I don’t personally draw symbolism to sexual violence when it comes to Sylvanas. However, the relationship between Sylvanas and Arthas was absolutely that of the abuser (Arthas) and the abused (Sylvanas).
I do agree in a sense, Arthas has always been one of my favourite characters because of the tragedy of his story. Because he was the quintessential “fallen hero”, soo blinded by what he considered to be “right” that he ended up doing great wrong. I still don’t think we’ve faced a better villain in WoW and I think that Arthas himself plays a notable role in why Wrath is such a beloved expansion.
Sure, and I guess the situations are similar in a shallow sense.
Arthas did not, at any stage, fight desperately to defend his people against a tide of undead. He did try to save his people in his own way, but it’s hardly the same situation at all. Fighting desperately for the survival of you and your people as a horde of undead clamour at your door is not the same as doing everything you believe you can do to save your people as Arthas did.
Also Arthas did not become the right hand, he supplanted the LK. Arthas became the Lich King and siezed control from Ner’zhul entirely. He also resisted Zovaal to a sizeable degree, being deemed a “failure” by Lord Nips.
This is the sort of incorrect oversimplification that is often brought to play in these conversations.
Sylvanas did not have contact with Zovaal until ICC, Arthas largely resisted Zovaal and was considered a failure
Arthas was lured to the power of Frostmourne and thought that he could use that power, Sylvanas was not “lured” by power at all; she was blackmailed with the Maw and apparently promised that Zovaal was going to break the cycle that she herself was trying to escape (to avoid the Maw to which she thought she was destined), it had almost nothing to do with “power” - Sylvanas had killed herself just prior to meeting Zovaal and so was pretty obviously not after power
Arthas did not properly serve Zovaal and ended up at war with the Legion, who were the main tools Zovaal was utilising outside of the Dreadlords (at least as far as we’ve seen); Arthas was largely acting of his own accord, although it was a twisted version of him
*Perhaps, we’ll have to see
And maybe the most important distinction.
Arthas chose, at every point he chose. Sylvanas did not choose to be raised as a Banshee, she did not choose to be abused - though many of her following choices were her own, after ICC she was under far greater duress than Arthas ever was.
of course he fought against the cult and their undeads, but the scourge back then wasn´t this big faction, before the fall of lordaeron, so he couldn´t fight so many undeads like sylvanas and her rangers later did.
was just as desperate, only that this enemy is invisible. Like a…well, pandemic, only that this was triggered by an organization and therefore has clear responsible parties and was not a natural transmission to humans but was magically reinforced.
dk arthas was the right hand…arthas stopped to be arthas in the moment he took the helm…therafter he was no longer mere arthas…but the lichking.
You are therefore rejecting the very core of Sylvanas’s character, and your opinion is already heavily biased against her.
Why should anyone take you seriously?
This is straight up victim blaming. You are denying she was victimized when she very explicitly was. There’s no alternate interpretation. She was a victim of subtextual rape.
Arthas violated her soul. She was the only character to experience this level of treatment by Arthas, and she didn’t deserve it.
Is not to be a rape victim because arthas never raped her. He abused but not raped her,.sometimes i ask myself are you ki kkng your brain out of your head in the moment sylvanas is the topic?
Arthas absolutely did control and abuse her, that cannot be debated.
And I can understand how people see an allegory to sexual violence given the overarching similarities as well as symbolism that can be interpreted in such a way, like the fact that she was stabbed in the stomach. However, the relationship also just displays a lot of the hallmarks of general emotional and physical abuse. Regardless, what she went through was horrendous.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t have an issue with people who do draw that allegory to sexual violence and I understand that for some there can be a sense of therapy in seeing her working to stand up to her abuser.
I’m just not sure about the implication that it’s the valid interpretation.
You sure it’s because she’s a woman and not just a person that stood in his way? The man is petty. Look at how far he went against Mal’Ganis, or how he treated Uther.
According to the book he plunged the sword into her and then the lich king said she will serve his favored champion Arthas. She then marched alongside all the other mindless undead beside her as they killed all the high elves that stood in their way.
This is something NO ONE mentions. The most evil thing Arthas did was betray those mercenaries in Northrend. However it’s canon that there is a connection between Yogg Saron and the Lich King.
"Blizzard representatives have stated that they feel the connection between Yogg-Saron and the Lich King ended up being poorly expressed in-game,[[19]] but added that it “had a lot to do with the ability for mortals to become corrupted.”[[20]]
It seems Yogg Saron was influencing Arthas’ actions in Northrend.
To be fair its pretty hard not to see a sexual assault allegory in the warbringers cinematic, which I think is where it comes from. In wc3 however there was neither an implicit or explicit indication that such was the case. It was a vindictive act of cruelty designed to inflict pain and suffering.
I read the book.
I kept waiting for something resembling sexual violence to be noticeably displayed but there was none.
This was far more about control. Lack of freedom or real choice, physical violence, a third party controlling you to serve someone else… controlling parents allegory perhaps? Or an arranged marriage?
Regardless the sexual violence that some posters here seem to be intent on making the only interpretation of those events are wrong.
They are not wrong though. The warbringer cinematic implies another possibility by its presentation. To me the creators of that strip are at the least implying an implicit allegory for sexual assault. If the content creators don’t want to create situations where such an interpretation is possible they need to be more careful in the way they present their material, but they don’t. Short time sensationalism is their goal irrespective of the long term effect.
