Seeing the Blue in Lilith's Eye: My Personal View on Diablo's Enigmatic Antagonist

PC General Discussion
1

In a recent developer interview, it was articulated that Lilith isn’t inherently “evil,” especially in comparison to the other demons or even the angels. Contrary to the typical demonic red eyes or angelic absence thereof eyes themselves, Lilith’s mismatched gaze – one blue eye and one of a different hue – serves to underscore her nuanced humanity and ambiguous representation.

Her manipulation of violence (as she has not committed a direct violent act yet herself) doesn’t necessarily translate to her wanting to annihilate the world like the Prime Evils or as the Angels have considered. She essentially constructed Sanctuary to elude the perpetual conflict and “set everyone free” from the endless conflict.

One needs only to venture far into Act 1 to observe the brutality and prejudice of humans under the guise of their religion. The sight of executions carried out in the name of their church is chilling reminder of the angels “mercy” by punishing “sin”.

One puzzling aspect of religion that the game explores is this notion of inherent sin simply because of our mortality. The idea that humans must endure punishment, or inflict it upon others, even to the point of murder is purely human. Violence is neither an intelligent nor a benevolent act, and intrinsically human. Meanwhile, “demons” are conveniently scapegoated for our deeds. But obviously this is a less compelling narrative for a game that is about killing demons and understandable (plus its just fun!)

Lilith embodies liberation from this vicious cycle, though ironically, she too is dependent on violence to achieve her ends. This could, in fact, reflect our own reliance on violence as a storytelling device, hence the portrayal of Lilith being violent to effectively convey her narrative.

What puzzles me is the worship of angels in Diablo. Most of them harbour a disdain for Sanctuary; it seems to be almost a 50/50 split with the most powerful angels wanting to destroy it as humans and nephalem are half angelic and half demonic. The fact that only one angel relinquishes his grace to safeguard humanity, choosing to be mortal over retaining his celestial status, speaks volumes.

The heaven vs hell concept in the Diablo series has always confounded me, until I grasped that the writers likely used this dichotomy as a comprehensible way to depict war.

In many faiths, hell quakes in the face of heaven’s “grace,” and evil engages humans in warfare because that’s the only fight they have a chance at winning or at least manipulating by corrupting humanity. Their war on humans isn’t necessarily about physical destruction, but more about corruption and manipulation of the human spirit and morality. The goal is often to lead humans astray, distancing them from their divine connection.

In many religious belief systems, the divine might of heaven or angels has the capacity to vanquish evil in an instant but refrains from doing so (for theological reason I won’t go into less this becomes an essay lol.) However, let’s face it, an immediate resolution or “snap” of evil out of existence wouldn’t exactly make for a gripping narrative in a game about slaying demons. So, the perpetual struggle between good and evil persists, fuelling the core of many compelling religious stories.

Finally, Lilith’s intention to overrun Sanctuary with demons seems less about wreaking havoc and more likely part of a grander, manipulative scheme (assuming the writing is this nuanced). The motivation behind her invasion, I suspect, isn’t about promoting senseless violence, but rather something more strategic and profound.

Or so I prophetically hope it doesn’t become a story of her revenge, kill everything or pushing heaven/hell to annihilate one another. I suspect in that, Diablo will be resurrected by her er…necromancer (light spoilers) to distract the heavens and hell, as part of her larger plan (as she is shown holding his skull often.) Of course I could be giving her and the writers too much credit, less they turn her into basically a “kill the demon looking women” because she is violent and “demons bad”.

Or the very real fear that Lilith could present herself as an indirect saviour for humans/sanctuary that could be attacked by real life religious groups as promoting satanism in Diablo 4 (based on her appearance and manipulations) resulting in dumping her down to a typical boss battle by games end to destroy “evil”.

To come full circle, I called her the antagonist, but that title could very well be that of Inarius or Diablo himself (perhaps in resurrecting him she is unaware he is now the prime evil) where in she actually is the protagonist of our story. From a narrative point of view, we are following her journey throughout the acts.

But that’s just my take.

5 Likes
2

I think she just has a whole “break the wheel” thing going, she wants her children to rise up against heaven and hell and free themselves from both side’s machinations returning Sanctuary back to what it was intended, however I get the feeling she’s a pawn and does not realise it yet, get ready for the twist at the end, from what happens in Act 1 she seems fairly benign compared to the prime evils.

1 Like
3

(for theological reason I won’t go into less this becomes an essay lol.)

What do you mean? It already is! Lol, jokes.

Saving this for later as it’s a really well written & in-depth post that I’d like to respond to. But I’ve got work in 15 minutes so it’ll have to wait until after. Great post!

2 Likes
4

Nice, thoughtful essay, HeroesQuest, and entirely worth the minute to two it takes to read. Sincere thanks for taking the time to write it and then making the choice to share it.

Ever considered the Taiji (AKA the Yin-Yang symbol)? It’s the black-and-white circle that conceptually depicts the energy or dynamism of opposite but interconnected forces. It’s no accident that “in the eye of one there’s the heart of another.” That is, what may appear dichotomous really isn’t - there’s energy, and then there’s the (outside) attribution that’s applied by observers that defines, perhaps inaccurately, to that energy.

Or it could be both. That is, the incitement of senseless violence (based on the ends- justify-the-means assumption) can or will bring about something more strategic and profound. For this reason, I’d suggest it’s similary worthwhile considering Inarius’ motivations, and the associated motivations and choices being made by the folks - folks like Prava and Vigo - involved with the Cathedral of Light’s crusade.

Indeed :wink:

Again, sincere thanks for sharing your essay. It makes for terrific reading!

1 Like
5

Haha, ya it kinda turned into an essay didn’t it? But th anks for the kind words, look forward to your reply!

6

In one short clip of a commentator on YouTube a level 50+ player was seeing fighting Knights Penitent, both a normal knight with spear and the bigger version which Viggo was controlling the armor.

No surprises if we get to fight both forces of Heaven and Hell.

1 Like
7

Sorry evil is evil. I don’t care what you believe or what your goals are. It is what you do that defines you. Lilith shows up in the church at the start of the game, tells the villagers to “Be Beautiful in sin.” To succumb to their vices, which they do. They violently kill the priest. What was his crime? He told them they shouldn’t over indulge in drink and gambling. They shouldn’t covet or steal. Basically he told them be decent people.

As far as I’m concerned anyone who would let what happened to that priest is evil. There is no nuance here. No shades of gray. As far as the player knows the priest was just trying to lead by example. Absolutely no justifiable reason to kill in that instance. Lilith is evil for allowing it, the villagers are evil for doing it.

As far as the Temple of Light. Well their evil too. There is no justification for there actions either. As far as the Angels of the high heavens half of them want to save humanity. Tyrael was the deciding vote when the high heavens were making a decision on fate fate of the humans of Sanctuary. He was originally against the humans but changed his mind. He said “I did call them abominations…and I was wrong! My vote is for them…For I would see what they might become…and marvel in it.”

Lilith, Inarius and Imperius are all cut from the same cloth and just as vile and evil as Baal, Mephisto, and Diablo.

1 Like
8

Curious what exactly Inarius has done specifically that would lead you to assume he is evil?

9

Here, perhaps, is a hint, taken directly from Diablo Wiki’s write-up on Inarius:

“Inarius sought to reduce the power of the nephalem at any cost. To this end, he attuned the Worldstone to cause the powers of the nephalem to diminish over time, for he could not bring himself to harm them. However, for the first generation of nephalem, he made it clear that any use of their powers would be punished, and insisted that Sanctuary, his world, would remain as he had envisaged it. His perfect world. Some nephalem protested, but any who challenged Inarius were crushed. Those who survived fled, their powers weakening.”

While definitions of evil vary, generally that which is evil is notable for conduct or choices that result in needless harm or foreseeable undesirable consequences. To this end, Inarius rationalized his various “ends-justify-the-means” abuses of the nephalem as they would bring about (or preserve) his “perfect version of Sanctuary,” only they didn’t. Sanctuary remained a dangerous place.

Alas, a world that begins in corruption can only end in corruption.

Similarly, as per George Santayana’s famous observation, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” it would appear Inarius’ motivation, no matter how well-intended (or carefully rationalized) was, in effect, responsible for a calamity (certainly, at least, for humanity) that was even greater in scale than the original upset that led to Inarius believing he and Lilith could work out an arrangement for the “greater good” of all involved.

1 Like
10

This entire incident is subject to interpretation to the perceiver. There’s a chance not everyone will see this as an evil act :man_shrugging:t4:

11

So the body of work that supports moral subjectivism points out :grinning:

Safe to say, when you’re discussing moral issues, there are no easy answers.

12

Remember that this is something that we as players know but most of the humans of Sanctuary do not. Have they been directly worshipping angels or are angels just meddling in human affairs to help further their own ends against demons? The Zakarum faith and worship of the light ultimately gets corrupted by Mephisto. Even without that corruption it lead to fanatics and zealots. With the Cathedral of Light Inarius started a cult to help him further his own ends. I mean think of it, half the world or more destroyed 50 years earlier and then Inarius shows up to offer some sort of aid or guidance. Some people cling to that as some sort of hope.
So there are religious zealots out doing his bidding but do the common people of the world in their little villages really love him? Some might because the demons are so terrifying but a lot of the people we run into seem to despise the Cathedral of Light and others are just trying to keep their head down and get by.
I think D4 is actually the first time we are really getting a sense that the general sentiment of the people of Sanctuary is hopelessness because they basically understand that they are nothing but pawns in the Eternal Conflict (as much as they even understand that is going on).

2 Likes
13

The problem with most people’s arguments is the simplistic division between good and evil. To make it simple, humans in that world can do a bunch of evil things in the name of good. However that doesn’t automatically make demons or Lilith good.

The problem is this mostly American ultra simplistic and youthful understanding of character as good or evil. I mean, not gonna delve into a political argument but America itself is a clear example of that nonsense, a nation that literally swears on the bible then does unspeakable evil like invasion of countries and arms sales the next day.

The world of Diablo is similar. It’s basically full of flawed humans being manipulated by both angels and demons, none of which are good or evil. Angels themselves as the paragon of good have been shown to easily fall to evil. Just look at the arrogance of Imperius and his zeal to kill demons, just look at Malthael and his drive to kill evil so strong that he is willing to wipe out humanity with it, or finally Inarius who helped create humanity but simply treats them like disposable cattle.

It’s not that demons or Lilith are good. They’re just more realistic than angels, the so called banality of evil.

Sometimes, the most evil people are basically the ones that strive for the highest good. The radical crusaders in the past or the American invasion of iraq is a prime example.

2 Likes
14

Enthralling essay. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your pros and cons. Your reasoning is very well received. I will be watching to see what happens in D4. Is Lilith “good” or “bad” or both? I am anxiously awainting the first day of game play!!! Keep posting, your writing is interesting and worth reading.

1 Like
15

Because the world is in despair and the entirety of it is run over by hell spawn that will murder anyone. That will drive anyone to the most fanatical religions and the cult of Inarius is the strongest one in that society. No matter how horrible and abuse that cult is, it’s a better escape than the torment of that world and it’s very real demonic invasions.

16

Just look at his actions in D4 so far. He is allowing his “church” to victimize people.
His only goal is to get back to heaven and he is using humans as his stepping stones to achieve that goal.

17

Yup. And from a consequentialist’s perspective (wherein the morality of an action is determined by the outcome of an action’s effects), Inarius’ ends-justify-all-means approach to matters morally vindicates both his actions and his motivations as they are, at least, rule based.

What is Inarius willing to sacrifice to achieve his goal? Everything. Because to an extremist, everything can be justified or rationalized because it’s (magically) part of a greater plan that’s clearly defined. An outside observer, however, would look at this sort of zeal and perhaps think, ‘Whoa! Looks like you’ve really lost sight of the plot there, good buddy’ and act accordingly.

But would this mean Inarius is the “real cause of evil”? Not necessarily. Without going into much detail, I’d argue Inarius’ 3,000-year exposure to Lilith’s various corruptions has resulted in him becoming as much a victim as he is a perpetrator and thus an instigator of further evils.

Comparatively, Lilith too is a victim (i.e., she had no choice in being formed as Mephisto’s daughter), and perhaps she’s also the greater perpetrator - she is a demon, and presumably it’s within the nature of demons to act, you know, demonically, but not necessarily so (for example, I’d happily offer the example of Crowley from Good Omens - while petty evils are his thing, he’s also quite capable of choosing of doing unalloyed good even if it’s entirely contrary to his demonic nature).

In a very real way, these notions touch on philosopher John Rawls’ theory of the “veil of ignorance.” He argues the best way to approach matters of ethics (and, by extension, morality) is to do so from a point of that’s based on setting aside one’s personal concerns, circumstances and affiliations, and do our best to proceed from there. That is, by striving towards a neutral, ego-free position (wherein our personal goals and desires are minimized), we can perhaps - and this is a giant perhaps - more objectively consider the bigger picture and how others are affected by our choices. Alas, this isn’t an easy proposition, particularly for the powerful - with power, there’s a tendency to want to gain more power, if only to bring around “the greater good.”

In closing, sincere thanks for sharing that clip, Martoq. Yeah, it’s a bit of a spoiler… like hugely :wink: … but it does tend to confirm the suspicions of more than a few folks who’ve been thinking about these matters.