Annotated 46-16
Harky and Penk’s display of respect for each other continues here. It’s very deliberate that Harky is the one to praise “the young and their new ideas” and Penk speaks of “the elders and their hard-won wisdom,” not the other way around. Harky does wander off script a little bit in the penultimate panel…he can’t quite resist taking one last potshot at those filthy humans…but Penk smooths things right back out.
Let me just belabor the point a little. While their differences are irreconcilable, both wish to make sure that trolls remain strong, no matter who wins. Harky may think an alliance with any humans is a grievous error, but a troll people half-allied with humans and half split off in conflict with their brothers would be even worse off, in his view, than a people united in that mistake. Penk believes in a new destiny for trollkind, but he’d likewise rather have a people united under Harky as they were before than a civil strife that could cost them the war. And the same applies on a grander scale: the other members of the coalition that Harky has formed can’t afford disunity in the middle of their war either. Whoever stands in the arena after this fight must be able to command all, without any competition from a dead troll’s memory.
In short, while Harky and Penk are willing to risk everything to lead on a personal level, neither will risk damaging their nation or their coalition to do so. That’s them. Iver represents (sigh) a different kind of politics.
FB (referencing then-recent events at the Oscars): Although everyone thinks that one of the golden, statuesque figures named on this stage will walk away the winner tonight, Iver smiles as the dusk sun touches his brow. He has prepared a moonlight surprise.
I’m going to get so angry at Iver in a moment, but then get incredibly satisfied with how Gravedust handles him right after.
Iver absolutely deserves to be humiliated in the most embarrassing way possible.
I really like how you handled conflict resolution in accordance with their society, not only here but in general in the story.
Trolls we see here, accepting the primacy of keeping the tribe together and willing to fight to the death over strategy to get a clear answer. The winner will heal rapidly so little risk of a maimed leader.
Gastonia is political, handles conflicts through politics, backstabbing and propaganda.
Sky elfs were everyone is a magic user and likes to debate and discuss, handles conflicts through discussions and eventually referendum. And referendum just dictates the course of the majority, the minority is free to leave.
Wood elfs I see as consensus driven, disliking conflicts, prefers to follow the guidance of the elders (who are in turn constrained through tradition). Probably takes a walk in nature for as long as it takes if they disagree strongly. Syr’nj is an outlier.
Land sharks has another form of consensus. Consensus through yelling, eats each other if it comes down to conflict.
Savasi are hardy, persecuted and in flux. We know that disrobing for a feat of strenght is traditional, but Iver came to power thorugh untraditional means. First shaping a role as dictator of the Savasi (as long as most of his subjects doesn’t get that that is what he is) and trying to create a whole different criteria for leading the world rebellion. But I am getting ahead of the annotations here.
In short cudos. To often are modern conflict resolution – courts, elections – applied where they wouldn’t make sense. Conflict resolution is an act of society and reflects society and you have really used it well to illustrate how different these societies are.
I like Harky. I think he’s ultimately a good person who has been permanently affected by anger and yes, hatred, but a hatred born of real pain and suffering; his own and others’. I think in any other circumstances, he’d allow his mind to be changed, especially by someone trusted and loved like Penk.
But he knows that his cause can’t afford it so he can’t either. A change of mind would require admitting that their way had been wrong. As a political leader with thousands of people following you into deadly conflict, admitting you’ve been wrong would be grievous to morale and would inevitably cause schisms. Their alliance was born and maintained by his zealotry both in battle and in leadership, so in order to keep the ship together, a zealot he needed to remain at the end.
Only by being defeated by Penk would the tribes agree to follow Penk: the only way to change everybody’s mind was by an even greater display of might than Harky was believed to have. Not that Harky sacrificed himself for Penk, he fought for his own vision with all he had and wagered his life on the truthfulness of it. But only defeat and removal of the other would ensure the success of the rebellion. Whether Harky could have ever see eye to eye with Penk is irrelevant. It needed to be done this way.
»A change of mind would require admitting that their way had been wrong. «
Would it? I think Penk made a good argument to Hammerhead when he said that situations change. If the Peacemakers leave Gastonia and want to ally with the Rebellion, I think it’s fair to say that the situation has changed, therefore a leader who is unwilling to change course in reaction to that would need to explain why the old solution would still be appropriate for the new problem.
Now, of course, humans also struggle with that concept (as well as with the admission of errors, no matter how obvious), even these days, in any country, no matter how democratic or enlightened it believes itself to be, so I can see why that would also not come naturally to Harky, or why the Troll population might end up being confused if he did.
Really, showing respect for each other before the battle is not just helping the your opponent in case you lose (and they need to convince your followers to go along). It’s also helpful in case you win because it also shows understanding and respect for your opponent’s followers, _before_ the decision, which makes it a lot easier for them to follow you afterwards.
In that regard, they seem to do something right which I seriously miss in modern-day democratic elections — probably because some marketing people figured out that you can get 0.5% more votes if you slam all your opponents’ ideas, including the ones that actually make sense, or something.
Harky haven’t just talked of war with humans. He wants to annihilate humans. So yeah, to now only conquer Gastonia and then enter an alliance with the surviving humans would mean Harky had to admit he was wrong about at least some of them.
Sadly, you cannot say “the situation has changed” when the banner you used to rally people around you is one based on racial hatred. There’s nothing a human can do that would “change” them in the eyes of Harky’s fanatics. The suffering humans have inflicted upon the savage races has been politically linked to humanity itself. That’s why there cannot be compromise: sparing even one human is a massive strike against the “humanity is evil and must be eradicated for the good of everybody else” narrative.
Has to be one of my favourite hovertexts.