Remove ads

RWBY Thread III: Time To Say Goodbye

Reader mode
Stop: So gotta few things that need to be said real quick.
  • Staff Post
    • so gotta few things that need to be said real quick.
    We get a lot of reports from this thread. A lot of it is just a series of people yelling at each other over arguments that have been rehashed hundreds of times since the end of the recent Volume. And I get that the last Volume - and RWBY in general, really - has some controversial moments that people will want to discuss, argue about, debate, etc.

    That's fine. We're not going to stop people from doing that, because that's literally what the point of the thread is. However, there's just a point where it gets to be a bit too much, and arguments about whether or not Ironwood was morally justified in his actions in the recent Volume, or if RWBY and her team were in the right for withholding information from Ironwood out of distrust, or whatever flavor of argument of the day descend into insulting other posters, expressing a demeaning attitude towards other's opinions, and just being overall unpleasant. That tends to happen a lot in this thread. We want it to stop happening in this thread.

    So! As of now the thread is in a higher state of moderation. What that means is that any future infractions will result in a weeklong boot from the thread, and repeated offenders will likely be permanently removed. So please, everyone endeavor to actually respect the other's arguments, and even if you strongly disagree with them please stay civil and mindful when it comes to responding to others.

    In addition, users should refrain from talking about off-site users in the thread. Bear in mind that this does not mean that you cannot continue to post tumblr posts, for example, that add onto the discussion in the thread, with the caveat that it's related to RWBY of course. But any objections to offsite users in the thread should be handled via PM, or they'll be treated as thread violations and infracted as such.
     
    Last edited:
  • Staff Post
    • Zam said:
    Did... Did you actually read the post?

    "what if. the lack of blood when cinder killed rhodes was a clever play on "the blood is (not) on your hands", signifying that yes, it was a tragedy, but no, it should not have been a life-defining moment from which there's no coming back from for cinder"

    It was very blatantly about the enslaved teenage Cinder fighting for her freedom and not adult Cinder.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    No, I read it. The problem is, there's no reason to make that point. We know where she ends up. She has no hope. She's already a monster because of events that have already been shown in the show. I'm vilifying the adult she becomes, an event that's ALREADY HAPPENED in the show. Cinder is a monster. She will never not be a monster, unless it turns out, that, i dunno, she didn't kill Pyrrha, but that'd be a good trick to retcon that. You cannot separate teenage cinder from the actions her adult self will eventually take, because this is a narrative. Cinder does that the writers want her to do. She has no free will. There's no chance of her taking a different path when she kills Rhodes. She will always end up where she is, and so showing that she's not too far gone after she kills Rhodes is pointless, because there's no way for her to change what she's going to become.

    Jcogginsa said:
    You were responding to a post talking about what she did to Rhodes (And, by extension, the matron and her daughters), so yes, you are talking about them.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    No. I'm responding from a meta point of view, that doesn't allow me to divorce teen cinder from the actions her adult self has already been show to have taken. As I say above, teen cinder will always become adult cinder, and thus, there's no reason to soften what she did to rhodes by claiming she's not beyond redemption yet. We know she's not. We've seen the future.
     
    Last edited:
    Even though "Moving forward" is a part of the series?
    I mean, if people can't move past Cinder's past actions then there is no hope for her, but then there would also be no hope for Salem and thus no hope for all of Remnant. >.>"
     
    Sandstar said:
    No, I read it. The problem is, there's no reason to make that point. We know where she ends up. She has no hope. She's already a monster because of events that have already been shown in the show. I'm vilifying the adult she becomes, an event that's ALREADY HAPPENED in the show. Cinder is a monster. She will never not be a monster, unless it turns out, that, i dunno, she didn't kill Pyrrha, but that'd be a good trick to retcon that. You cannot separate teenage cinder from the actions her adult self will eventually take, because this is a narrative. Cinder does that the writers want her to do. She has no free will. There's no chance of her taking a different path when she kills Rhodes. She will always end up where she is, and so showing that she's not too far gone after she kills Rhodes is pointless, because there's no way for her to change what she's going to become.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I feel like you don't really get the point of media analysis, or flashbacks and backstory, or seemingly the passage of time.
     
    Sandstar said:
    I feel like you're just insulting me because you don't have any arguments left to make. So we're done. Toodles.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Its no more insulting than you ranting about Cinder being some inhumane monster cos she killed Pyrrha, which is apparently infinitely worse than all the other people she killed. Despite the fact the post in question had nothing to do with actions taken likely a decade out from the period in time the post was addressing, while ignoring the themes it was discussing to perpetuate your personal grudge against a fictional character.
     
    Zam said:
    Its no more insulting than you ranting about Cinder being some inhumane monster cos she killed Pyrrha, which is apparently infinitely worse than all the other people she killed. Despite the fact the post in question had nothing to do with actions taken likely a decade out from the period in time the post was addressing, while ignoring the themes it was discussing to perpetuate your personal grudge against a fictional character.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Cinder isn't a person. She can't be insulted. I mentioned Pyrrha because her death was shown on screen. and happened before the flashback (in terms of the show), and was thus an easy reference to make. I'm not saying it's worse that anyone else she killed. Jesus, what a ridiculous argument. Are you saying that Cinder murdering Pyrrha was justifiable now? As a fictional character, Cinder *has* to be taken as a whole. You cannot divorce her actions as a teenager from the fact that, no she doesn't move on from killing Rhodes. We know she doesn't.
     
    Sandstar said:
    Cinder isn't a person. She can't be insulted. I mentioned Pyrrha because her death was shown on screen. and happened before the flashback (in terms of the show), and was thus an easy reference to make. I'm not saying it's worse that anyone else she killed. Jesus, what a ridiculous argument. Are you saying that Cinder murdering Pyrrha was justifiable now? As a fictional character, Cinder *has* to be taken as a whole. You cannot divorce her actions as a teenager from the fact that, no she doesn't move on from killing Rhodes. We know she doesn't.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Neither is Pyrrha yet you seem to take her death extremely personally. So did other deaths. Which is entirely irrelevant to the discussion of themes raised in the post. It sure sounds like that given the language you use and the aggressive tone. Kindly point me to where I said that. Except it wasn't about whether she did move on from Rhode's; the post was arguing that she could have but didn't, which is part of the tragedy.
     
    Truth be told, we don't really know what happened in between that fight and her recruiting of Emerald and Mercury, so we don't know where, when, or how Salem got a hold of her.

    So it could be that she tried to move on from Rhode's death, but the unfortunate circumstance that she also murdered three people that same night kept following her, echoing Rhode's words that she'll never stop running.
     
    The above is also true though as noted in other posts, I don't blame Cinder for killing Madam and the twins, a deeply traumatized and tortured slave child shouldn't exist in the first place, let alone be held responsible for protecting the lives or their 'owners'.
     
    I highly doubt it was all that long before Cinder got picked up by Salem.
    I mean, Cinder just killed 4 people right in a popular establishment in the middle of Atlas. The city with a military and surrounded by a frozen tundra.
    Girl would need a "Fairy Godmother" to come in and swoop her out of there.

    And now I am just imagining Cinder and Watts getting picked up at the same time and their bickering starts right there.
     
    Meh I have not changed from my stance cinder dies is the only ending for her I'll be happy with
     
    Last edited:
    Zam said:
    Neither is Pyrrha yet you seem to take her death extremely personally. So did other deaths. Which is entirely irrelevant to the discussion of themes raised in the post. It sure sounds like that given the language you use and the aggressive tone. Kindly point me to where I said that. Except it wasn't about whether she did move on from Rhode's; the post was arguing that she could have but didn't, which is part of the tragedy.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    No, it's not irrelevant. I could say this a few more times, in increasingly complex ways, but the point comes down to this: Cinder has no hope. We know what happens later on, so saying that Cinder can still walk away after Rhodes death is pointless. She doesn't.
     
    daedalus725 said:
    Meh I have changed from my stance cinder dies is the only ending for her I'll be happy with
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    We're all well aware of your hate boner, you don't need to flash it every time Cinder comes up and we don't instantly start tacking on "I want her dead" onto the end of every statement.
    Sandstar said:
    No, it's not irrelevant. I could say this a few more times, in increasingly complex ways, but the point comes down to this: Cinder has no hope. We know what happens later on, so saying that Cinder can still walk away after Rhodes death is pointless. She doesn't.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    It is irrelevant because Cinder's killed plenty of people you being hung up on this one either indicate personal investment or a bid to evoke emotional responses by utilizing a likable named character.

    I'm not going to argue the second sentence because that was not the point of the post.

    Which again, was not the point of the post, its that she could walk away from it, not that she would or did.

    Its like how Ironwood had that last hurrah of being somewhat helpful before his final topple into intentional villainy and betrayal; it doesn't have no narrative worth because we know how it ends.

    By your logic we might as well just cut everything but the characters being anything but their best/worst selves out from the show and sap away any and all depth cos bad person bad, good person good, never the twain shall meet, nor anything be analyzed.
     
    I have no idea if Cinder or Salem or Tyrian could, would or will become better; but RWBY is a hope punk series and thematically them going "You're shit and too far gone" isn't well in line with the heroes developing attitudes. Like Weiss literally intervenes to ensure Jac stayed alive despite having no reason to do so and Winter clearly not wanting to.

    Blake & Yang didn't kill Adam because he was a shitty person who had it coming, they did it in self defense, if he'd left them that would have been it. Same for Ironwood, he wasn't fought because he did wrong in the past or cos they had a personal grudge against him but because his actions were going to kill innocent people and make everything worse.

    Similarly, while they didn't welcome Emerald with a hug and a kiss, the fact is she stopped being their enemy and eventually started to be a willing ally. Neither, especially the former, mean forgiveness or buddiness is owed in anyway, but if someone pretends that doesn't change the context of their collective circumstances then they are ignoring reality.

    Thus simply going "Person bad" or "Person beyond improvement" is an over simplification, out of steps with the themes of the series and frankly just presents a really crappy ideology to approach things from. There's that whole saying about when your foe goes to their knees help them up for if you strike them down, no one else shall ever surrenders to you.

    Again, not saying what will, won't or what I'd want to happen, let alone what anyone in the cast is obliged to do, I am just making an observation.
     
    Heck, Tyrian is the only remaining character that I can't see a redemption for. He has shown nothing but sadistic glee for so much of what is going on. In fact the only time he has not been happy was when Ruby de-stinger'd him and when Salem was disappointed in him.
    Meanwhile for Cinder we know her story and we can see where it is heading if she can't stop.
    And lastly Salem....well her being "saved" is what will ultimately release her and Oz from their curse and free Remnant from these shenanigans.
     
    Ozpin is only freed from his curse when he accomplishes an entirely impossible goal and invites captain and co captain genocide home, I still refuse to see this as a good ending, even if the gods "Change".
     
    Zam hates the Gods
    Daed hates Cinder
    and I'm just sitting here like "Hate these characters all you want, but the way I've seen these kinds of stories end is either the character burn themselves in the end (a possible end for Cinder) or the protag talks them down enough that they just bugger off (how I see the Gods ending)."
    Like, there has been no build so far to a way to actually hurt the 2 shining douche bros, so that literally just leaves us the Simple Soul using her words to get them to not destroy humanity and let Salem and Oz rest in peace.

    I mean in JRPGS we either can kill gods because game mechanics or a mcguffin, and so far we have nothing. So unless The Island has some kind of Vorpal Sword to snicker-snack Light and Dark we aren't beating them in a fight.

    anyway I must sleep now. been sick for the past week and I need to get better soon so I can go back to work. Night people.
     
    Last edited:
    Pugman said:
    Zam hates the Gods
    Daed hates Cinder
    and I'm just sitting here like "Hate these characters all you want, but the way I've seen these kinds of stories end is either the character burn themselves in the end (a possible end for Cinder) or the protag talks them down enough that they just bugger off (how I see the Gods ending)."
    Like, there has been no build so far to a way to actually hurt the 2 shining douche bros, so that literally just leaves us the Simple Soul using her words to get them to not destroy humanity and let Salem and Oz rest in peace.

    I mean in JRPGS we either can kill gods because game mechanics or a mcguffin, and so far we have nothing. So unless The Island has some kind of Vorpal Sword to snicker-snack Light and Dark we aren't beating them in a fight.

    anyway I must sleep now. been sick for the past week and I need to get better soon so I can go back to work. Night people.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    I think that letting two entities who commit omnicide extremely actually just be in charge of everything again is not a happy ending, or even a neutral ending and thus far they have indicated an unwillingness to heed the words of creations they deem beneath them.

    What's more, unlike Salem, Cinder or even Tyrian they aren't active characters in the story who can grow and change as we watch them so them just suddenly doing a 180 is not thematically or dramatically satisfying.

    Adding to that but RWBY's never shown itself inclined to accept authoritarianism as a positive, or might makes right, or anything else mandated from a position of power as being gospel and loves to subvert, twist and play on tropes, so that's not even a solid basis for conjecture.

    I'd also note that as much as I like there will be no victory in strength and simple soul, both Ozpin and Salem are in universe characters and actively flawed one's, they aren't the voices of the authors, even if they did touch on important themes.

    Finally, the show isn't even over yet, so simply shrugging and saying nothings been introduced to make it work yet feels incomprehensible to me, every few volumes we get revelations that shake up the status quo and how the world works, what's currently available is not necessarily all that there shall be.
     
    Zam said:
    We're all well aware of your hate boner, you don't need to flash it every time Cinder comes up and we don't instantly start tacking on "I want her dead" onto the end of every statement.

    It is irrelevant because Cinder's killed plenty of people you being hung up on this one either indicate personal investment or a bid to evoke emotional responses by utilizing a likable named character.

    I'm not going to argue the second sentence because that was not the point of the post.

    Which again, was not the point of the post, its that she could walk away from it, not that she would or did.

    Its like how Ironwood had that last hurrah of being somewhat helpful before his final topple into intentional villainy and betrayal; it doesn't have no narrative worth because we know how it ends.

    By your logic we might as well just cut everything but the characters being anything but their best/worst selves out from the show and sap away any and all depth cos bad person bad, good person good, never the twain shall meet, nor anything be analyzed.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    You are wrong, and here's why: You can analysis Ironwood's being somewhat helpful because it came before his final turn to being a villain. Therefor, it's possible that the writers wanted to signify something, or fool the watcher, or any number of things. There's no where for Teen Cinder to go, except for where she ends up. We already know where that is. What would the point of the indicating that she could run away from what happened, when she doesn't? This is just people, ONCE AGAIN, trying to white wash Cinder.

    As for invoking an emotional response, at least I haven't insulted you. *shrugs*
     
    Sandstar said:
    You are wrong, and here's why: You can analysis Ironwood's being somewhat helpful because it came before his final turn to being a villain. Therefor, it's possible that the writers wanted to signify something, or fool the watcher, or any number of things. There's no where for Teen Cinder to go, except for where she ends up. We already know where that is. What would the point of the indicating that she could run away from what happened, when she doesn't? This is just people, ONCE AGAIN, trying to white wash Cinder.

    As for invoking an emotional response, at least I haven't insulted you. *shrugs*
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    As you were so fond of saying mere posts ago though, Ironwood has no real agency, he is but a character whose life is planned out for him, thus again by your own logic its pointless for us to have seen any other sides of him or to reflect on what could have beens because his fate was already decided. Again, you seem to miss the whole point of "She could have, but didn't" aspect to the post and how it was clearly talking about teen Cinder not current Cinder, by virtue of only discussing that point in her life and how it was a major crossroads. Like I literally don't know how you can take a post talking about teen Cinder and the path she could have taken and go "This is people trying to ONCE AGAIN white wash Cinder" when it literally doesn't even touch on anything but that period in her life before any of this other stuff happened.

    No you just had a perpetually rude, aggressive and dismissive manner.
     
    Sandstar said:
    No, that's just ridiculous. I mean, she killed Pyrrha, she's already a monster, what's the point of softening her killing Rhodes?
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Psyga315 said:
    And those Mantleans that were being evacuated.

    And that woman she robbed the clothes off of.

    And the people of Vale.

    And Amber.

    And (almost) Weiss.

    And Penny.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Rhodes was before all of that. She is very much at fault for all of those, but Rhodes is the one who's mix of actions and inactions is what got him and her "adopted" family killed.
    Rabe said:
    I think the point is Cinder could have chose to move past Rhode's death and slaying of her abusers, she did not do those things, the following actions were her choices and circumstance. She Could have come back from "that" point in her life She chose not to
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    We don't know how that choice was made yet, either from believing Rhodes on not being able to stop running or if someone else convinced her she couldn't.
    Sandstar said:
    No, it's not irrelevant. I could say this a few more times, in increasingly complex ways, but the point comes down to this: Cinder has no hope. We know what happens later on, so saying that Cinder can still walk away after Rhodes death is pointless. She doesn't.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    There being a chance she could have changed is what makes it all the more a tragedy. Rhodes may have said she would never stop running, but there being a chance she could have if he hadn't acted that way is something people are taking as an important subtext. What she was like as an adult isn't a reason to hate the enslaved child lashing out in a way she was trained to by Rhodes.
    Zam said:
    I think that letting two entities who commit omnicide extremely actually just be in charge of everything again is not a happy ending, or even a neutral ending and thus far they have indicated an unwillingness to heed the words of creations they deem beneath them.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    No one's asking for that, they just want them to leave and not come back. Unfortunately they're probably needed to get Salem and Oz to stop lingering.
     
    GuestLurker said:
    Rhodes was before all of that. She is very much at fault for all of those, but Rhodes is the one who's mix of actions and inactions is what got him and her "adopted" family killed.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    Before that, in her timeline, but after those events in the show. We know the future for teen Cinder. She doesn't walk away from killing her tormenters, and Rhodes. She becomes a monster, and is working to help someone who's trying to destroy all life on the planet.

    Zam said:
    As you were so fond of saying mere posts ago though, Ironwood has no real agency, he is but a character whose life is planned out for him, thus again by your own logic its pointless for us to have seen any other sides of him or to reflect on what could have beens because his fate was already decided. Again, you seem to miss the whole point of "She could have, but didn't" aspect to the post and how it was clearly talking about teen Cinder not current Cinder, by virtue of only discussing that point in her life and how it was a major crossroads. Like I literally don't know how you can take a post talking about teen Cinder and the path she could have taken and go "This is people trying to ONCE AGAIN white wash Cinder" when it literally doesn't even touch on anything but that period in her life before any of this other stuff happened.

    No you just had a perpetually rude, aggressive and dismissive manner.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...

    *sighs* Time to circle back to (because that's all we're doing, going in circles, and I want off this crazy thing, Jane): we're done here. Toodles.
     
    Last edited:
    GuestLurker said:
    No one's asking for that, they just want them to leave and not come back. Unfortunately they're probably needed to get Salem and Oz to stop lingering.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Sure, but I am just ambivalent about that being likely and its definitely not what some suggest when they talk about the gods.

    Sandstar said:
    Before that, in her timeline, but after those events in the show. We know the future for teen Cinder. She doesn't walk away from killing her tormenters, and Rhodes. She becomes a monster, and is working to help someone who's trying to destroy all life on the planet.
    Click to expand...
    Click to shrink...
    Again, by this logic backstory has no meaning, character history, motives, themes, its all entirely meaningless to a story which is just not accurate.

    Given Cinder actively wants power, I find the idea she knows Salem (Seemingly) wants to end all life is unlikely, not for any moral reason but just a "All my stuff is here" reasons, it doesn't serve Cinder's interests for the geocide of all life to happen.
     
    Reader mode
    You must login or register to reply here.
    Remove ads
    Back
    Top