So, apparently according to the show, temporarily taking control of people's bodies is evil. Leaving people to starve to death is hilarious!

we've always seen it being used to basically violate other people.. and it's inherently much more dangerous than any other form of bending, which has also a lot of good applications, from keeping warm to healing, building a house or pushing a sailboat..

This would perhaps be a point if those other forms of bending were only used for the "good" applications. But they're not.

Let me put it into perspective. Suppose we compare a gun with a knife. Offhand, I can't think of any particularly "peaceful" uses for a gun, so let's assume that guns can only be used to harm. Knives can also be used to hurt people, but also have non-harmful uses like cutting food. But if someone is going around attacking people with a knife, are you really going to say it's "better" than going around attacking people with a gun because the knife could be used in ways that don't harm people?

the step from bloodbending to fist-of-the-north-star like exploding heads is a bit too close for comfort.

Based on...what? Am I missing something from the episode that indicated that sort of thing could happen? Because otherwise this appears to be blatant speculation.

[lord_khaine]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyren View Post
If you're wondering about evil bending, what about Toph? She imprisons several people in metal once she learns metalbending (e.g. the two schlubs sent to take her back to her parents, and the dai li agent she locks in the support column underground.) And she was the world's only metalbender at that time. She even locked the former two in with the key. Those people were left to starve to death/die of thirst with no bender on the planet able to free them, including themselves - and that's assuming anyone even found them in time. Isn't that "dangerous and cruel?"

I forgot about that. And remember, that was played for laughs. So, apparently according to the show, temporarily taking control of people's bodies is evil. Leaving people to starve to death is hilarious!

Its also incorrect, just because there isnt any other metalbenders doesnt mean its impossible to get them out of those positions, it just means it would take a lot more brute force, than what were used to place them there in the first place.

[dehro]

Based on...what? Am I missing something from the episode that indicated that sort of thing could happen? Because otherwise this appears to be blatant speculation.

it is speculation, but not so much "out there" as you seem to think... bending is primarily taking the element and pushing it in different directions, giving it forms and such. that's what happens to the blood in the bloodvessels when they are being..bent.
how far a step is causing a bloodclot or pushing blood "out of the body" from what we see it being used for? I don't think it's that far.
yes, bending of any element can have and has destructive power..but I can't think of a single episode that doesn't also show at least one if not several ways for those elements to be used in positive action...more often than not outside of a battle context. on the whole, it balances out..more so than with bloodbending
even in battle..how many people do we see actually die onscreen through bending, in the entire run of the show? not that many..it's mostly knocking people out/over.
on screen we really don't see any good use/application of bloodbending.
we are on the contrary told in rather strong terms that bloodbending is bad juju, and a terrible power to have.
could it potentially have good applications..yes..but that isn't expanded on or shown.

ultimately however, you've avoided the one sentence in my previous post that I do think matters most

this is a kids show... on a cartoon network.

on a very fundamental level, and I'm deliberately exagerating..
for many children, especially the younger ones, blood equals pain equals ugly/nasty stuff...whereas firebending is cool
this may be an oversimplification, but I understand if the authors don't want to go there just to avoid complications, criticism, scaring off children.. or worse, concerned parents..many children I know appreciate a little gore and a bloodied nose more than I do..

Its also incorrect, just because there isnt any other metalbenders doesnt mean its impossible to get them out of those positions, it just means it would take a lot more brute force, than what were used to place them there in the first place.

that, or a pair of can-openers

[John Cribati]

Let me put it into perspective. Suppose we compare a gun with a knife. Offhand, I can't think of any particularly "peaceful" uses for a gun, so let's assume that guns can only be used to harm. Knives can also be used to hurt people, but also have non-harmful uses like cutting food. But if someone is going around attacking people with a knife, are you really going to say it's "better" than going around attacking people with a gun because the knife could be used in ways that don't harm people?

Your analogy is wrong. We're not talking about Gun vs. Knife, we're talking about Cutting Food With Knife vs. Cutting Person With Knife.

Bending is a tool, not just a weapon. You can use a hammer to build a birdhouse, but you can also use it to cave in someone's skull. And last I checked, caving in someone's skull without provocation is bad.

[Psyren]

How far a step is causing a bloodclot or pushing blood "out of the body" from what we see it being used for? I don't think it's that far.

This is a Slippery Slope fallacy, which is particularly remarkable since we don't even have a slope here to be slipping on.

You have no basis that bending clots in someone's bloodstream is even possible, never mind that it's somehow an inevitability for all bloodbenders regardless of moral compass, despite Hama (who doesn't have one) having bloodbended (bloodbent?) for months without killing any of her captives or even the rats.

on screen we really don't see any good use/application of bloodbending.

Of course we did - you can stop other benders from bending with it, like the Southern Raider Katara froze with it (ending the fight with him immediately and non-lethally.) Or all the firebenders Hama imprisoned solo.

Using it that way is no more inherently evil than energybending, or a Hold Person spell. It's in fact much more humane than energybending, given that it doesn't take your target's bending away permanently - just long enough for you to restrain them.

on a very fundamental level, and I'm deliberately exagerating..
for many children, especially the younger ones, blood equals pain equals ugly/nasty stuff...whereas firebending is cool
this may be an oversimplification, but I understand if the authors don't want to go there just to avoid complications, criticism, scaring off children.. or worse, concerned parents..many children I know appreciate a little gore and a bloodied nose more than I do..
that, or a pair of can-openers

There's a term for that - bad writing. We can argue how justified it was that they may or may not have wanted to explore the consequences of bloodbending on a kids show - but the fact is that they weren't explored. And they've hinted at much worse/darker events - the murder of Katara's mother was itself pretty heavy for a kid's show, as was Roku's death by suffocation, the systematic annihilation of the southern water tribe's benders, the Dai Li's brainwashing and subsequent murder of Jet etc. And I still consider what Toph did to be far darker too.

Bloodbending is practically sesame street compared to all that.

[Reverent-One]

Because everyone in the TV show always takes the most practical option, and never makes a bad, knee-jerk reaction to reject a power that was used to kidnap people by hijacking their very bodies, and then forcing her brother and her best friend/love interest to very nearly kill each other.

This basically. Removing a person's agency, through controlling their body or their mind, is a disturbing concept, and I don't have a problem with a decent person wanting to draw a hard line that they won't cross on the subject, whether there's practical purposes it could be used for as well or not.

[Lord Seth]

Its also incorrect, just because there isnt any other metalbenders doesnt mean its impossible to get them out of those positions, it just means it would take a lot more brute force, than what were used to place them there in the first place.

Toph left them there with no way out and there was no indication whatsoever that anyone was going to show up and rescue them and at no point afterwards was there any implication or indication that they were. Even if someone did by chance, that clearly wasn't something Toph was banking on. She left them there essentially to starve to death, and this was more or less played for laughs. But temporarily taking control of someone's body is portrayed as a really serious manner. There's a major dissonance there.

it is speculation, but not so much "out there" as you seem to think... bending is primarily taking the element and pushing it in different directions, giving it forms and such. that's what happens to the blood in the bloodvessels when they are being..bent.
how far a step is causing a bloodclot or pushing blood "out of the body" from what we see it being used for? I don't think it's that far.

As Psyren has pointed out, this is blatant speculation. There is no basis for this in show at any point that I know of. We know that bloodbending involves controlling people's movements, and we are never given any indication that I know of that it is anything more than that.

even in battle..how many people do we see actually die onscreen through bending, in the entire run of the show? not that many..it's mostly knocking people out/over.

A war has been going on for a century. It is not unreasonable to believe that a lot of people have died. This is even alluded to onscreen in the opening of the second season, when the general guy points to the people who are injured and mentions they're the lucky ones.

on screen we really don't see any good use/application of bloodbending.
we are on the contrary told in rather strong terms that bloodbending is bad juju, and a terrible power to have.

Which we are told based on...um...er...oh wait, it doesn't. We're just told it is.

could it potentially have good applications..yes..but that isn't expanded on or shown.

Which is exactly part of the problem. It treats it as this oh-so-horrible thing despite it not being such a thing even on screen.

By the way, I'm not sure how the ability to make pointed icicles and throw them at people has applications any better than bloodbending...

ultimately however, you've avoided the one sentence in my previous post that I do think matters most

this is a kids show... on a cartoon network.

"It's a kid's show" is trotted out too much as an excuse for bad writing. Yes, there are restrictions on what you can do on a kid's show. But that's why people who write for them should be mindful of them and not try to write stories that don't work right in those restrictions.

And let's suppose the case is "well, they couldn't show something as violent as blood bursting" (rather than it quite possibly have been their intention that just the controlling alone was what was so bad about it). In that case, establish that things can go really really wrong if you're not really really careful with bloodbending. You don't need to graphically illustrate it to do so. You don't even need to be really specific about it. But as this idea is never established, never indicated or implied, and in fact seems to run contrary to how bloodbending is demonstrated (as Psyren has pointed out), attempting to advance it is just blatant speculation without any actual basis.

on a very fundamental level, and I'm deliberately exagerating..
for many children, especially the younger ones, blood equals pain equals ugly/nasty stuff...whereas firebending is cool
this may be an oversimplification, but I understand if the authors don't want to go there just to avoid complications, criticism, scaring off children.. or worse, concerned parents..many children I know appreciate a little gore and a bloodied nose more than I do..

Then--if this was the case--they should not have brought up the whole thing in the first place. If there are restrictions on what you can do, you should not try to tackle things that you can't properly do within those restrictions. It's similar to the issue with the special effects in Birdemic. Despite not having the budget to have bird attacks that look at least slightly plausible, they decided to go forward and try to make a film that involves bird attacks, and as a result we got some of the most laughably bad special effects ever.

Your analogy is wrong. We're not talking about Gun vs. Knife, we're talking about Cutting Food With Knife vs. Cutting Person With Knife.

My analogy is not wrong. We are absolutely talking about Gun vs. Knife. The claim was that bloodbending is bad compared to other bending techniques because it (allegedly) can't be used for non-harmful purposes, whereas general waterbending can be used for things other than just harming people.

Now, if you were saying "well, harming someone with bloodbending is bad because it's harming them, and harmful uses of waterbending or any other bending in general is bad also, but non-harmful uses of waterbending are fine" that's one matter. But if the claim is "bloodbending is bad because it's harmful" then you must logically apply that notion to every other harmful usage of waterbending. And the other bendings. And everything else, for that matter.

The argument appears to be "sure, regular waterbending can be used to make icicles to pierce people or making the water really sharp to cut people, but it also can be used for things like healing or regular utility, whereas bloodbending can't, so therefore things like killing people with icicles is okay but killing people with bloodbending is not (assuming killing them with it is even possible)." And that fits perfectly in with my analogy.

Bending is a tool, not just a weapon. You can use a hammer to build a birdhouse, but you can also use it to cave in someone's skull. And last I checked, caving in someone's skull without provocation is bad.

Considering at no point was the discussion about using bloodbending or regular attacking bending without provocation, that's a flawed analogy.

[John Cribati]

My analogy is not wrong. We are absolutely talking about Gun vs. Knife. The claim was that bloodbending is bad compared to other bending techniques because it (allegedly) can't be used for non-harmful purposes, whereas general waterbending can be used for things other than just harming people.

Now, if you were saying "well, harming someone with bloodbending is bad because it's harming them, and harmful uses of waterbending or any other bending in general is bad also, but non-harmful uses of waterbending are fine" that's one matter. But if the claim is "bloodbending is bad because it's harmful" then you must logically apply that notion to every other harmful usage of waterbending. And the other bendings. And everything else, for that matter

Your analogy is wrong in that a gun is not a kind of knife, but Bloodbending is a kind of Waterbending. Bloodbending as portrayed in the show is a harmful, evil use of Waterbending. Can it be used for non-evil purposes? Sure, but none that can't be easily (and more often) replicated by regular waterbending.

[CoffeeIncluded]

Toph left them there with no way out and there was no indication whatsoever that anyone was going to show up and rescue them and at no point afterwards was there any implication or indication that they were. Even if someone did by chance, that clearly wasn't something Toph was banking on. She left them there essentially to starve to death, and this was more or less played for laughs. But temporarily taking control of someone's body is portrayed as a really serious manner. There's a major dissonance there.

If I remember that scene correctly, Toph left them in the middle of a road not far from Ba Sing Se. They wouldn't have had to wait more than a couple of days, tops, before someone found them and helped get them out. Or they could have earthbended themselves out by wedging rocks into the gaps on the top and bottom of the front of the box (since Toph didn't close it tightly) and use those rocks as crowbars to pry the front open. It would just take several hours and Toph was long gone by then.

[lord_khaine]

Actualy, as i recall it it Toph left them in a cart heading towards BSS, i dont see where the "left them to starve thing" is comming from?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Actualy, as i recall it it Toph left them in a cart heading towards BSS, i dont see where the "left them to starve thing" is comming from?

Er, that's not what happened. They were driving a cart, Toph escaped, the two guys, who were also the drivers, stopped to investigate, and she bent the cage back together. End of story. And they were heading away from BSS.

[John Cribati]

Er, that's not what happened. They were driving a cart, Toph escaped, the two guys, who were also the drivers, stopped to investigate, and she bent the cage back together. End of story. And they were heading away from BSS.

On a road. Where people travel. To/from the single most populous city in the Earth Kingdom, if not the world. As said above, three days, tops.

[Partysan]

The funny thing with me and Lord Seth's critiques of A:TLA is that I agree with almost everything he says, I'm just bothered less by it than he is.
Here as well I mostly agree with him as well, save one thing: with bloodbending you can - and that has been tried on screen - make someone kill their loved ones while fully conscious yet unable to resist. That is pretty vile.
Now we should keep in mind that almost every kind of bending has pretty cruel applications if you think it through, but it seems to me that in western culture there is this sentiment that taking away a person's free will is somehow worse than killing them - I do not neccessarily agree with that, but it's definitely out there. This is probably one reason why bloodbending is seen as inherently evil.
While I personally think that it is indeed a valuable tool for restraining benders without harm and danger, what Katara has seen done by it, namely Aang and Sokka trying to slice up the other's guts in horribly warped movements while helplessly screaming they don't want to, is enough reason for her personally to want to forget about ever knowing about that power. For her personally mind you, it makes perfect sense. My opinion at least.

[Seerow]

On a road. Where people travel. To/from the single most populous city in the Earth Kingdom, if not the world. As said above, three days, tops.

3 days isn't long enough to die from dehydration, especially given the circumstance of being trapped in a box in what seems to be the middle of summer?

It may not have been a guaranteed death sentence, but it sure seems like a pretty likely one.

[Knaight]

3 days isn't long enough to die from dehydration, especially given the circumstance of being trapped in a box in what seems to be the middle of summer?

It may not have been a guaranteed death sentence, but it sure seems like a pretty likely one.

3 days seems like a pretty extreme case. I'd expect 3 hours to be closer to likely. With that said, there is the question of air.

[dehro]

As Psyren has pointed out, this is blatant speculation. There is no basis for this in show at any point that I know of. We know that bloodbending involves controlling people's movements, and we are never given any indication that I know of that it is anything more than that.
I seem to remember that what they say is that it is done by controlling the blood flow, on account of it being basically water plus stuff. we have seen how even the lamest waterbender knows how to turn water in ice..that's a blood clot and a burst vein right there, if you ask me.
A war has been going on for a century. It is not unreasonable to believe that a lot of people have died. This is even alluded to onscreen in the opening of the second season, when the general guy points to the people who are injured and mentions they're the lucky ones.
I know..and Iroh lost a son in it..yes..but all of that..as much as possible of it, was off screen, which was kinda my point
Which we are told based on...um...er...oh wait, it doesn't. We're just told it is.
which is sustained by the fact that we only see bad applications of it?
stopping a bloodbender through bloodbending doesn't count as good application..otherwise threatening a nuclear power with a bigger nuclear bomb would also be a good thing, and we all know that nuclear bombs are bad news allround
Which is exactly part of the problem. It treats it as this oh-so-horrible thing despite it not being such a thing even on screen.
being forced to attempt to kill my best friends isn't a bad thing? it reminds me of a certain panel of oots involving tentacles and a 3headed creature..

By the way, I'm not sure how the ability to make pointed icicles and throw them at people has applications any better than bloodbending...
again? you seem to be missing the point.. I am not saying using other bending elements in combat is good or better than using bloodbending..I'm saying that bending water is used in sailing, is used extensively in healing, is used in farming etc etc.. earthbending is used in building, transportation, crafting of all sorts of equipment.. firebending is used for cooking, heating, a source of steampower.. airbending..well.. only aang did that and we all know that he did his best not to hurt anyone... we see these things on screen constantly.. bloodbending is presented from the get go as a negative thing and only negative things are done with it. there IS a difference that way.

"It's a kid's show" is trotted out too much as an excuse for bad writing. Yes, there are restrictions on what you can do on a kid's show. But that's why people who write for them should be mindful of them and not try to write stories that don't work right in those restrictions.

And let's suppose the case is "well, they couldn't show something as violent as blood bursting" (rather than it quite possibly have been their intention that just the controlling alone was what was so bad about it). In that case, establish that things can go really really wrong if you're not really really careful with bloodbending. You don't need to graphically illustrate it to do so. You don't even need to be really specific about it. But as this idea is never established, never indicated or implied, and in fact seems to run contrary to how bloodbending is demonstrated (as Psyren has pointed out), attempting to advance it is just blatant speculation without any actual basis.

Then--if this was the case--they should not have brought up the whole thing in the first place. If there are restrictions on what you can do, you should not try to tackle things that you can't properly do within those restrictions. It's similar to the issue with the special effects in Birdemic. Despite not having the budget to have bird attacks that look at least slightly plausible, they decided to go forward and try to make a film that involves bird attacks, and as a result we got some of the most laughably bad special effects ever.
I agree that they could have done a better job of it, or just leave it alone and not mention bloodbending at all. that said, they used bloodbending as something that "regular bending performed by aang" couldn't solve or wasn't quite strong enough against..the same way they did with sparky boom boom man..another.. well.. failure, really. this one however I feel has been handled better than combustion man.
personal taste, I suppose

aren't you guys seriously overthinking the issue of the 2 boxed in guys?

[John Cribati]

3 days isn't long enough to die from dehydration, especially given the circumstance of being trapped in a box in what seems to be the middle of summer?

It may not have been a guaranteed death sentence, but it sure seems like a pretty likely one.

Okay, three days in a box might kill someone in the real world, but... have you noticed that everyone in Airbender is kind of... badass? Just, like, the whole world. Random old guys fight bears, your average faceless mook can run up walls, people can jump hella high, and Zuko could come out of an exploding ship looking like he was only in a rather nasty bar fight. And don't tell me it was all the fire shield, because it came up at the very last second. He still would have had to deal with the concussive force of the explosion.

[Lord Seth]

Your analogy is wrong in that a gun is not a kind of knife, but Bloodbending is a kind of Waterbending.

Then let's make an analogy that's more acceptable.

Waterbending can do some utility things and some healing things, but is also capable of all sorts of offensive attacks, which are not portrayed as being anything particularly dark or evil (unlike bloodbending, which is portrayed as such). So let's take the knife. You can do some utility things with knives like cut food. You can also use one as a weapon. However, you can use it in different ways as a weapon. For example, you can use it to slice someone's leg or you can use it to slice someone's arm. What the show seems to be saying is that one of those (leg or arm) is unacceptable, whereas the other is what the good guys do an awful lot and is fine. In other words, the argument is like "cutting someone in the arm is horrible! But knives can be used for other things, so cutting someone in the leg is okay." If the issue is that it's harmful, then that should apply to all harmful ways it can be used.

While I personally think that it is indeed a valuable tool for restraining benders without harm and danger, what Katara has seen done by it, namely Aang and Sokka trying to slice up the other's guts in horribly warped movements while helplessly screaming they don't want to, is enough reason for her personally to want to forget about ever knowing about that power. For her personally mind you, it makes perfect sense. My opinion at least.

The issue I have is not that whether it makes sense to Katara or not, but the fact that it seems fairly obvious that's how we're supposed to see it. The lone advocate for bloodbending is a crazy woman who's the villain. No character or anyone else offers any counterpoints at any time.

Next up: Dehro, don't reply to me IN the quote, that makes it harder to read and it also means I have to manually quote your message via copy/paste. Anyway...

I seem to remember that what they say is that it is done by controlling the blood flow, on account of it being basically water plus stuff. we have seen how even the lamest waterbender knows how to turn water in ice..that's a blood clot and a burst vein right there, if you ask me.

Well, yes, but we're really given no indication in show this could happen. Hama or whatever her name never does it, and she certainly seems to have no reason to not do so. But even if that is true...so? It can kill people? So can a lot of things in Avatar!

being forced to attempt to kill my best friends isn't a bad thing? it reminds me of a certain panel of oots involving tentacles and a 3headed creature..

That is, at most, a particular use of bloodbending. If you're going to claim "well bloodbending could be used for this, and that's evil, so the whole thing is rotten" then honestly you can logically extend that to waterbending as a whole. If bloodbending is evil because it's possible to use it in an evil way...then shouldn't waterbending be evil for that reason, because you can use it in such a way through bloodbending?

again? you seem to be missing the point.. I am not saying using other bending elements in combat is good or better than using bloodbending..

None of them can incapacitate your opponent as quickly or as efficiently.

I'm saying that bending water is used in sailing, is used extensively in healing, is used in farming etc etc.. earthbending is used in building, transportation, crafting of all sorts of equipment.. firebending is used for cooking, heating, a source of steampower.. airbending..well.. only aang did that and we all know that he did his best not to hurt anyone... we see these things on screen constantly.. bloodbending is presented from the get go as a negative thing and only negative things are done with it. there IS a difference that way.

No, the issue is that bloodbending, from what we can tell, only has offensive purposes. But even if it can only harm...the issue is that so many other subsets of waterbending or anythingbending can only be used that way, but they don't get portrayed as the bad thing. Heck, from what we've seen of it, what way can energybending be used that isn't quite frankly a violation of the person you're using it on?

[John Cribati]

The lone advocate for bloodbending is a crazy woman who's the villain. No character or anyone else offers any counterpoints at any time.

Which characters would be available to make a counterpoint?

Katara? The only other person in the world who knew how to bloodbend? She saw all the evil that had been performed using bloodbending (Hama's petty revenge), she almost had to watch her brother kill her (admittedly rather poorly written) love interest. And the next time the opportunity to use it came up, it was for the purpose of her own revenge, against the wrong person. I wouldn't be surprised if she took the secret to her grave after that fiasco.
Sokka or Aang? You mean the ones who actually had their bodies move due to an outside force that almost forced one to kill the other?
Or maybe Toph, who... probably doesn't give a flying crap about any kind of bending that's not Earthbending anyway?

Sure, they could probably all come up with something good to say about it, if they hadn't all (Except Toph) been witness to the kind of evil that it could do. That's like Aang, after getting struck and killed by lightning, talking to Zuko about trying to find a peaceful, nonviolent application for it.

[Devonix]

On a road. Where people travel. To/from the single most populous city in the Earth Kingdom, if not the world. As said above, three days, tops.

Quite right it was a heavily traveled road in the middle of the day. Why would you think no one saw them, it wasn't even the side of the road it was the middle of the road.

[Lord Seth]

Which characters would be available to make a counterpoint?

I'm talking about it more from an out of universe perspective. I feel the show just stacks the deck so far against bloodbending that it never bothers to point out the counterpoints to the conclusions apparently reached on it.

But let's set that aside; that's not even my biggest problem with bloodbending. My problem is that bloodbending had a lot of potential. After that episode, there could've been a story about Katara being torn between using an ability that's so useful (granted, only useful at particular times...but still, the thing's really powerful when you can and it's a great weapon to have on your side) and the trauma of what she witnessed with it. Then she could realize that sure, Hama was a nut and used it for pretty diabolical purposes, but that doesn't mean she can't use it for less, well, diabolical purposes. That could've been an interesting story!

Or you could go with the whole "bloodbending is bad" thing and do a story with that idea. Let's face it, even if it is usable only at particular times, it's still a tremendously useful and powerful ability. The ability might singlehandedly be something that could get you in and out of a fortress filled with enemies if there was something you needed there (as it allows you to swiftly incapacitate them while you're there...okay, sure, you might not have enough range to hit everyone, but you certainly could hit any guards with it for long enough to get through). And that's just an example I came up with off the top of my head. So, what if a side effect of using it was that it did mess up your mind? That creates the opposite struggle, between using it to achieve your goals more easily but the danger of it turning you into someone like Hama. Granted, you'd have to avoid the trap of it all turning into some cheesy drug allegory, but that could be a really interesting idea.

Or just throw out the whole issue and just have bloodbending be a new technique introduced and used at various points in the series to progress the plot in the same way Aang learning water/earth/firebending was. Or something else entirely! Just something...anything...to make it feel like there was a real point to it all other than to kill an episode.

There's just so many directions they could've gone with bloodbending, but instead they go for "okay, it's really really bad so let's forget about it completely after this episode outside of one brief usage that could've been cut out." So in the end it all just feels like wasted potential, particularly considering this could've been a way to give Katara something to do outside of filler episodes. To me, at least, she felt really immaterial in season 3...

[dehro]

could the episode have been left out? probabily yes, even though it did help as a "reminder" of the gaang's condition of refugees and katara's status as last waterbender of her tribe.. also, she supposedly learned a few new tricks bloodbending aside...so it was useful for her personal growth.
I didn't watch the show in it's original airing dates on account of being on the wrong continent and all.. so for all I know they kinda went the dark path because it was halloween or somesuch. then again, maybe it was just a not well thought out plot.
all that aside, yes, it could have been left out.

does bloodbending have a lot of potential plotwise? hell yeah it does!
I don't think anybody disagreed with that. the controversy was more about ignoring/disagreeing on/not seeing the fact that bloodbending, as presented in the show, which carries the last word anyway, was seen as bad juju.. in favour of looking (offscreen and irl) for positive sides to it.
nobody denies that it would have been good source for further sub-plots.

in fact, for all we know, bloodbending might very well have a part to play in the plot of the upcoming show.
who knows..with enough fanbased lobbying the authors might just decide to have it make a comeback and round it off better.

also... Lord Seth.. taking the subsection and applying the principle to the larger bending art, specifically waterbending... isn't that forcing the issue? we're debating the applications of the subset, not it's value within the bigger picture of waterbending.
in the same vein we could say that making fire-daggers and ice-arrows is a bad thing..yes of course it is.. the issue here is that so far, in show, we haven't seen a single positive application of bloodbending.. saving lives by taking prisoners without harming them doesn't really mean much when you shouldn't be taking prisoners..and it still is a very intrusive practice.
why aren't fire-daggers and ice-arrows branded as evil? because they're used by good and bad characters and are "common tools of the trade of war"..not exceptional and therefore carrying lesser "moral gravitas".
a bit like using rifles and anti-tank explosives as opposed to using nerve gas.
or maybe it's poor writing and the authors just didn't think of it.

as for energy bending...if I am correct, the only ones to use it are Azula and Ozai..not exactly do-gooders..
Iroh could have, and chose not to..not even at Ba Sing Se where it might have come in handy... and went as far as to create a way to neutralize energy-bending.
So yeah, we could say that the subset of energy-bending shares "evil qualities" with bloodbending. it's a moot point though

[lord_khaine]

3 days seems like a pretty extreme case. I'd expect 3 hours to be closer to likely. With that said, there is the question of air.

Air would be the last of their problems, the cage were designed to transport living cargo, and had air-holes even before Toph mashed it up.

[Lord Seth]

could the episode have been left out? probabily yes, even though it did help as a "reminder" of the gaang's condition of refugees and katara's status as last waterbender of her tribe.. also, she supposedly learned a few new tricks bloodbending aside...so it was useful for her personal growth.

Which she never used anyway.

in fact, for all we know, bloodbending might very well have a part to play in the plot of the upcoming show.

A show they didn't know they would be getting until years afterwards.

also... Lord Seth.. taking the subsection and applying the principle to the larger bending art, specifically waterbending... isn't that forcing the issue? we're debating the applications of the subset, not it's value within the bigger picture of waterbending.

No, not really. If the argument is "bloodbending can be used in really awful ways, so it's really awful" then by extension bloodbending, as a way of using waterbending, must make waterbending awful (to say nothing of all the other quite nasty ways I can think of using waterbending in general).

the issue here is that so far, in show, we haven't seen a single positive application of bloodbending..

It can be used to control and defeat your enemies! Assuming your enemies are the bad guys, that's a good usage right there!

saving lives by taking prisoners without harming them doesn't really mean much when you shouldn't be taking prisoners

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

as for energy bending...if I am correct, the only ones to use it are Azula and Ozai..not exactly do-gooders..
Iroh could have, and chose not to..not even at Ba Sing Se where it might have come in handy... and went as far as to create a way to neutralize energy-bending.
So yeah, we could say that the subset of energy-bending shares "evil qualities" with bloodbending. it's a moot point though

You're thinking of lightning (which I don't see as particularly evil either...it's a weapon that can be used for good or evil). I was referring to energybending, which only Aang has ever used on the show.

[GloatingSwine]

You're thinking of lightning (which I don't see as particularly evil either...it's a weapon that can be used for good or evil). I was referring to energybending, which only Aang has ever used on the show.

Only Aang used it on other people.

Manipulating one's own "energy" is what Guru Pathik was all about way back in book two. (Yeah, it's probably not a coincidence that the Lion Turtle touches Aang at two chakra points)

[Seerow]

Only Aang used it on other people.

Manipulating one's own "energy" is what Guru Pathik was all about way back in book two. (Yeah, it's probably not a coincidence that the Lion Turtle touches Aang at two chakra points)

It would be REALLY interesting if Legend of Korra explored energy bending further. The thing with Pathik described each of the chakras and how to open them, and apparently energy bending with that particular combination of chakras removes someone's bending potential.... what would other chakras potentially do? Could you perhaps unlock the ability to bend for a non-bender? (Potentially a arc-ending revelation since the big story here is about the anti-bender group)