Post Reply Euphie was the noblest character in Code Geass?
1166 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
64 / M
Offline
Posted 10/11/09 , edited 8/20/10
I say that Euphemia was the noblest and best person in the world of Code geass.

Of course that is not necessarily saying much, since most of the Britannians and Black Knights were contaminated by the evils committed by their sides.

Here is my discussion of how Euphemia alone of important Britannians remained good and innocent. It is spoilered for reasons of brevity:


And what about the members of the Black Knights organization? Weren't they fighting for the same goal as other organizations which used terorism (Like the Japan LIberation Front in "Black Knight")? I say that even being on the same side as terrorist is evil.

And what about those three words "Geass Directorate Massacre"? Taking part in massacre is definatly something which makes someone evil.
1166 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
64 / M
Offline
Posted 12/20/09 , edited 12/20/09
Euphemia compared to other Code geass Characters

Euphemia and Lelouch

Lelouch is an arrogant bastard who thinks that he knows what is best for the world and will kill anyone who gets in his way and ends up slaughtering thousands and millions of innocent people in his quest for vengeance. And in the end the best he can do for the world is the Zero Requiem.

Lelouch is about as controlling as Lenin who forced the other Bolshevicks to start the communist revolution in Russia in late 1917 when all the others were loyal Marxists who believed that they would have to wait for years or decades until Russia was industrialized enough for a communist revolution. Lenin almost single-handedly brought about the October Revolution and founded the Soviet Union. Thus he was responsible for Stalin's rule and the fact that for decades thousands of atomic bombs were aimed at many countries.

Lelouch used a landslide to kill many Britannian soldiers and JLf fighters at the Battle of Narita despite telling his men that they were there to save the JLF from the Britannians. Lelouch's lust to be the undisputed leader of the revolution drove him to kill JLF at Narita and later blow up the ship carrying surviving leaders, despite the fact that Lelouch could have found a way to use his geass on the JLF to make them all obey his orders and add to his fighting power.

Later the Chinese invasion of Japan was the best chance to liberate Japan from the Britannians. True the Chinese might have ruled Japan oppressively after "liberating" it from Britannia, but the Japanese would probably have been a lot better off and freer under Chinese rule. And if that was not good enough for them they could later revolt against Chinese rule with secret help from Britannia and achieve a greater degree of freedom. But Lelouch fought against and helped defeat the Chinese invasion in order to be certain that he would be in total control of the movement to liberate Japan. And we all know how well his Black Rebellion turned out in the end.

And even if the Emperor was not watching everything the revolution still would have failed disastrously. Lelouch gloated to CC, his confident, that once the rebels proclaimed an independent Japan the Emperor would have to come for a meeting with Zero (and you can be sure that Lelouch had a lot planned for that meeting). But in our world King George III didn't visit the Founding Fathers in Philadelphia as soon as he heard of the declaration of independence. Instead he sent his army to fight for years to try to crush the rebels.

So Lelouch naively let his desire that the Emperor would come to meet Zero turn into a false belief that the Emperor actually would come to meet Zero, and had no plans to defend Japan against the repeated Britannian attacks and invasions which would have come instead of the visit by the Emperor. One thing which Lelouch could have done to make the visit by the Emperor more likely to happen was to make sure that Euphemia survived. Anyone who knew Euphie, like her father the Emperor knew her, would know that ordering a massacre was way out of character for her and would suspect the massacre was just a lie backed up by faked videos to justify killing an innocent girl who was really killed merely because she was the daughter of the hated Emperor.

Lelouch should have expected that if Euphemia was killed the Emperor would think: ”Thank God those Japanese couldn’t hold in their hate but jumped the gun and killed Euphemia merely because she is my daughter. Now that they have accidentally warned me I’ll never go to Japan and certain doom!”

So Lelouch desperately needed to keep Euphemia alive to keep from scaring the Emperor away from visiting Japan. And Lelouch clearly had good chances to capture Euphemia alive just as fast, as easy, and as safely as he killed her. But he inexplicably killed her anyway and doomed his rebellion and his plans to failure.

Euphemia and Suzaku

Suzaku is an arrogant bastard who thinks that he knows what is best for the world (despite being less intelligent than Lelouch who is not intelligent enough to know what is best for the world) and in the first season fights without killing anyone out of his sense of personal honor. Then he meets Euphemia, the best boss a teenage boy could ever imagine, and she becomes his hope of making things better for the Japanese now instead of after thirty or forty years of service to Britannia, and he falls in love with her. Then he sees Euphemia murdered and VV tells him lies to make what is actually one of the worst murders ever shown on television seem even worse to Suzaku, and Suzaku turns into a vengeance-crazed monster, a cheap imitation of Lelouch's and Kallen's vengeance-crazed monsters.

In the first season Suzaku is a great warrior and nightmare pilot but shows no sign of being a great leader. Even peace loving Euphemia is a better general in the first season than Suzaku is shown to be.

Perhaps there is an intentional contrast between Lelouch, the strategic mastermind and poor warrior, and Suzaku the great warrior with little hint of being a strategic mastermind.

But Suzaku is just not up to being an equal foe of Lelouch. He has too much tactics and not enough strategy. It would have been better planning to make Euphemia the political leader of the opponents of Lelouch and her knight Suazaku the leading warrior on Euphemia’s side and the opponent in battle of Lelouch’s best warrior – Kallen, perhaps. Lelouch and Suzaku could still have been the two main characters even if Suzaku was a follower of Euphemia like Kallen was a follower of Lelouch.

Euphemia & CC

C2 knew that Euphemia was innocent of the Fuji massacre but helped Lelouch blame her for it and then murder her. She took part in the geass directorate massacre.

CC helps Lelouch murder Euphemia when he has wonderful chances to capture her alive with no danger to himself. She knows that Euphemia is innocent and less than a thirtieth as old as CC. That is like you helping to murder a baby. Then she helps Lelouch in the Geass Directorate Massacre. I think that CC has lived a few hundred years too many.


Euphemia and “Killer” Kallen Kouzuki aka Kallen “Mad Dog” Stradtfeld.

Kallen was a vicious killer who fired a machine gun toward Suzaku and Euphemia in "Island of the gods" and (deceived by Lelouch's lies I admit) tired to roast Euphemia to death in episode 23, and took part in the geass directorate massacre.

Kallen is sort of a serial avenger, which is only a little better than a serial killer. In the first season she pretends to be an innocent schoolgirl and sneaks out at night to hep her comrades fight and kill Britannians. Like Lenin she sought to get vengeance for the death of her brother, who was killed because he was the leader of a resistance group which Lelouch described as "terrorists" in the first episode. Like killing a terrorist leader is an evil deed or something he might not have expected and accepted when he became a terrorist leader.

Unlike Lenin, Kallen is not a great leader. Lelouch is the Lenin-like thinker and planner. Kallen is a great nightmare pilot like Cornelia, but not a great general like Cornelia in the first season. Even peace-loving Euphemia is a better general at the Battle of Narita than Kallen was anytime in the first season.

Euphemia and Rollo

Rollo was an imperial assassin by the age of fifteen. At the age of sixteen he switched sides. But did he repent of his former evil? Not if he helped at the Geass Directorate Massacre.

Some people say that Rollo died bravely trying to save the life of Lelouch, his fake brother who he came to love like a real brother. But if that was after the geass directorate Rollo should have dies trying to kill Lelouch.

I say that he bodyguards and family members of Harry S Truman should have killed him the instantl that they learned about the atomic Bbombing of Hiroshima. I say that when a leader does something evil his bodyguards should iinstantly kill him despite their job being protecting him and his family members shuld instantly kill him despite loving him. Thre is no good in protecting someone who has done a terrible evil deed who it is your duty to kill.

Euphemia and Cornelia

Cornelia is a great general and civil administrator. But left to her self she resorts to excessive violence too often, as in the Saitema Ghetto Massacre in "Get Cornelia". Without Euphemia to influence her in the direction of gentleness and mercy (and Cornelia needs a lot of influencing in that direction) Cornelia may be able to do many important things but cannot be a force for good. Cornelia may have killed thousands more people than were necessary in the year between the first and second seasons, perhaps a million, due to Euphemia's murder.


Euphemia and Schneitzel

Prince Schneitzel is kind to his subordinates and followers. But he slaughters millions of people in his quest for power. Thus he seems to have both the virtues and the evil qualities of “Earth’s Supreme Horror”, Genghis Khan.

Euphemia is kind to her subordinates and followers. Thus, like Schneitzel, she has the virtues of Genghis khan. But Euphemia is also kind and good to everyone else, strangers, foreigners, and even her enemies. Unlike Scheneitzel, she is completely free of the evil qualities of Genghis Khan.

Prince Schneitzel lacks Lelouch's drive for revenge, but makes up for that with an even greater lust for power, and so is about equally evil. He is almost as smart as Lelouch, but after being geassed to obey Zero's orders he can only support Zero's polices. New Zero policies can only be as smart and good as Suzaku, following Lelouch's example, can make them, which is not very smart (Suzaku's fault) or good (Lelouch's and Suzaku's fault). Schneitzel can not be a major force for good.

By backing the F.R.E.I.J.A. project Schenitzel is one hundred percent guilty of all the millions of deaths resulting from the use of F.R.E.I.J.A.. Just as Lloyd the director of the project is one hundred percent guilty of all those deaths. Just as Ninia who provided the necessary genius is one hundred percent guilty of all those deaths. And Lelouch whose murder of Euphemia caused Nina to enter the project is also one hundred percent guilty of all those deaths. And that adds up to 400 percent, but I I am not dividing up the guilt among those people but pointing out that each of them did something which was absolutely necessary for all those millions of deaths to happen.

Euphemia and Tianzi

Euphemia is nice and good. Tianzi is nice and evil.

Tianzi could have united two thirds of the world by the marriage with Prince Oddysses but cared more about her personal happiness than ending wars forever and maybe saving thousands or millions of lives per year for thousands or millions of years if the marriage resulted in the total and permanent union of the whole world. Then she played a leading role in the UFN invasion of Japan which resulted in millions of deaths when F.R.E.I.J.A. was used. I wonder how the Chinese people are going to survive another fifty or sixty or seventy years of her reign.

Euphemia and Nina.

Some people say that Euphemia and Nina were both helpless girls. But Euphemia rushed into danger several times to save people she knew or even strangers.

Nina, also is not just a helpless girl – unfortunately. As a scientist she helped develop F.R.E.I.J.A.. in time to kill tens of millions during the wars of the second season. Since Nina did so as a result of Lelouch murdering Euphemia they are both responsible for the same tens of millions of deaths, although Lelouch has killed hundreds and thousands of people without using F.R.E.I.J.A. and so has a slightly higher evil score.

Euphemia did not totally disapprove of getting revenege – she did apologize to Clovis’s picture for being unable to revenge him. But if Euphemia ever did try to get revenge she would have tried her best to only kill or harm the person she targeted, not kill millions of relatively innocent bystanders without killing the one she was after.

And so on. All the major and secondary characters except For Euphemia are too evil to seek to do good very often and thus are much less likely than Euphie to make the world a better place.
Member
3361 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / cuddled to Lelouc...
Offline
Posted 12/26/09
uuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
52652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / F / Jus sitting at th...
Offline
Posted 12/28/09

jaeljael wrote:

uuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh


Yeah same here
1575 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
17 / F / In JUMP's House (=
Offline
Posted 1/1/10
Uhmm. So many words...
1166 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
64 / M
Offline
Posted 8/20/10
So much truth, so few words to cram it in.
1166 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
64 / M
Offline
Posted 8/20/10
Euphemia.

She was the only character good enough to be liked. And she was not only good enough to be liked, but superhumanly good.

Even after the the geass command added a new goal, thousands of times more evil than her previous goals were, Euphemie's overall goals were still far better, more good and less evil, than those of any other character. It would have been far better for the world of Code Geass if Euphemia won and achieved all her goals, even if that meant completing the geass command first, than if any of the other characters had achieved their goals. To say nothing of being far better than the mess the other characters made fighting against their opponents.

see above posts for some of the other flaws of the other main characters.
1047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Unknown.
Offline
Posted 8/26/10 , edited 8/27/10
*facepalm*
Copy_Ninja11 told me before I went to CR about your posts IC. wat's going on? wats ur purpose?
1166 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
64 / M
Offline
Posted 8/27/10

WrepardME wrote:

*facepalm*
Copy_Ninja11 told me before I went to CR about your posts IC. wat's going on? wats ur purpose?


My purpose is to free you from your liking for Lelouch and for Code Geass. I want to create a world in which nobody likes Lelouch or Code Geass.

1047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Unknown.
Offline
Posted 8/29/10

infinitycubed wrote:


WrepardME wrote:

*facepalm*
Copy_Ninja11 told me before I went to CR about your posts IC. wat's going on? wats ur purpose?


My purpose is to free you from your liking for Lelouch and for Code Geass. I want to create a world in which nobody likes Lelouch or Code Geass.


My godd@mn opinion is my own godd@mn opinions, everyone has opinions, don't try to change them, you will make things worse.
800 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F
Offline
Posted 11/9/10
Well there's definitely something about Euphemia, I mean people who love do really adore her to the extreme and would do anything for her. Suzaku, Cornelia, Nina, infinitycubed... But I do agree her death could have been avoided and I really did hate Lelouch not only for murdering her even though he could have solve the problem some other way, but for badmouthing her and put all the blame on her (while it was all his fault, accidental Geass order or not) which was much worse. And as much as I love her I was also quite disappointed with CC for letting him do that.

But I still love Code Geass and although Lelouch is not my favoutite character I dig him.
Member
219 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Dallas, TX
Offline
Posted 1/26/11

infinitycubed wrote:

My purpose is to free you from your liking for Lelouch and for Code Geass. I want to create a world in which nobody likes Lelouch or Code Geass.



What a waste of such good analytical skill.

I don't think anyone denies Lelouch being evil. I disagree with him being COMPLETELY evil. His inner conflict of his goodwill versus his want for vengeance is what makes the story so interesting.

Anyways, you talk as if liking Lelouch or Code Geass is some sort of horrible disease. You're preposterous.

Also, I've read nearly all of your threads. You seem to stress the fact (other than Lelouch being an evil bastard) that if Euphie were to not die, everything would've worked out happily in the end. However, I don't think a happy end is what Code Geass was meant to depict. Heck, I know for sure, the moment Euphie was killed, the show was going to end up extremely tragic.

I simply view Euphie's death as a tragic accident and a mistake on Lelouch's part and another one of his sacrifices he had to make.
1166 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
64 / M
Offline
Posted 1/26/11 , edited 1/26/11

Roflicious wrote:


infinitycubed wrote:

My purpose is to free you from your liking for Lelouch and for Code Geass. I want to create a world in which nobody likes Lelouch or Code Geass.



What a waste of such good analytical skill.

I don't think anyone denies Lelouch being evil. I disagree with him being COMPLETELY evil. His inner conflict of his goodwill versus his want for vengeance is what makes the story so interesting.

Anyways, you talk as if liking Lelouch or Code Geass is some sort of horrible disease. You're preposterous.

Also, I've read nearly all of your threads. You seem to stress the fact (other than Lelouch being an evil bastard) that if Euphie were to not die, everything would've worked out happily in the end. However, I don't think a happy end is what Code Geass was meant to depict. Heck, I know for sure, the moment Euphie was killed, the show was going to end up extremely tragic.

I simply view Euphie's death as a tragic accident and a mistake on Lelouch's part and another one of his sacrifices he had to make.


Lelouch doesn't have to be COMPLETELY evil to be hated and loathed and despised as an evil villain. Or at the least to be despised and pitied as a character who has lost all his rationality due to his vengeance lust, who only thinks that he his making rational choices.

Lelouch is evil enough to be a villain disguised as a hero.

In real life, defense lawyers often claim their clients have spent most of their lives doing ethically neutral or even good deeds. They claim that the alleged crimes of their clients took up only a small proportion of the lives of the clients up to the time of the trial. And they are correct.

Even the most evil men in all of history spent most of their waking hours doing things which were ethically neutral or even good. So naturally any evil fictional villain who is not supposed to be far worse than them, who is supposed to be reasonably realistic, would spend most of his time doing ethically neutral or even good deeds.

In Oliver Twist Bill Sykes is supposed to be between thirty and forty, I guess. Since there are 24 hours in a day and 365.25 days in a year according to the Julian Calendar, which I will use to keep things simpler, there are 8766 hours in a year and Bill Sykes was about 262,980 to 305,640 hours old in the novel. If he took an hour or two to murder Nancy he spent only 0.0000032 to 0.0000076 of his life committing that terrible, horrible, disgusting murder. But countless millions of readers, who previously thought that he was a bad man but not much worse than many other poor men who turn to a life of crime, hated and despised him as an evil, cruel, heartless murderer after reading the murder scene, and hated him for a deed he spent less than a hundred thousandth of his life committing.

And many real life relatives of murder victims have considered the killers to be evil murderers despite the killers spending less than a hundred thousandth of their lives so far committing the murders in question.

There are 60 minutes in an hour, 1440 minutes in a day, and 525,960 minutes in a year. So someone would be a million minutes old when 1.9012852 years old. Suppose that when one of the alien children in The Village of the Damned (1960) was 1.9012852 years old he took a minute to make one of the human children hurt himself or even kill himself. The relatives of the victim would would consider the alien child evil, even if he was not known to have done anything else evil in the other 999,9999 minutes of his life.

And someone would be 10,000,000 minutes old at the age of 19.012852 years. Suppose that he took a minute to knock down a woman and run away with her purse. . If he had no prior criminal record, his defense could argue that he had been neutral or good for most of his life so far. And he would have been neutral or good for ten million times as long as he had been a criminal -- or 9,999,9999 times as long, to be precise. But that would not make him innocent. And if he used that minute to impulsively murder someone, he would be an evil murderer despite spending only 0.0000001 of his life so far committing murders.

There are 60 seconds in a minute, 3,600 seconds in a hour, 86,400 seconds in a day, and 31,557,600 seconds in a year. So someone would be a billion seconds old when he was 31.688087 years old. Suppose that he is walking along and someone greets him, and for some trivial reason, such as the ugliness of the person, he whips out his ray gun and vaporizes him in a single second. Even if he never did anything else evil in the billion other seconds of his life, he would be considered an evil murderer by the relatives of the victim and by most neutral observers.

As a real life example, John M Chivington, 1831-1894, almost never did anything evil, but his most evil deed, the Sand Creek Massacre, is enough to make him an evil mass murderer. He might have done neutral or good deeds for thousands or millions of times as long as he spent murdering, but his murders are enough to make everyone despise him as an evil murderer. He was once introduced to a half-Cheyenne Denver socialite by some ignorant or malicious person, who asked her if she knew Colonel Chivington. And she replied that he murdered her grandmother. And any person who watched any neutral or balanced show about the Sand Creek Massacre would have to agree that Chivington murdered at least a hundred persons.

I say that Lelouch's inner conflict between good and evil could make the story interesting if his evil actions were limited to, at the worst, ethically ambiguous killings, not anything so obviously and clearly evil and unnecessary as killing Euphemia.

And I do think that if Euphemia survived, everything would work out happy enough at the end as far as the named characters seen in the story were concerned. The one good and decent character who deserved to live would survive, some of the evil characters would die the deaths they so richly deserved, and some of the other evil characters would unjustly survive. And although I didn't want any evil characters to survive, the higher the fatality rate the more unlikely it would be that Euphemia would survive, so I could put up with the majority of the characters surviving if Euphemia did. If the writers wanted to, they could kill off more of the other teenage characters, especially if they killed the characters before they did anything evil, so the audience would not know they would eventually turn evil and would mourn them as innocents.

And you were wrong abut the show ending up extremely tragic. Such a terrible crime as the murder of a character as good as Euphemia could only fit in a good tragedy if it was the obvious direct cause of the final cataclysm which immediately followed. Instead the story was dragged out for over twelve more hours and a year of fictional time and involved so many plot elements that the cause of the final event was decidedly unclear.

And a tragic hero has to have some reason to commit even his most evil acts. Even his worst crimes need to have some degree of ethical justification or at least psychological explanation. His fatal flaw has to be at least partially a good and admirable trait. But how could any psychological trait that was even partially good or admirable cause someone to kill someone who was never hinted to have wronged him, and who was obviously unnecessary to kill to achieve any good or humane goal? How can it be even partially noble or admirable to kill someone when it is so utterly unnecessary and even counterproductive to your cause to kill them? How can the psychological explanation for such an obviously unnecessary murder translate into anything except that the killer was too evil to be liked?

I have a theory that the creators of Code Geass originally planned it as a one season tragedy in which Lelouch and Suzaku refused to work together to help the Japanese, and Lelouch got more and more evil, killing people with less and less reason, until at last he killed Euphemia, and in the final confrontation everyone was killed. Probably someone would activate a F.R.E.I.J.A. prototype which would destroy the Tokyo area, or all of Japan, or the whole world.

And when it was decided to make it a two season series episode there was no money in the budget to pay for rewriting most of the first season episodes to make Lelouch more decent and not swiftly descend into an irrational murderer.

And disgustingly, most of the audience continued to care about Lelouch and root for him despite his descent into insane evil during the first season being kept in the show.

How can it be a tragic accident or mistake to kill someone who is so obviously safe and easy and quick to capture alive as Euphemia would have been? Nobody who cared about doing good and avoiding evil would ever have passed up such a wonderful chance to do good and avoid doing evil has Lelouch passed up when he killed Euphemia instead of capturing her alive. Killing Euphemia was a sacrifice Lelouch had to avoid for the series to make any sense ethically.

And as for Lelouch-loving being a terrible disease, how can I trust that any viewer of Code Geass will ever spare anyone's life under any circumstances if they refuse to condemn Lelouch's murder of Euphemia, if it does not disgust, horrify, and revolt them, if it doesn't make them Lelouch-loathers? If the fictional murder of Euphemia is not evil enough to make them hate Lelouch, would they ever decide not to kill any person in real life, under any circumstances?
Member
219 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Dallas, TX
Offline
Posted 1/27/11 , edited 1/28/11
Firstly, I was appalled when I read your original post. You, in summation, called single secondary character, besides Euphy, evil. Even the 10-something year old Tianzi. I just cannot comprehend this. Because Tianzi did not happen to understand the consequences of her actions, she is now evil? She chose her course of action because she did not completely realize the benefits of the other alternative. She's a child. Nina? I thought it was clear, from early on in the series, that Nina is not mentally or emotionally stable. That is why it is understandable when she acts in the far extreme. Why do you expect every character to perfectly follow ethical behavior? Is it impossible to accept that perhaps some people do not always behave ethically, but they are not evil, also? Why must every character be compared to a flawless character such as Euphie, and then be called evil because they do not match up to her flawlessness? What would YOU have done if you were in each of those characters' shoes? In their predicaments? In their dire situations? Would Code Geass have been as entertaining as it was, if YOU were in Lelouch's place?

Secondly:


infinitycubed wrote:

Lelouch doesn't have to be COMPLETELY evil to be hated and loathed and despised as an evil villain. Or at the least to be despised and pitied as a character who has lost all his rationality due to his vengeance lust, who only thinks that he his making rational choices.

Lelouch is evil enough to be a villain disguised as a hero.

In real life, defense lawyers often claim their clients have spent most of their lives doing ethically neutral or even good deeds. They claim that the alleged crimes of their clients took up only a small proportion of the lives of the clients up to the time of the trial. And they are correct.

Even the most evil men in all of history spent most of their waking hours doing things which were ethically neutral or even good. So naturally any evil fictional villain who is not supposed to be far worse than them, who is supposed to be reasonably realistic, would spend most of his time doing ethically neutral or even good deeds.


You're certainly right. However, regarding the examples you gave, the reason society would come to loathe the person
rather than the actual deed itself is due to the masses not knowing much about the person except the deed and the incidents that happened around the deed. The viewers are not strangers to Lelouch. We have seen, from episode one, both his admirable as well as evil traits. The show revolves around him. We know all there is to know about Lelouch. His past, his present, his future. Everything. We don't have omnipotent powers to track the thoughts and lives of every criminal accused of crimes. If we did, though, I'm sure many of these criminals would be less loathed. I see this to be human nature. When we become attached to individuals, we have a natural tendency to close our eyes to some things.

If I heard in the news about a stranger committing a horrible murder, I would immediately and naturally be, even though I shouldn't, revolted. Now, if that stranger was a very dear friend of mine instead, rather than loathing my friend, I would loathe the fact that he did such a thing. Next, I would, in my confusion, try to reason out why he would do such a deed, for surely, there must have been a reason that stimulated him to do such a thing, which brings me to my next point.


infinitycubed wrote:


And a tragic hero has to have some reason to commit even his most evil acts. Even his worst crimes need to have some degree of ethical justification or at least psychological explanation. His fatal flaw has to be at least partially a good and admirable trait. But how could any psychological trait that was even partially good or admirable cause someone to kill someone who was never hinted to have wronged him, and who was obviously unnecessary to kill to achieve any good or humane goal? How can it be even partially noble or admirable to kill someone when it is so utterly unnecessary and even counterproductive to your cause to kill them? How can the psychological explanation for such an obviously unnecessary murder translate into anything except that the killer was too evil to be liked?


I know you've done extensive analysis on this, but, I do believe Lelouch had a reason to kill Euphie. Perhaps more reasons not to kill her than to kill her, but, like I said, that is where Lelouch's poor judgment at that time came in. I say, his fatal flaw was his absolute fixation on achieving his goals that would ultimately lead the world to a better place. Working for the better welfare of the world is a good and admirable trait. What makes Lelouch so ironic is that the means in which he does it are very evil.

I do not believe we should put normal human standards on Lelouch, who, at that time, was the leader of a large organization, targeted by many, and possesses an other-worldly power of Geass. From Lelouch's standpoint, Euphie did "wrong" him. He did call her the worst enemy he has ever had. By formulating a plan that totally usurped all he has done until now, we could infer that Lelouch was already a bit upset at Euphie. Lelouch was one who decided to sacrifice all for the future. Euphie's plan probably made Lelouch feel that all of his previous sacrifices were totally unnecessary. Lelouch was not nearly upset enough to kill her, of course. But, there are several other factors we must look at.

Euphie, in a sense, "wronged" many Japanese. Even though it was not Euphie's will, not even Lelouch's will, Euphie ended up massacring the Japanese. There, we had an example of how the masses tend to jump on the person first, rather then rationalizing the reasons for the deed itself. Perhaps, the Black Knights truly thought it was a trap and no more reasoning was even necessary. Anyways, Lelouch was already receiving a great deal of stress. Not only does he feel partly responsible for this tragedy, all the chaos that would brew up after this incident, Lelouch would have to deal with. It's possible he was thinking of all of these things simultaneously when he encountered Euphemia.

Just exactly what Lelouch was thinking of when he decided to murder Euphemia, we can't tell. Perhaps, he thought that harboring Euphemia as a hostage would cause a direct confrontation with the Royal Family of Britannia, especially Cornelia and Suzaku. Perhaps Lelouch thought that Euphemia would be rather useless as a bargaining tool by then, for not even Brittania would want to claim her back after what she allegedly has done. Perhaps, Lelouch was thinking, that he is justice, and bringing death upon Euphemia for her "crime" would be the justice millions would have wanted to be enacted upon her. Perhaps, Lelouch did not want to deal with more people having a direct look at Euphemia's crazed state, for fear of having them discovering Geass. Perhaps, Lelouch thought, that even if Euphemia was taken hostage, some radical in the Black Knights could possibly murder Euphemia, anyway. Perhaps, Lelouch, knowing that Geass is an evil power, could not bear having to see Euphemia in such a state or even live any longer. It would indeed put him past his place as a human in this world, but, I do not find it realistic for Lelouch to be arguing ethics within himself in such a situation.

When asked by Kallen, "Do we take her hostage?" The reply was, "No need."
When asked by Euphemia, "Will you run the specially administered zone of Nippon with me?" The reply was, "No. I really wanted to, if I could."

So, Lelouch, clearly not in his best condition, saw it was unnecessary to have Euphemia captive, for whatever reason. It is clear in his head, he had a reason. We don't know for sure what that reason is. We don't know for sure if that reason is adequate. Lelouch decided that the administered zone of Nippon was no longer attainable. We don't know for sure what the reason is. And, once again, we don't know for sure if that reason is adequate. If the reason was indeed inadequate, Lelouch is certainly evil. Well, that's clearly established by both of us by now. However, when Lelouch shoots Euphie, it is clear he harbors no hatred. No malicious feelings, whatsoever. He clearly does not take any bit of joy in doing such a thing. Without a doubt, Lelouch knows he will be hated by many for his actions.

Thus, I cannot help but sympathize. Do I condone of his action? No. Was there a better course of action for Lelouch? Possibly, I don't know. Should Lelouch be hated? Yes, and he gets plenty of it. But, most importantly, do I and most of viewers hate him, too?

Truth to be told, I cannot describe what feeling I have for Lelouch. I cannot fathom such a being existing in reality, and there probably is. Although I sympathize with his suffering, I do not like Lelouch, either. Even if I tell myself, "He is not worthy of sympathy," I still sympathize, anyway.


infinitycubed wrote:

And disgustingly, most of the audience continued to care about Lelouch and root for him despite his descent into insane evil during the first season being kept in the show.

And as for Lelouch-loving being a terrible disease, how can I trust that any viewer of Code Geass will ever spare anyone's life under any circumstances if they refuse to condemn Lelouch's murder of Euphemia, if it does not disgust, horrify, and revolt them, if it doesn't make them Lelouch-loathers? If the fictional murder of Euphemia is not evil enough to make them hate Lelouch, would they ever decide not to kill any person in real life, under any circumstances?


The audience cares for Lelouch, not only because he's the main hero, but because they enjoy his cunning, his genius, his intellect, and even his suffering. I'm sure no viewer would not admit to Lelouch being evil, even if they like him. I'm sure no viewer enjoyed the death of Euphie. From most user comments generating around that episode, nearly every viewer finds Euphie's death tragic. Not many of them blame Lelouch as harshly as you, though.

The audience does not think this deeply through, like you do. The majority of the fanbase are teenagers. Teenagers have some degree of knowledge regarding ethics. But, do they even bother to think about it while watching anime? Most teenagers watch anime for entertainment. They seek entertainment. The giant ethical fallacy that occurred during Euphie's murder probably passed straight over their heads, like it did to me. Perhaps, that's why you're on this crusade to make everybody hate Lelouch and Code Geass. But, I must say, I cannot agree with what you're doing here. Ethics are a good thing. Your intentions are good. Preaching it, however, can be rather insulting. Just as how preaching religiously offends some, preaching ethically might have the same effect.

You claimed that if the fictional murder of Euphemia is not evil enough to make them hate Lelouch, it is questionable if they will ever decide not to kill any person in real life. If you rephrased that question, "Is killing a good, innocent person through a video game evil?" You will get varying answers. If you then ask, "Is killing a good, innocent person in real life evil?" You will definitely, definitely get a "yes" from all people, even teenagers who viewed and enjoyed Code Geass.
257 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / omniverse
Offline
Posted 3/13/12
Shirley is the noblest character, get over it
You must be logged in to post.