Its almost like she completely misunderstood the “arrows in my quiver” flashback in EoN. She didnt understand that Sylvanas was a ranger general who was cold because she made sacrifices for victory. It’s like she thought Sylvanas meant that her rangers were arrows in her quivver, because they were lesser than her and she could make them do whatever she wanted. Its almost like the Avatar the Last Airbender movie. Thats how out of touch she seems with Sylvanas… and after all the criticism she got for BtS, and all the extra time they had to get it right. I just can’t believe it.
10 Likes
I would disagree.
I am not an Arthas fan. So, my favorite parts of the Arthas book are where he is shown to be a foolish brat. Where it is building on his history of bad choices and foolishness. Like early on, when Muradin is training him, and telling him he is acting like a soft entitled whelp. Or when Arthas breaks Invincible because he ignores the warnings and rides him foolishly through the snow.
The Arthas book explored and highlighted negative aspects of Arthas that helped explain why he was such a sadistic bratty creep. It should not have been some monument for his fans to hold sacred… same with the Sylvanas book. Sylvanas has done bad things and made mistakes. Those should be explored.
2 Likes
I realize that this could be taken as not factual. What she actually said was that she was trying to build an ultimate army, like her Dark Rangers, and those who would be willing to be part of that wouldn’t care that Nathanos was a human. (the kick them out part was an embellishment on my part, she never says she would kick them out, but it read like she told Lorthemar that it’s “my way or the Highway.” and that’s why I applied those words.)
Here I am now justifying my own interpretations, lest I be accused of lying.
Another thing that really bothered me is the fact that Golden made Sylvanas hate intrigue and paties… um… no, Sylvanas is the absolute sly diplomat able to charm any crowd, she’s not someone who is going to toss back a beer with the boys and complain about having to wear a dress. Ugh I hate some of her characterizations in the book so much. I feel like Golden robbed Sylvanas in some ways of her femininity and I have a lot of opinions on that. Being feminine and still being able to command aurhority is feminist. Being a toyboy into authority is… Freudian.
9 Likes
Ren, bestie, sweetie, lava eel of my hungry dreams.
You don’t gotta justify your interpretations. Those who have issues with a slightly interpreted retelling are not worth the extra effort.
3 Likes
Even among the Alliance of Lordaeron, Garithos was not a well liked man. He was a stuck up spoiled rich boy who got his position only on his family name, and everyone knew it.
I cannot imagine anyone killing the Forsaken in revenge for that man.
it seems way more likely it went more like this:
Mob: “AHHH ITS THE SCOURGE”
Diplomat: “No we are th-” dies by mob
Mob: “Huh, that was an oddly chatty scourge”
and the rest is history.
9 Likes
So true. It is getting tiresome that a #strongfemalecharacter must be a tomboy or else they are not.
Tomboys do exist, my auntie is one but not every female on the planet is one.
I mean you don’t see Azshara being a tomboy. She plays into her femininity. And yet she ruled over two empires.
Besides, the windrunners already got a few tomboys with Veressa and Alleria. Sylvanas doesn’t need to be one and nor should she be one.
8 Likes
In EoN she recalls herself as vain “it wasn’t enough she was the best archer in the family she had to turn everyone’s head while doing it”
How Kosak can write a better feminine character than Golden just boggles my mind.
Christie’s Sylvanas is “I don’t even own a dress”
How are these the same character?
13 Likes
Thing is I don’t believe they are being presented in an unfavourable light. They are just being confirmed human, and the usual suspects are outraged the heavens haven’t interfered and removed that smudge from their otherwise divine incarnation.
Thanks for taking the time to give us a rundown on the contents of this book. 
2 Likes
Sylvanas is a highly controversial character, being written off in a highly controversial expansion, while being potentially rewritten in a highly controversial book by a highly controversial author. All because highly controversial people made highly controversial decisions regarding her story.
I don’t think it’s asking a lot to present any information here objectively.
3 Likes
So that excuses abusive behavior?
Then you should expect highly controvercial answers.
I’m not a miracle worker.
12 Likes
I always wished they had delved into Tiffin more, she feels like she could of been a representative of a strong willed female as she had the same sort of preternatural ability to bend the world with her unyielding kindness that Anduin inherited and was one of the few who didnt fall prey to Onyxia’s machinations.
And she is the one that taught Varian economics, which is pretty neat.
4 Likes
Yes! Tiffin Wrynn was a feminist character.
Imagine how different Wow would be if the rock killed Varian and she lived. Having to deal with the machinations of assasins in her kingdom trying to kill her child, clearing the debt she owed to her people… her beloved home of Westfall.
Instead we got red vs blue Varian Rockem Sockem, toxic masculinity and father abandonment syndrome.
Red vs Blue Varian was a cringe part of this franchise and I wish more ppl would admit that.
4 Likes
I’m not even opposed to this scenario, but we haven’t actually seen any evidence that it happened. And we probably won’t until we get a non-Garithos perspective from the Alliance in that period.
1 Like
Did I say that?
Like, Garithos obviously was not meant to be an important character. He was an accessory to Kael’thas and Sylvanas’ arcs.
But as it stands now this useless throwaway caricature of a person is the central driving force of why the EK’s geopolitical situation is the way it was in Vanilla. This either needs to be treated with the gravity it deserves, or we need new information that allows us to move beyond him.
6 Likes
No. But that is the context of the conversation. Because Ren allowed bias to enter her language when giving these exerpts, abusive behavior is excused.
And I mean, you did jump into that end of the pool, so it’s worth asking again; does the presence of bias excuse abusive behavior?
1 Like
“Abusive behavior” being “telling someone they’re wrong or asking them to clarify a statement”
Nice gaslighting there, Ain.
1 Like
If someone is being harassed online, they should report and ignore that person.
But there’s a difference between harassment, and criticism for potentially misleading others.
It’s a similar case with Golden. She suffers from stalkers and abusive people, but she blocks those that criticize her work and behavior. Is it fair for one group to be mixed in with the other?
2 Likes