Jump to content

What Edelgard means to me…


Recommended Posts

I cannot help but to regard Edelgard as a shining beacon of light in the darkness and hope among hopelessness. While many people see a villain, I see a girl giving her all for the sake of a better future. She always puts her own personal desires second to what she thinks is the greater good, while she does start a war she doesn't even hesitate to give her own life, if that means fewer people would die when she is defeated. That level of dedication is truly admirable. Just how much she is burdened by all the bloodshed and the guilt she seems to be feeling. As a consequence, that she does feel regret and isn't enjoying any of it. Speaks volumes about her character. She constantly speaks of how the blood that flows at her feet is a burden. The way she talks about it makes it clear that she takes full responsibility for every casualty. It Edelgard is a villain. She is the most noble villain I have ever encountered, the contrast between her true good nature and the things she feels she has to do for the greater good makes are quite tragic and the level of sympathy I feel for her as a consequence is indescribable.

I originally discovered three houses during a period I struggled with major anxiety and depression, it caught my interest quite fast and served as a distraction from my issues. Edelgard as a character was especially important to me and for one reason or another she gave me hope. Where none existed before. I am not quite sure why this is but Edelgard gave me a sense of motivation, she showed me how important it is to stand up for what you believe in. I think this is because all the trauma she suffered, and instead of becoming obsessed with revenge against the person responsible for her suffering, she looked towards the system that allowed this to happen and trauma motivated her to make sure what happened to her couldn't happen to anyone else ever again. It is very inspiring to see someone taking experiences that would break the spirit of almost anyone and use it as a drive to change the world for the better. I am still dealing with my mental issues, but words cannot describe just how much Edelgard has helped me through it. 

Do anyone feel the way I do about this character? Is there any other character from this game that has had a major impact in your life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 236
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

To me, Edelgard is an incredible representation of what it means to be human. 

No, she is not some fantasy heroic human that knows the absolute best of what people needs. Hell, she doesn't make the absolute best decisions. But she does what she BELIEVES is right. And that's more human than anything there is. You fight and you strive for what you believe is right. Was Edelgard's answer the true and best answer? Maybe, maybe not. We won't know, because what happened happened. 

Maybe she did make a mistake, and there might very well have been another way.

But simply put, she couldn't see another way. 

We humans aren't omniscient. We don't know everything. We actually won't ever have all the answers no matter how hard we look, and then time comes when we have to make a decision. And that's when we make a choice. Edelgard knew that starting a war and working with the Agarthans would lead to many people suffering. But she believes that at the end of the path, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. And she will make sure that the people will be happy after, and work to ensure that the lives that were lost and sacrificed had not gone to waste. 

Edelgard is no villain. Maybe to some, she is. But not to me. To me, she is the embodiment of someone that does the best that she can with what she has. And that's all us humans can do. 

And I am so glad that there is no such thing as a golden ending in this story, because every ending is a good ending, but no ending is perfect. 

I think that Edelgard is the type of character that Fire Emblem needed to make a true morally grey story, where there were no absolutes. But from my perspective, some people think morally grey means someone that is sympathetic, but 100% objectively in the wrong, which isn't what being morally grey means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

To me, Edelgard is an incredible representation of what it means to be human. 

No, she is not some fantasy heroic human that knows the absolute best of what people needs. Hell, she doesn't make the absolute best decisions. But she does what she BELIEVES is right. And that's more human than anything there is. You fight and you strive for what you believe is right. Was Edelgard's answer the true and best answer? Maybe, maybe not. We won't know, because what happened happened. 

Maybe she did make a mistake, and there might very well have been another way.

But simply put, she couldn't see another way. 

We humans aren't omniscient. We don't know everything. We actually won't ever have all the answers no matter how hard we look, and then time comes when we have to make a decision. And that's when we make a choice. Edelgard knew that starting a war and working with the Agarthans would lead to many people suffering. But she believes that at the end of the path, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. And she will make sure that the people will be happy after, and work to ensure that the lives that were lost and sacrificed had not gone to waste. 

Edelgard is no villain. Maybe to some, she is. But not to me. To me, she is the embodiment of someone that does the best that she can with what she has. And that's all us humans can do. 

And I am so glad that there is no such thing as a golden ending in this story, because every ending is a good ending, but no ending is perfect. 

I think that Edelgard is the type of character that Fire Emblem needed to make a true morally grey story, where there were no absolutes. But from my perspective, some people think morally grey means someone that is sympathetic, but 100% objectively in the wrong, which isn't what being morally grey means.

That is a beautiful way of putting it, Edelgard's humanity is part of what draws me to her. The way I define morally grey is that it is unclear whenever they are in the right or not, which is definitely applicable to this game in general. Edelgard not necessarily being right about everything. Just make her more human, morally speaking. She is selfless and empathetic, but she isn't infallible and can make mistakes in judgement when it comes to what is the best thing to do. I don't think I could do any better than her if I were in her situation, even knowing what I do now. I am still not infallible and I could be mistaken in the most well laid of plans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally think Edelgard is a good character, although there are certainly problems with her writing at points.

Going through both Black Eagles campaigns again, I do think she is a better character as Edelgard than as the Flame Emperor. I just wish we got to see that manifesto.

A lot of the time, however, I sometimes daydream about fulfilling similar results as Edelgard tries to accomplish. Maybe not as extreme, but being a US citizen, I am aware of many of the problems here, and a few ideas on how to reform.

I feel Edelgard is the result of every problem with Fódlan up to that point. The Crest System, how society revolves around it, the Church’s refusal to change anything, and finally Those Who Silther in the Dark. Although, I think her close relation to them weakens her character overall. If they were better, more morally grey villains, I think Edelgard would be even better. Especially if Edelgard had to confront the fact that TWSITD may need to brought down first, alongside other things. But, this game was pretty ambitious already.

My biggest hope for the next nonremake is that the developers cut back on the split routes stuff that started with Fates and stuck to one linear storyline, and approach it more similarly to Three Houses. Maybe even polish that even further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the way the game is morally grey, compared to past FEs that were textbook right/wrong. They tried it with Fates but made the MC so Gary Stu/Mary Sue that everyone in-game bends over for them, and on top of that, they copped out by releasing Revelations as a Golden Route.

Whereas in 3H, everyone is wrong in some way. Edelgard refuses to trust others, too hurt by her past until Byleth reaches out to her in the Holy Tomb, leading her to start a war to destroy the system she sees as wrong. Dmitri is consumed by guilt and regret to the point he experiences delusions of the dead haunting him, and  jumps on the idea that Edelgard is responsible for Duscur despite the conversation they were listening to clearly indicating she disapproved of it. Claude puts on a friendly act, but actually keeps others at arm's length and therefore winds up lacking the allies needed to win, thus relying on Byleth to serve as a beacon of hope. And Rhea is just all-around gray, with her obsession with bringing back Sothis' physical form, her ruthless stamping out any signs of opposition, and her utter belief that only Sothis knows better than her what is best for Fodlan counterbalanced by the fact she really is trying to maintain the peace the continent enjoys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Azure loves his Half Elves said:

I personally think Edelgard is a good character, although there are certainly problems with her writing at points.

Going through both Black Eagles campaigns again, I do think she is a better character as Edelgard than as the Flame Emperor. I just wish we got to see that manifesto.

I agree completely with both of those statements. Edelgard is a great character despite certain problems with her writing. One issue that I have is that the game tries too hard to make her sympathetic in the Crimson Flower route. 

I also agree about the Flame Emperor. The moment she puts on that TWSITD-provided armour, she also wears their terrible writing. Her goals for what she hoped to use the Flame Emperor identity to accomplish should've been clear rather than kept "mysterious", and she should've had more impact on the plot as Flame Emperor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, vanguard333 said:

I agree completely with both of those statements. Edelgard is a great character despite certain problems with her writing. One issue that I have is that the game tries too hard to make her sympathetic in the Crimson Flower route. 

Does it? How does it make her be too sympathetic? She isn't talking about her past during the route. 

Her past is only learned during Part 1, and you have to find that out in supports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Does it? How does it make her be too sympathetic? She isn't talking about her past during the route. 

Her past is only learned during Part 1, and you have to find that out in supports. 

I think vanguard meant the writers tried to shill her, and that was not a good play

 

I don't like Edelgard as a character, I can't support her plans and actions, but she IS a well-written character, and I respect for it, but she is my least favorite lord and character in FE history, but I do understand her and her motives, but that just makes her even more unforgivable, she is well-written character, and a good villain but I can't like her, our ideologies are too different for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, darkblade2814 said:

I think vanguard meant the writers tried to shill her, and that was not a good play

I feel that is an inaccurate thing to say. To make her too sympathetic is to constantly remind us of her suffering and use that as an excuse. Except Edelgard never uses her past as an excuse or use it to defend her actions. It explains her motivations, but she doesn't ever try to excuse herself from her actions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i personally really hate what she does, and i can't see myself ever changing my mind on this

however, for me, this hate i feel towards her is due to her very good writing, in fact i can't think of another non-Fates FE character which makes me feel so damn disgusted (in a good way) when appearing on screen

anyway, she'll always hold a special place in my heart, because she's a perfect example of what i do not intend to be or do in my life (presumptuous, full of myself, presuming i know what is best for others, and forcing my beliefs on who's weaker than me)

 

putting aside her most controversial aspects (so basically 80% of her whole character), she's a nice cute girl with a rather likabe personality
were she a real person, i'd honestly try and get to know her, so that i can see how she actually is behind her composed demeanor

 

also, i find it so hilarious that the most human characters in the whole series, namely Makalov and Brom, are left in the dust, or even harshly hated and criticized in Makalov's case
is being a cute anime girl really that big of a deal for people? i mean both Makalov and Brom are appreciable their own way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I, myself am a big fan of Edelgard but the thing I really like is that people either love her or hate her and there rarely seems to be an inbetween.

And I think that just goes to show how well she was written. Discussions about her fly around everywhere, where for other characters, there is barely any. Well written characters will always have people talking, no matter what side they are on and I think that just goes to show stuff about the quality of Three Houses in general.

Also, her crush on the professor is really endearing when she's not busy wagering war.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Does it? How does it make her be too sympathetic? She isn't talking about her past during the route. 

I didn't say they made her "too sympathetic"; I said they tried too hard to make her sympathetic. Those are two very different things. Speaking as an aspiring writer, going out of your way to write a character to be sympathetic will often backfire. 

One character-writing tool I once learned is that great characters should be written to be dimensional, fascinating, compelling, and/or believable. Things like sympathetic, likeable, and relatable are not bad on their own, but when one tries to write a character to be those things, they are often misused, and that can result in poor storytelling. 

Edelgard easily meets those four categories: she's dimensional and fascinating, her conviction makes her compelling, and she's believable. So, I consider her a great character. However, I do feel that certain moments in part 2 that make it seem like the writers went out of their way to make her sympathetic. Stuff like her locking herself in her room for a month over a portrait, when she could destroy it or ask Bernadetta for help, and that's just one example.

 

Does that make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

I didn't say they made her "too sympathetic"; I said they tried too hard to make her sympathetic. Those are two very different things. Speaking as an aspiring writer, going out of your way to write a character to be sympathetic will often backfire. 

One character-writing tool I once learned is that great characters should be written to be dimensional, fascinating, compelling, and/or believable. Things like sympathetic, likeable, and relatable are not bad on their own, but when one tries to write a character to be those things, they are often misused, and that can result in poor storytelling. 

Edelgard easily meets those four categories: she's dimensional and fascinating, her conviction makes her compelling, and she's believable. So, I consider her a great character. However, I do feel that certain moments in part 2 that make it seem like the writers went out of their way to make her sympathetic. Stuff like her locking herself in her room for a month over a portrait, when she could destroy it or ask Bernadetta for help, and that's just one example.

 

Does that make sense?

Okay, so you mean during those events during Part 2. 

Honest, I never felt they were forced or so much of a problem, but rather a great way to have moments of calmness when the horrors of war can be held back for a time and we get humanizing traits. Times when characters can just be goofy or silly are moments are needed, both for a story, and even in reality, where people sometimes like to crack jokes or be comedic to get the serious air away for a while. 

Cause honestly, if all you have is just serious moments, you forget that they are humans that want to have a good time and just enjoy themselves. 

Edelgard admits that she'd rather just run away from her duties and just gorge on sweets. 

I do feel that the story honestly should have benefitted from having her suffering be said in the main story. 

Cause quite a lot of people overlook, ignore, or don't bother giving much thought to the circumstances of the Insurrection of the Seven. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, omegaxis1 said:

Okay, so you mean during those events during Part 2. 

Honest, I never felt they were forced or so much of a problem, but rather a great way to have moments of calmness when the horrors of war can be held back for a time and we get humanizing traits. Times when characters can just be goofy or silly are moments are needed, both for a story, and even in reality, where people sometimes like to crack jokes or be comedic to get the serious air away for a while. 

Cause honestly, if all you have is just serious moments, you forget that they are humans that want to have a good time and just enjoy themselves. 

Edelgard admits that she'd rather just run away from her duties and just gorge on sweets.  

Oh; don't get me wrong; I like moments of levity, and I liked some of the ones in Crimson Flower. Edelgard mimicking Hubert was something I particularly enjoyed. I'm just saying that certain moments did feel a bit forced. What did you think of that character-writing tool by the way?

 

4 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

I do feel that the story honestly should have benefitted from having her suffering be said in the main story. 

Cause quite a lot of people overlook, ignore, or don't bother giving much thought to the circumstances of the Insurrection of the Seven. 

I could see that. I mean; we get bits of information about the Tragedy of Duscur and the conflicts between Fodlan and Almyra in routes outside Blue Lions and Golden Deer respectively; it would make sense to hear the same amount for the Insurrection of the Seven in non-Black Eagles routes, if not perhaps a bit more because of how important Edelgard still is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vanguard333 said:

Oh; don't get me wrong; I like moments of levity, and I liked some of the ones in Crimson Flower. Edelgard mimicking Hubert was something I particularly enjoyed. I'm just saying that certain moments did feel a bit forced. What did you think of that character-writing tool by the way?

 

As someone that also wants to get better at writing stories, I very much do understand the character writing tools you mentioned. And I agree that some parts did feel forced. I felt that Part 1 handled a lot of Edelgard's humanizing moments the best. 

2 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

I could see that. I mean; we get bits of information about the Tragedy of Duscur and the conflicts between Fodlan and Almyra in routes outside Blue Lions and Golden Deer respectively; it would make sense to hear the same amount for the Insurrection of the Seven in non-Black Eagles routes, if not perhaps a bit more because of how important Edelgard still is. 

Yeah. Cause frankly, how is it possible for no one to talk about the fact that Edelgard's siblings, many of them older than her, all ended being dead? How does none of the other nobles in the class or such mention this? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

As someone that also wants to get better at writing stories, I very much do understand the character writing tools you mentioned. And I agree that some parts did feel forced. I felt that Part 1 handled a lot of Edelgard's humanizing moments the best. 

I'm an aspiring writer as well, and I'm currently writing my own medieval-fantasy war novel. So, I'm trying to learn all the different writing tools I can.

34 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

Yeah. Cause frankly, how is it possible for no one to talk about the fact that Edelgard's siblings, many of them older than her, all ended being dead? How does none of the other nobles in the class or such mention this? 

Yeah; that is weird. Almost any explanation would work, such as the official story being that they died from a plague that spread across the royal family, or something like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

Edelgard easily meets those four categories: she's dimensional and fascinating, her conviction makes her compelling, and she's believable. So, I consider her a great character. However, I do feel that certain moments in part 2 that make it seem like the writers went out of their way to make her sympathetic. Stuff like her locking herself in her room for a month over a portrait, when she could destroy it or ask Bernadetta for help, and that's just one example.

Those moments aren’t necessarily there to draw sympathy as they are to make her look cute cause there is a difference. Sympathy implies that I feel sorry for her in some capacity which I do but that’s not what that moment is really there for. In a way it’s like Sumia’s tripping(never thought you’d see that comparison). It’s there because it’s cute and endearing. It contrasts with her usual stern demeanor which humanizes her a little bit which is something I appreciate. It’s something you see a lot with female anime characters. They’re usually given some kind of cute little quirk that somewhat contrasts with their usual demeanor in order to make them come off as more cute(like Bernadetta’s love of Carnivorous plants).

 

56 minutes ago, vanguard333 said:

One character-writing tool I once learned is that great characters should be written to be dimensional, fascinating, compelling, and/or believable. Things like sympathetic, likeable, and relatable are not bad on their own, but when one tries to write a character to be those things, they are often misused, and that can result in poor storytelling. 

As an aspiring writer myself, the one thing I’ve learned about what makes good character writing is that a good character is simply an understandable one. No more to it than that really. If you can’t understand a character or why they are the way they are then you have a bad character. We can talk about nuance, layers, character dimensions, and how compelling they are all day but when you get right down to it, all of that doesn’t really mean anything if you can’t understand them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

As an aspiring writer myself, the one thing I’ve learned about what makes good character writing is that a good character is simply an understandable one. No more to it than that really. If you can’t understand a character or why they are the way they are then you have a bad character. We can talk about nuance, layers, character dimensions, and how compelling they are all day but when you get right down to it, all of that doesn’t really mean anything if you can’t understand them.

A perfect example of this is Kayaba Akihiko from Sword Art Online. 

Literally asks him why he trapped 10,000 people into a game where it became a real life and death situation, ultimately resulting in the death of over 2,000 people, and he says:

"It's been so long, I've forgotten the reason."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

A perfect example of this is Kayaba Akihiko from Sword Art Online. 

Literally asks him why he trapped 10,000 people into a game where it became a real life and death situation, ultimately resulting in the death of over 2,000 people, and he says:

"It's been so long, I've forgotten the reason."

Or TWSITD. We cannot understand them as much because we lack a reason for why they do what they do aside from being among those god-complex humans with whom Sothis fought a long time ago (as mentioned in SS and VW).

It is also not understandable why they got pretty sidelined, considering that they are one of the most important factions in Fódlan’s history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Azure loves his Half Elves said:

Or TWSITD. We cannot understand them as much because we lack a reason for why they do what they do aside from being among those god-complex humans with whom Sothis fought a long time ago (as mentioned in SS and VW).

It is also not understandable why they got pretty sidelined, considering that they are one of the most important factions in Fódlan’s history.

 

15 minutes ago, omegaxis1 said:

A perfect example of this is Kayaba Akihiko from Sword Art Online. 

Literally asks him why he trapped 10,000 people into a game where it became a real life and death situation, ultimately resulting in the death of over 2,000 people, and he says:

"It's been so long, I've forgotten the reason."

It's funny that you two mention villains cause villains in a way are kind of the exception the rule(well at least somewhat). Cause like most pure evil villains like Grima and such don't really need much of a reason to do what they do beyond just the fact that humans suck or whatever. Then again those kinds of villains aren't really characters as they are forces of nature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally kind of dislike Edelgard, because extremist things just don't go well. I generally view her as a kind of terrorist/revolutionairy. She's not poorly written, I just dislike some of her actions.

And where's DImitri X Edekgard SMH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Benice said:

I personally kind of dislike Edelgard, because extremist things just don't go well. I generally view her as a kind of terrorist/revolutionairy. She's not poorly written, I just dislike some of her actions.

The entire point of revolution is that you are overall rebels and can even be labeled as terrorists. You fight against the order of society for what you believe is a better future, inadvertently leading to a war and such.

America's entire War of Independence is people rebelling against the rule of the British. The reason they are accepted is cause they won. 

An absolute law that remains upheld to this day:

"History is decided by the victors."

Let's consider the entire case of how Faerghus and the Alliance were formed.

Faerghus rebelled. So would that not make Faerghus the terrorists and extremists? 

Or how about how the Alliance was formed where there were guys that just didn't want to have Faerghus rule over them?

If Edelgard loses the war, she's the villain in history. If she wins, she's the hero in history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, omegaxis1 said:

The entire point of revolution is that you are overall rebels and can even be labeled as terrorists. You fight against the order of society for what you believe is a better future, inadvertently leading to a war and such.

America's entire War of Independence is people rebelling against the rule of the British. The reason they are accepted is cause they won. 

An absolute law that remains upheld to this day:

"History is decided by the victors."

Let's consider the entire case of how Faerghus and the Alliance were formed.

Faerghus rebelled. So would that not make Faerghus the terrorists and extremists? 

Or how about how the Alliance was formed where there were guys that just didn't want to have Faerghus rule over them?

If Edelgard loses the war, she's the villain in history. If she wins, she's the hero in history.

Even though the spaniards won the war against the aztecs, I don't condone their actions at all, and for the most part, history doesn't either. War and violence in general just kinda suck, though.

Edelgard believes that it's worth doing horrible things to get the job done; I think that fighting should always be avoided. We have different views on conflicts, that's why I dislike her. I don't HATE her, she's just not my type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Benice said:

Even though the spaniards won the war against the aztecs, I don't condone their actions at all, and for the most part, history doesn't either. War and violence in general just kinda suck, though.

Edelgard believes that it's worth doing horrible things to get the job done; I think that fighting should always be avoided. We have different views on conflicts, that's why I dislike her. I don't HATE her, she's just not my type.

Yeah, some don't. But that does not change that there are plenty of wars where many horrible things happen and the winners are praised for it. 

Edelgard believes that this is the only way, not that it's worth it. If anything, for it to be worth it, Edelgard has to make the lives lost have meaning. Hence why she dedicates her life to making her vision a reality and she ultimately does succeed in her endings.

The overall problem is that she knows things that simply cannot be spoken.

Edelgard knows that Rhea is a dragon that's lived for over a thousand years leading the Church. Is Rhea gonna admit it? Obviously not. 

That's the thing I said above. We work with things that we have and make decisions. And what we know that is not easy to swallow is not something that you can start talking to others, even those you care about. It's easy to talk that there could have been a better way, but as a human, how do one act with information that simply can't be used easily? In the end, saying that there could have been a way is just that, a say. All talk. 

And if you can't prove it, which 3H doesn't, then you only can accept that war is a necessary action. As I said, the very Independence War is because people are unwilling to really open up and talk, and instead we have a war being waged cause people are people. 

It's horrible.

But people aren't some hive mind that all share their thoughts. So the concept of people all coming together and make a decision to change is idealistic, but not generally realistic. Even democracy is just a "peaceful" method of trying to force one's ideals onto others. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...