15,253
pages
ALL POSTSAzula Maybe Lying About How She Got "Rid" Of Her Mental Illness
<p>I found it really odd that Azula's mental condition would just "disappear" after she found her "destiny". Mental illnesses don't go away easily, much less in a few months. I personally theorize that she must have gotten her hands on Avatar's verison of medication pills, some herbs or something such that calm down her symptons. Apparently, Azula managed to befriend some of the mental patients at the mental asylum. But they seem pretty sane from the scenes we see of them in Smoke & Shadow. That's <i>really </i>strange. Let's say I were to believe that Azula cured her mental illness through finding her destiny. What about the others? They were put in the mental asylum for a reason. They seem so normal and calm, though. I also find it quite eerie when Azula said to Zuko "But eventually, you will become <i>just like me</i>". Just like me as in just as ruthless and intimidating? Or just like me as in just as bakstabbed and mentally ill? I always suspected that Azula's loathed Zuko for putting her in that looney bin and it felt confirmed after she described it as "that horrible institution". Either way, I just have a really hard to believing that she only wants Zuko to rule through fear. <span style="font-weight:normal;">To be the Fire Lord she thought she was meant to be. </span>What's she to gain from all this? The Azula that we all know never does anything unless she it benefits her for her endless quest to achieve power or amuses her. I do believe that she really did give up on her quest for the throne, but not for the reasons she said. Dear god, Smoke & Shadow Part 3 left me with more questions than answers.
</p>
(Edited by DarkNet1)
2
<div class="quote"><i>Integer115 wrote:
<div class="quote">Neo Bahamut wrote: <p>That's nothing to be proud of. Obviously, security needs to be a concern, but the notion that you have to be tyrannical in order to handle security is absurd. It's even counter-productive. </p><p>If you have a reputation for being a tyrant, you're going to have more people looking at you as a threat, & less people serving you out of any sort of loyalty or other intrinsic motive. And the problem with extrinsic motives, like fear, if that if the King ever finds themselves in an actually vulnerable situation, where they really NEED their allies, they're going to lose that leverage & said allies will be less likely to help them. </p> </i></div>
As a trivial example: <p>Minamoto no Yoshitsune was a great and noble warrior and commander. But he did not understand what the policy is and how it is done. He died as a vagabond, who was killed by his brother. </p><p>Minamoto no Yoritomo was cunning, cruel and treacherous ruler. He established his shogunate and became the de facto ruler of Japan. And he hired killers that they killed his brother. And then he killed the killers. </p><p>Or: Władysław II Jagiełło. He killed his uncle and uncle's wife. But the son (Vytautas) of these people became his ally in the Battle of Grunwald. They both went down in history as great politicians. </p><p>Niccolo Machiavelli: </p><p>So to hold it they were compelled to dismantle many cities in the country, for in truth there is no safe way to retain them otherwise than by ruining them. And he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed by it, for in rebellion it has always the watchword of liberty and its ancient privileges as a rallying point, which neither time nor benefits will ever cause it to forget. And whatever you may do or provide against, they never forget that name or their privileges unless they are disunited or dispersed, but at every chance they immediately rally to them. </p><p>Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life, and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails. </p> </div> <p>Did you copy and paste this whole essay from an article or are you actually extremely dedicated to this viewpoint of ruling?? </p>
<div class="quote">Neo Bahamut wrote: <p>That's nothing to be proud of. Obviously, security needs to be a concern, but the notion that you have to be tyrannical in order to handle security is absurd. It's even counter-productive. </p><p>If you have a reputation for being a tyrant, you're going to have more people looking at you as a threat, & less people serving you out of any sort of loyalty or other intrinsic motive. And the problem with extrinsic motives, like fear, if that if the King ever finds themselves in an actually vulnerable situation, where they really NEED their allies, they're going to lose that leverage & said allies will be less likely to help them. </p> </i></div>
As a trivial example: <p>Minamoto no Yoshitsune was a great and noble warrior and commander. But he did not understand what the policy is and how it is done. He died as a vagabond, who was killed by his brother. </p><p>Minamoto no Yoritomo was cunning, cruel and treacherous ruler. He established his shogunate and became the de facto ruler of Japan. And he hired killers that they killed his brother. And then he killed the killers. </p><p>Or: Władysław II Jagiełło. He killed his uncle and uncle's wife. But the son (Vytautas) of these people became his ally in the Battle of Grunwald. They both went down in history as great politicians. </p><p>Niccolo Machiavelli: </p><p>So to hold it they were compelled to dismantle many cities in the country, for in truth there is no safe way to retain them otherwise than by ruining them. And he who becomes master of a city accustomed to freedom and does not destroy it, may expect to be destroyed by it, for in rebellion it has always the watchword of liberty and its ancient privileges as a rallying point, which neither time nor benefits will ever cause it to forget. And whatever you may do or provide against, they never forget that name or their privileges unless they are disunited or dispersed, but at every chance they immediately rally to them. </p><p>Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, it is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life, and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails. </p> </div> <p>Did you copy and paste this whole essay from an article or are you actually extremely dedicated to this viewpoint of ruling?? </p>
(Edited by DarkNet1)
<p>I have a mental illness and have had it for years (during a period of 20th-21st Century medicine and treatment at that). I function well with medicine and therapy, though I'm still not cured. I'm not a doctor, though I'd imagine she would still have issues to say the least.
</p>
(Edited by Ashara Xerxes)
0
<div class="quote"><i>Ashara Xerxes wrote:
I have a mental illness and have had it for years (during a period of 20th-21st Century medicine and treatment at that). I function well with medicine and therapy, though I'm still not cured. I'm not a doctor, though I'd imagine she would still have issues to say the least.</i></div>
<p>Just out of curiosity, which mental illness do you harbor? </p>
I have a mental illness and have had it for years (during a period of 20th-21st Century medicine and treatment at that). I function well with medicine and therapy, though I'm still not cured. I'm not a doctor, though I'd imagine she would still have issues to say the least.</i></div>
<p>Just out of curiosity, which mental illness do you harbor? </p>
(Edited by DarkNet1)
0
<p>I wish Aang could have took Azula's bending, and she would get all her limbs broken very badly so she won't bend anymore
</p>
(Edited by Yamisora)
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>DarkNet1 wrote:
</p>
<div class="quote">Ashara Xerxes wrote:
I have a mental illness and have had it for years (during a period of 20th-21st Century medicine and treatment at that). I function well with medicine and therapy, though I'm still not cured. I'm not a doctor, though I'd imagine she would still have issues to say the least.</i></div>
<p>Just out of curiosity, which mental illness do you harbor? </p> </div> <p>Schizoaffective Disorder, Depression and the worst for me is the paranoia, but I'll leave it at that. </p>
I have a mental illness and have had it for years (during a period of 20th-21st Century medicine and treatment at that). I function well with medicine and therapy, though I'm still not cured. I'm not a doctor, though I'd imagine she would still have issues to say the least.</i></div>
<p>Just out of curiosity, which mental illness do you harbor? </p> </div> <p>Schizoaffective Disorder, Depression and the worst for me is the paranoia, but I'll leave it at that. </p>
(Edited by Ashara Xerxes)
2
<div class="quote"><i>Yamisora wrote:
I wish Aang could have took Azula's bending, and she would get all her limbs broken very badly so she won't bend anymore</i></div>
<p>Her whole plan with the Kermuikage and messing up Zuko had been done with nearly zero amount of bending. I don't think that's really going to work. P.S, Azula's really adept at hand-to-hand combat and she's quite agile. </p>
I wish Aang could have took Azula's bending, and she would get all her limbs broken very badly so she won't bend anymore</i></div>
<p>Her whole plan with the Kermuikage and messing up Zuko had been done with nearly zero amount of bending. I don't think that's really going to work. P.S, Azula's really adept at hand-to-hand combat and she's quite agile. </p>
(Edited by DarkNet1)
<div class="quote"><i>Integer115 wrote:
Azula is worthy of respect. She works. She creates itself and the world. And her character is not an obstacle to work. In the Italian province of Rimini once lived a great tyrant. He corresponded with the Pope. Pope threatened the tyrant that he go to hell. But these threats are only amused tyrant. Azula no longer crazy. She's super effective. And because of it, I am sorry that she will lose.</i></div>
<p>Well, I partially agree with you. In fact, She's my favorite character from the series... </p><p>But example of Rimini was a bit a bad comparison. Guess which city was annexed by Paul II and then eradicated By borgias? </p>
Azula is worthy of respect. She works. She creates itself and the world. And her character is not an obstacle to work. In the Italian province of Rimini once lived a great tyrant. He corresponded with the Pope. Pope threatened the tyrant that he go to hell. But these threats are only amused tyrant. Azula no longer crazy. She's super effective. And because of it, I am sorry that she will lose.</i></div>
<p>Well, I partially agree with you. In fact, She's my favorite character from the series... </p><p>But example of Rimini was a bit a bad comparison. Guess which city was annexed by Paul II and then eradicated By borgias? </p>
(Edited by moderator)
<div class="quote"><i>
<p>Integer115 wrote:
Azula is worthy of respect. She works. She creates itself and the world. And her character is not an obstacle to work. In the Italian province of Rimini once lived a great tyrant. He corresponded with the Pope. Pope threatened the tyrant that he go to hell. But these threats are only amused tyrant. Azula no longer crazy. She's super effective. And because of it, I am sorry that she will lose.
Raises eyebrow. Like Zuko,Aang,Katara,Sokka etc didn't work to change the world.
I like what they did with her here, and wouldn't mind it being the conclusion of sorts, with Azula out there making chaos here and there,either forever or until she dies, like a more relaxed Joker.
</p>
</i></div>
(Edited by Master Earthbender8)
<div class="quote"><i>Nukeverything wrote:
<p>Well, I partially agree with you. In fact, She's my favorite character from the series...
</p><p>But example of Rimini was a bit a bad comparison. Guess which city was annexed by Paul II and then eradicated By borgias?
</p>
</i></div>
<p>Azula also lost. In the show and in the comics. She completely lost the initiative. And in the end, her goals turn out to be some kind of nonsense. And this is an obvious authorial arbitrariness. They just need to make Zuko look better. But for the entire Smoke and Shadow story arc, nothing was shown that would make him a serious lord. All that he does is like a simple reflection. However, it began in the Book Three: Fire. </p>
<p>Azula also lost. In the show and in the comics. She completely lost the initiative. And in the end, her goals turn out to be some kind of nonsense. And this is an obvious authorial arbitrariness. They just need to make Zuko look better. But for the entire Smoke and Shadow story arc, nothing was shown that would make him a serious lord. All that he does is like a simple reflection. However, it began in the Book Three: Fire. </p>
(Edited by Integer115)
<p>I don't think she lost initiative so much as she lost her mind; being betrayed by her closest friends unhinged a mind that was already addled by unresolved issues from childhood and a minor inferiority complex and with the loss of her mind, she could no longer stand as a viable candidate for the throne or any position of power. Her goals becoming "nonsense" could be attributed to said insanity, but i don't think her goals are nonsense. Her goal in The Search was a bit poorly-planned; even if Zuko had been Ikem's son, rather than Ozai's, nobody would have believed a former mental patient, certainly not on the word of a letter alone (and even if they did, they'd probably just crown Iroh rather than Azula). Her plans in S&S make sense to me; having lost much of her credibility, she no longer had a hope of ruling herself, so the next best thing was to make Zuko into the ruler she wanted. It didn't work out in the end, but it still made some sense.
</p>
(Edited by QueenCeline)