Giving A Fictional Character A Little Blood On Their Face Or Clothes Is Like Seasoning It Adds Flavor

Hi there, anon last week who offered some criticism about bias/etc in response to the Joel essay. Was looking forward to your Abby essay and really wanted to be open minded but truthfully you managed to cherry pick the absolute shit out of moments in the game and ignored so many allusions/small nuances/moments that you claim aren’t in the game (Abby showing regret, etc). That take is one of the most biased takes yet that I have read about this game. Also your use of the word retarded to describe Ellie’s questionable decision making with Mel and Owen isn’t cool. If you’re capable of writing an essay like this, you’re capable of finding another word to use instead of that.

But onto the issues with some of the arguments. This is going to be long so buckle up. (I hope it sends in it’s entirety so apologies if it doesn’t). I don’t expect this to be posted, again this is just a criticism to try and point out some bias that I’m seeing coming through. I tried to stay in a linear order of examples you brought up but if I bounce around I apologize. There’s a lot of moments that you give as examples where you would seem to embellish what happened and twist it to fit the narrative that you wanted regarding Abby and her arc.

After Joel’s death, there’s references made to Abby not sleeping and we see that she’s still having nightmares about running into the operating room and finding her dad/finding Lev and Yara. If she truly felt justified in her actions and that she had gotten her revenge, why would she still be having nightmares about this subject? Perhaps she is feeling guilt and didn’t receive any closure from Joel’s death and it’s not until after she knows Yara is okay that we finally see some sort of closure where the nightmare of death turns into a dream. It could be argued that perhaps she’s found a new purpose in life after the end of a 4 year quest and that  through taking care of those that saved her life, she’s been able to move on because of this. There’s also moments during the opening of her half (specifically when we see the mansion scene again but from her view) that after the final blow, there’s no relief. For one or two moments, some of her expression look like she could be contemplating the extent of her own actions. It doesn’t seem like there’s any joy or happiness there.

Next. Expecting Abby to change her view on the Seraphites in two days because of some kids she saved is highly unrealistic. She has conversations with Lev though when they’re making their way up to the sky bridge where they discuss the religion, how the prophets teachings have been skewed over time. Even learning about them, the Seraphites would try to kill her regardless. There’s no reason for her to have a change of heart because she’s met two outliers to their religion. The majority of them still are religious fanatics.

As far as expressing remorse to Ellie for what she did to Joel, Abby didn’t know of Joel’s importance to Ellie in the same way that Ellie didn’t know it was Jerry’s death that Abby sought out vengeance for, not taking away the cure (as stated by Ellie int he theatre confrontation where she states ‘I’m the one you want, there’s no cure because of me’.” This was a really interesting decision on the writers part. Personally I would loved to have seen some sort of revelations with these but I also enjoy the fact that they never know how significantly their lives impacted each other. Abby had to reason to show Ellie remorse because she simply didn’t know the connection. For all she knew, Joel and Ellie could have been a randomly paired patrol group from Jackson. Not a father-daughter like bond.

I do agree with your assessment that perhaps Isaac had something to do with her dark ways. Clearly he has no qualms with brutal tactics and seeing as Abby is consistently referred to as one of the top WLF, it’s not unrealistic to assume that he had a direct hand into grooming her violent ways. That’s not to say she didn’t have a choice, but it’s an interesting concept to explore how he could have shaped the growth of a 16 year old Abby hell bent on revenge.

Owen’s drunk provocation of Abby is an interesting scene because Abby has always relied on Owen to be by her side. To hear his unfiltered thoughts on Joel’s torture could have come as a shock to the system because he has always been straight with her and to have someone as important to her as him paint her brutal actions in such a blunt, disapproving way could have maybe felt like a slight betrayal. There’s no excuse for Owen cheating on Mel, but we see a moment of weakness and vlunerability with the two of them. Not sure why the sex scene gets bashed so much. Whereas Ellie and Dina are allowed to be intimate (granted yes not anywhere near as explicit as Abby and Owen), there seems to be no issue with the former as opposed to the latter. Sex is natural. What’s so traumatizing about the scene? Genuinely curious.

Onto arguments about Seraphite island. You call the line from Yara a throw away line (about how there’s fighting and gun fire from the other way) yet if the conflict has spilled out to where they were, why would they go back that way? Abby trusted Lev and Yara to know a way out because she wasn’t familiar with the island. Why shut down their suggestions when she knows nothing about the layout or inner workings? Regarding Isaac, I don’t think Abby all of a sudden offering to torture a Seraphite would have been an automatic get out of jail free card. Isaac wanted the fight to be over, why would he allow one soldier to take a boat to take a child away for torture? In the grand scheme of things, this doesn’t make sense. Abby could have chosen to go back to the WLF but instead, she chose her new family (Lev). To act like she was best friends with all of the WLF and this means she shouldn’t have killed them once again doesn’t feel realistic. Even Isaac makes a comment about the Salt Lake Crew and how close they are, there’s no reason to believe that she went out of her way to befriend others when she already had her group. Abby more than likely would have gone to SB with Owen and the others (pre Mel conversation) since she was already an enemy of the WLF by that point. There’s no need to call writers less talented/less creative because you didn’t like the story. Resorting to personal attacks on their abilities doesn’t help your arguments. It comes off as petty.

Onto Abby ‘dragging’ Lev to the theater. You’re more than willing to point out Lev’s traumatic experiences but not Abby’s. Lev chose to give Abby the map. He had no reason to, but instead offered it up to her. Lev isn’t stupid. In his interactions with Abby, he shows an understanding of Owen’s importance to her so it’s not out of the box for him to understand the implications of giving her a literal map to the location of the person that had killed the two of them. As for why wouldn’t they give up Abby’s location: Mel was ready to do so and was going to. We know she doesn’t like Abby, figured she was likely dead, and saw a chance to perhaps save the two of them if she gave Ellie what she wanted. Owen cares for Abby and didn’t want to risk the possibility of Ellie finding her, interrupting the conversation before Mel could give any info. Owen approaching Ellie wasn’t wise, but how is his effort to try and deescalate anything other than an attempt to protect both himself and Mel?

Next. Abby did not respond with glee to learning Dina was pregnant. I’m not sure what you think glee is, but there’s nothing happy or joyful about the way she reacted. She’s fueled by blind rage at that point and it’s already been established she’s an eye for an eye type person. Ellie had killed Mel who was pregnant (she’s wearing a coat because there’s a giant ass rainstorm. I’m not sure why her wearing a coat would be so confusing and out of character?) and Dina happening to be pregnant would be an eye for an eye in Abby’s view. Does this make it right? No. But she was not jumping for joy and oh so happy to find that out.

Not sure what the qualms are with something as small as collections cards vs coins. It’s a video game. There was a chance to add more collectibles for a trophy so why not? This seems like a detail to just pick at just because you can. Giraffe/zebra, we knew in the first game wild animals were running around. Why is it out of the box for a group LIVING in SLC to make a hobby of watching them? Again, seems nitpicky. A father/father figure teasing a child about a relationship. Isn’t this just a dad thing? Again, feels nitpicky and serves no purpose as a legitimate critique. The museum/aquarium, are people not allowed to explore and have things they’re intersted in?’ These little details you throw in serve no real purpose other than to nitpick and are basing this off an emotional response instead of trying to use logic regrding game mechanics/achievements/explanations/etc.

Im sure there’s things I’m missing or that I forgot to mention but this has become quite long. As a wrap up, it feels like you truly haven’t tried to look at the game from a neutral perspective. Perhaps you really have tried, but that doesn’t really show in your essays. It shows as still having a strong bias towards anything that isn’t complimentary of Ellie or Joel and their stories. I do enjoy reading different perspectives on the game and having discussions, but I would still find it hard to approach and have a thoughtful discussion because there seems to be no openness and the vibe that you know the story better than the writers do. That paired with insults flung at the writers makes it feel like nothing more than a spiteful rant for not living up to your expectation rather than a constructive critique. I look forward to further essays and hope that perhaps the tone can become a bit more neutral in them. Have a great evening.

First of all, I wanna say thank you for reaching out and offering some critique, of course that is what I am hoping for (I'm not writing a 4500 word essay only to have it not be read and discussed), so again thank you for that. The next thing, you are absolutely right about the use of the word "retarded", I'll change that as soon as I posted this response. Regarding the cherry picking, I yet again have to agree with you. Of course I picked scenes that serve as (for me the most fitting) examples to support my claim/stance. I think you would agree that talking about every single scene of this game, especially in a single essay, is near impossible. So I instead reduced the list of my arguments to what I believed to be most crucial ones in informing my opinion (thus hoping they would also be most convincing to the reader). Before I go on to react to the specific arguments you make, and I had hoped I worded my essay in a way that that becomes clear, that essay is an outline of my thoughts in a way, it is me saying: this is my opinion/position/stance and these are reasons x, y, z of why I have that opinion. Subsequently, it is neither a definitive statement of any kind nor is it a critique to people who feel differently than me. I repeatedly say "in my point of view", "for me", "I expected", as well as giving room for other interpretations (I literally state that other interpretations are possible, and then went on to explain why I interpreted it the way I did). Which leads me neatly to your first argument. For you, Abby's nightmares read as an expression of guilt as well as other instances, allusions and nuances as you say, that could be interpreted this way. But that is exactly my critique. Interpretation is something so subjective and all these supposed allusions (again that is up to the individual's interpretation) are so incredibly vague that there is no way we could ever make a definitive statement about what they actually allude to. You reading it as guilt concerning Joel is absolutely and 100% justified, but me not doing so is just as legitimate. And Abby didn't strike me as feeling guilty the first time I played, and she still didn't the tenth time I did. Additionally, a glance that lasts a few seconds (and could be interpreteted in a marriott of ways) is unfortunately not substantial and concrete enough to balance out all the concrete evidence (Abby's actual actions) I have of her being a questionable person. This is one of the reasons why I needed Abby to have an actual conversation, to verbalize what's going on in her head. And it could have been with any one person, honestly, it didn't need to be Ellie. And I 100% agree with you there that we'd have to tweak a lot of the rest of the game if we were to arrive at my proposed alternative ending, since Abby wouldn't have the information needed (none of my proposed fixes work in isolation btw, so this goes for the Isaac confrontation as well). But it instead could have been a conversation with Lev, or Owen during that scene on the boat for instance (which I absolutely adore, by the way, it's one of my favourite scenes in the entire game). Owen's heartfelt monolgue could have been the perfect stepping stone for Abby to reveal her inner conflicts, thoughts, and motivations. But instead we get a sex scene. My issues here lies with the fact that they decided to show as much as they did for pure shock value (as opposed to implying it like they did with Ellie and Dina). But this is only issue #273 I have, so let's move on to the more important stuff. And this is where it gets interesting to me personally: You argue that Abby living with the WLF for the past four years would not lead her to having a strong enough connection to her comrades to not be willing to kill them. How is her connection to Lev so strong then after just 48 hours? Looks a lot like cherry picking to me. And this next argument has to be my favourite: You don't have to critize the writers just because you didn't like the story. Have you considered that I didn't like the story because it was

poorly written? I have no idea why people put writers on such a pedestal. It is their literal job. And when they don't do their job well I have the right to critize them for it. Abby dragging Lev to the theatre is and will remain inexcusable to me. First of all, Abby's "traumatic" experiences pale next to Lev's, but on top of that she's an adult and Lev a literal child. If you don't care that she's dismissive of his feelings and struggles here, because she prioritizes her own, that's your right. But I find it horrendous. "Glee" might have been the wrong word to choose here, but you still understand what I was trying to express. Her reaction to receiving that information is still messed up and concerning. And if Abby is indeed an eye for an eye type of character, and that is the supposed motivation for her to want to kill Dina, why then did Joel saving her life not lead to her letting him live in return? That would have been the eye for an eye solution, you saved my life so I will spare yours. And yet. Now, as the second to last thing, I want to address the critique that I do not come off as neutral enough. And I am absolutely aware of that. I had a second person proofread my essay before I posted it and they also let me know (even though I was aware of it beforehand) that as a reader one can tell that I am getting increasingly more frustrated as the essay goes on. And for a while I thought of going over the essay again to fix it to try to sound more neutral, objective and unemotional (like I did with my other two essays, that still aren't entirely neutral or free of personal bias by any means, as no text expressing opinions and feelings ever truly can be), but I ultimately decided against it. Not only is this a game specifically designed to elicit strong emotions, and pointing out all the issues I have did frustrate me, so why should I try to play that down? But also, why am I the only person expected to be completely rid of personal bias or emotions? Why are my arguments only seen as valid or legitimate if I present them in precisely the one way that suits you best? How am I expected to anticipate any one reader's interpretation and thus emotional reaction to my words and consciously construct my essay in a way which aims to prevent said reaction? No utterance, especially regarding opinions and feelings, is entirely neutral or free of personal bias. Your critique of my essay is filled with personal bias as well as it is emotionally charged. Does not take away from the legitimacy of your stance and/or arguments though, does it?

My priorities when I write these essays are: accumulating enough strong arguments to support my position, structuring them in a logical way as to assist the reader in recreating my thought process (to increase comprehension), wording it in a way that is as thorough while also as efficient as possible, attempting to word it in a way that is as neutral and objective as I can be (the exception being my Abby essay as I have just explained). And since I am not dismissive, condescending, or accusatory towards people who might disagree with me, I don't see a problem with being emotionally charged every now and then.

Now, finally I do wanna thank you again for voicing critique. I do appreciate it a lot. Not only for reading my essays, but again trying to look at them critically and informing me about issues you have found within my writing. It continues to force me to look at my own opinion with a critical eye and more often than not I have found myself persuaded by compelling arguments presented by people like you. And while you said you wouldn't be interested in having an open discussion/conversation, I would have to disagree, but I think an oral conversation would be more fruitful since I do get the feeling a lot might get lost by having it be a written conversation.

The Last of Us Part II Ellie + swearing

ELLIE WILLIAMS | The Last of Us Pt. II (2020)

what if 🤔 you defeated me in battle 😔 and when you tilted my head up with your blade beneath my chin 🗡️ we accidentally kissed 💋😳

actually. Come 2 think of it. like. humor me for a moment, o followers of mine who are here solely because i post about gillian’s p*rtofino pictures. what seattle day 1 on ellie’s end needs is a tess. LET ME EXPLAIN. having dina there doesn’t work because dina’s character has to do a lot of storybuilding jobs. you have to understand as a player why ellie loves dina, you have to start loving dina yourself, and you have to understand why dina would join you on this revenge mission. and the first felt more out of convenience than anything else (it was a longtime crush but there’s nothing substantial beyond like. paper crowns), the second had me thinking dina was just very bland as a character and thus could be substituted out easily, and the third was just…convenience again. but with tess in the beginning of part 1 like you dont know who robert is but you know robert’s guys beat tess up and now it’s time to fuck robert up. like her anger just fits so well with the narrative that you dont question it at all. and the other thing is like. two young women going on a revenge quest like. Like i get that they both are worldly but they still feel wildly underprepared imo. so if it had been like…ellie and tommy instead for instance. like he has a history, you know there’s anger there, and there’s that unending depression and rage because this was not the world that had been promised to him. and also joel couldn’t occupy that spot because his emotions, though big and overwhelming, oftentimes get pushed down, so it would be a new experience and a bunch of great opportunities for characterization. i would much prefer swapping genuine war stories over dina talking about a farmhouse or making a dumb joke. tonally i think it would fit way better 

Left Behind - Part 1 of 4

Repurposing this account

Accidentally deleted my side account, meaning all the essays I posted are gone too. So, I decided to repurpose this ancient account of mine and have to clean it up first, will repost all my content here in the upcoming days. So to any of you following me still (knowing that I haven’t posted anything in forever honestly), I will be posting mainly about The Last of Us Part 2 for now, so if that’s not something you’d be interested in, this is your sign to unfollow, I guess 😅 Other than that, I was able to save two of my essays that I will be reposting shortly, the third one I’ll try to rewrite in the upcoming days. That’s it from my side. xx

Why Abby never redeemed herself (and what that means for the story)

As divisive as the discourse surrounding Abby as a character and The Last of Us Part 2’s story as a whole is, I have felt the need for quite some time now to properly put into words why much of the intended effect the highly ambitious narrative attempted to achieve has unfortunately never occurred for me. This is due to a single central problem: Abby does not have a redemption arc. A redemption arc consists of two equally crucial aspects: a) the character undergoing the arc realizes that they made a mistake/have been acting morally reprehensible b) they make the conscious decision to do/be better Abby doesn’t do either of those things. Regarding the first aspect, the only instance where Abby alludes to feeling some type of guilt or shame or regret regarding any of her actions (both in terms of what happened in Jackson and what’s going on in Seattle) is on day 2, while she descends the hotel with Lev. When asked by him why she’s helping them, Abby says she “needed to lighten the load a bit”. This is most commonly interpreted as her feeling guilty. This one sentence, however, is so incredibly vague that it’s impossible to determine definitively what she’s talking about here. More than likely, she is referring to having slept with Owen. Not only did that happen mere hours ago, meaning it would still be on her mind, but additionally, Abby has remained consistently defensive, almost aggressively so, when being questioned or challenged in the slightest about Jackson (nearly all her conversations with Mel and Manny during the first day showcase this), so why would she out of nowhere admit any feeling of guilt concerning Joel? Furthermore, nothing occurred that could have acted as a trigger for Abby to start looking back on her actions with self-reflection/self-criticism. And for precisely these reasons I didn’t take that line as an allusion to Joel. (Again, it is possible to interpret it this way, I’m just illustrating why I deem it unlikely.)

Her decision to save Lev and Yara, as is implied by the narrative, is motivated by her feeling like she owes them for having saved her life. And thus (since they would likely die otherwise) she felt somewhat obligated – against her better judgement – to help them in return. Abby doesn't feel the need to change her mind about the Seraphites, she merely makes an exception for these two. Even when interacting with Lev and Yara, she continues to be reluctant, judgmental, and condescending throughout the majority of the first two days (we can spontaneously think of snide, condescending comments Abby makes toward Lev whenever he is talking about his faith), again showcasing that she clearly has no desire or intention to change her mind about their faction, as well as continuously refusing to take them seriously/treat them respect. And while on the subject of Lev and his faith, we do see Abby learning quite a bit about the Seraphites’ religion, but it’s always through the lens of Lev, who makes an effort to distance himself from the rest of his people. When explaining himself to Abby, he makes it clear that this is his belief, and that the Seraphites deviated from their original beliefs/teachings some time ago, thus only reinforcing Abby’s previously held beliefs. She is given no reason to look at the conflict between the two factions from an objective/distant perspective, possibly realizing that misunderstandings, prejudices and year-long, one-sided, vicious rhetoric might have blown the conflict out of proportion (and that she may have been complicit in that). As a result, Abby continues to have no qualms with slaughtering Seraphites. On the morning of the first day, Abby doesn’t hesitate because they're all just religious lunatics to her, and she continues to have this attitude at the end of the third day, Lev being the only exception. There's complete absence of self-reflection, admittance of fault, or desire to change her way of thinking from Abby's side, so where exactly is her supposed character growth? Ultimately, Abby believes to be 100% justified and her enemies to be 100% at fault (this goes for both the Seraphites and Ellie). But there is another problem. Even if Abby had undergone a decent arc, learning the error of her ways, or at the very least realizing how her years of blind loyalty and narrow-mindedness led to unjust, meaningless bloodshed, it would ultimately be irrelevant unless she also drew a connection to her misdeeds against Joel and Ellie. Her supposed “redemption arc” during the three days in Seattle is entirely removed from what she did in Jackson. Thus, even if her arc was well-written and brilliantly executed, she would have at most redeemed herself with regard to the WLF/Seraphite conflict. Let me quickly illustrate why: in a hypothetical situation where I set your house on fire and then immediately afterwards cross the street to give a homeless person 100 dollars, would I have repented myself in your eyes? Would you absolve me of my crimes against you? No, because these two acts are entirely independent of each other. I have not shown repentance towards you or made amends for the injustice you suffered because of my actions. Similarly, Abby has not redeemed herself in my eyes, even in the hypothetical best-case scenario where she undergoes a well-crafted and fantastically executed redemption arc in Seattle (which would give me something to work with at least). Unless she makes the connection and expresses some sort of regret or remorse for what she’s put Ellie through, it is impossible for her to redeem herself regarding this offense and that’s the redemption I was interested in seeing. Some players seem to hold the belief that Abby doesn't need to redeem herself for killing Joel. I cannot argue with that. All I can do is illustrate my position, I believe that her actions were wrong, particularly regarding Ellie who had absolutely no part in killing her father. Hence, I expected – in some way even demanded – a redemption arc, at least if I was ever expected to come around to Abby.

I went into her section looking forward to seeing things from her perspective, wanting to latch onto her personality and get engrossed in her arc, but was ultimately let down. And I wanna make this absolutely clear: Abby does not need to regret having killed Joel in order to redeem herself (both in the audience's and in Ellie's eyes). Her motivation is after all understandable, much like Ellie's is. Still, I would have liked to see her feeling regret for having killed Joel in such an exceptionally and unnecessarily brutal and sadistic way. Perhaps Abby could realize that Isaac's years of training turned her into a heartless, unfeeling killing machine, and that this “darker side” of her came even more to the forefront during that highly emotional moment in the ski lodge. Perhaps, in retrospect, the fact that, despite Ellie's repeated crying and pleading, Abby still went through with killing Ellie’s father figure right in front of her eyes, is slowly starting to gnaw at her conscience (since Abby has been in a similar situation). Just imagine a confrontation between these two women where they actually get to have a conversation with each other. Imagine Abby eventually expressing regret, apologizing to Ellie for having caused her so much suffering. How would that effect Ellie who has been desperate to kill this woman up until this point (in this alternative, hypothetical story)? I cannot express how much potential for compelling dialogue and really powerful drama lies in this alternative scenario. In this version, Abby, who gave into her darkest impulses due to her anger and sadness and insatiable need for vengeance, could ultimately, through self-reflection, realization and asking for forgiveness (a.k.a. actual character growth), prevent Ellie from going down a similarly dark path. And I am in no way implying that this is the only direction this story could have gone that I would have accepted, but I needed to be given something at least. But we were denied all of this. No critical self-assessment, no admission of guilt, no want to redeem herself in the eyes of the people whom she wronged. And thus, Abby's potential redemption arc turns to dust. Now I feel the need to address another incredibly large issue I have with Abby, not as a character within a story, but as a person within the universe. Because unfortunately I am not convinced that I’d be capable of coming around to her even if all these major issues were fixed. And the reason for this being numerous independent acts which I am not able to overlook or excuse. Beginning with her sleeping with Owen. Completely ignoring the fact that him and Abby talk about torturing someone only to 5 seconds later do the devil’s tango (which is quite frankly one the most disturbing things I’ve ever had to witness), I personally find infidelity an inexcusable offense. There is not a single good reason not to be honest with your partner, not to resist your impulses, not to do the right thing. The fact that Mel is about to bring Owen’s child into this world is not exactly helping either. And with this one act (of which I’m to this day unsure why it was included in the game at all? What purpose did that sex scene serve apart from traumatizing me for life?) the writers pretty much sealed the deal for me regarding my opinion of Abby, all the goodwill that might have been left completely eradicated. But I had no idea what profoundly disturbing and repellent things were yet to come. On Day 3, after Abby followed Lev onto the island and he just lost his sister, Abby, in order to ensure they escape the island together, goes on to mow down WLFs and Seraphites alike. For one, the matter of fact is that there would have been plenty other ways to get out of that situation, for instance: a) Why do they not return to the boat with which they came (and landed on a very remote part of the island with)? I know they offer some bs throw-away line from Yara about hearing gunshots coming from there, but honestly anything would be smarter than going through the main battle that’s going on in Haven.

But no, we can’t have characters make rational decisions, we need another cool action set piece, goddammit. b) In that confrontation with Isaac (I still can’t get over how they actually ran into him, like what are the odds of this) why wouldn't Abby just tell Isaac that she wants Lev to herself, that she wants to take her sweet time torturing him? Don’t tell me Isaac wouldn’t be on board with that. But then Abby and Lev would be able to escape the island no problem, and we need to show how much Abby cares about Lev (who she met 24 hours ago btw) by having her willingly accept getting shot to protect him. We can’t have Abby making rational decisions that would ensure both her own and the kid’s survival she apparently so desperately cares for, we need another cool action set piece, goddammit. What I am trying to illustrate is that there would have been more than one alternative to avoid having to kill her own comrades. But no, Abby instead opts for the way that not only takes longer and is much riskier but is also the one that forces her to kill her own comrades/friends. (Me criticizing the stupidity of the character's actions is obviously by extension a critique of the poor writing, since a more creative/more talented writer would have come up with logical, sensical ways to get to this plot point/action set piece. I'm not criticizing the fact they prioritize a certain plot point, but there's ways to reach those in more organic, logical, non-contrived ways.) And what does Abby have to say when Lev asks her about just having killed dozens of her own people? “It doesn’t matter.”. Mind you, these are the people she has spent the past four years with, the family and the home she was granted after having lost that in Salt Lake City (keep in mind how much effort they put into showing us how chummy Abby was with literally everyone during Day 1 too). And she ploughs through them with absolute apathy. No hesitation, no moral dilemma, no inner conflict, nothing. This woman is a literal sociopath. And I know it sounds like it couldn’t get any worse, and yet. I think my absolute favorite thing about Abby has to be how selfless and empathic she is. Only take the scene at the end of day three where she finds Owen and Mel dead in the aquarium. What is the next thing Abby does? She drags a 13-year-old child into a combat situation, a child who has recently been through five – count them five!!! – severe traumatic events within the last three days. a) He was excommunicated from his community, whose members then went on to hunt him and his sister down for sport. b) His sister lost her arm trying to protect him, nearly dying in the process. c) He had to kill his mother in self-defense because she was so unable to accept him for who he is to the point of attempting to kill him. d) He lost his sister whose last act was saving his life once again. e) He watched the community he’s been a part of his entire life being slaughtered in front of his eyes while his home and the physical manifestation of his faith, their place of worship, burned and razed to the ground. This 13-year-old child needs all the affection, attention, compassion, support and time in the world to be able to cope with all this. But unfortunately, Lev is stuck with Abby, who couldn’t care less. As soon as she finds her two friends dead, Lev’s struggles are immediately brushed aside. So much so that she drags him along, willingly putting his life at risk again while also expecting him to be capable of focusing enough to assist/aid her. “I know you – a literal child – just lost everything that made up your sense of identity and belonging, but I really liked my two friends, so shut up, we need to focus on me first.” And people expect me to like this person? Of all the things Abby did that make her the most psychotic, despicable, and morally reprehensible person, this one might take the cake for me personally. How far up your own a**, how far removed from any capability of showing empathy do you have to be to act this way?

It seems to me that she does not care about Lev after all (only when we need a cool action set piece where she kills all her friends – she does it out of love for this random kid though, so it’s okay). And yet there remains one final moment, one decision, one act that we need to talk about – when Abby reacts with glee upon hearing she is about to slit a pregnant woman’s throat. And once again, if it wasn’t for the presence of a literal child, she would have gone through with it. I've heard claims in defense of this heinous act such as she deems it retribution for Mel's death. And I don’t know about you, but I didn’t get the impression she liked Mel all that much, especially considering she barely bestows a glance at Mel’s lifeless body, she instead cries over Owen. Let's compare her to Ellie for a moment, as people often tend to, thinking it would benefit their defense of Abby: When Ellie confronts Mel and Owen in the aquarium, she makes it clear from the very first second that she is not interested in them, but in Abby (prioritizing the actual perpetrator as opposed to mere (somewhat innocent) bystanders). And I’m gonna have to rant for a second about how utterly dumb and contrived this whole scene is: a) Why exactly is Mel there to begin with? Why is a woman as heavily pregnant as she is even allowed outside the base, much less in a combat situation? (It almost seems like the writers needed to make sure there’s a pregnant woman around for Ellie to kill, no matter how nonsensical and contrived it might be, especially considering we’re in a post-apocalyptic world where pregnant women would be the most valued (and thus most protected) members of society, seeing how they literally ensure the survival of humankind.) b) Mel conveniently wears a big ass coat that hides her belly, when every other second we see her throughout the game she has it on full display so that everyone can immediately tell how heavily pregnant she is. c) Why in the world would the first thing out of Mel’s mouth not be that she’s pregnant? Someone’s holding a pistol to her face and she doesn’t even consider pleading to Ellie to spare her and her child? That Owen doesn’t say anything is even funnier, but we already knew that he doesn’t care about Mel and his own child, so. d) Why would they refuse to give Ellie the information? Not only has it been established that Mel doesn’t care too much about Abby, there should be no dilemma for her when it comes to choosing between protecting her own child and ratting Abby out. But also: Abby is on the Seraphite island where an attck is currently taking place? What are the odds of a) Abby surviving that in the first place, b) Ellie actually managing to get there, and c) Ellie surviving, finding and killing Abby? You have absolutely no good reason to not give up Abby's location, you have nothing to lose and only your own and your child’s life to save. e) Why the hell would Owen approach Ellie who is holding a gun to his pregnant girlfriend’s face? Yeah, sure, don’t comply with her, she can only kill the three of you within milliseconds. (Like, I want so badly to empathize with these people, but it’s really difficult when they continue to be so utterly stupid and incompetent.) f) Ellie, if you threaten someone with a gun, you make sure they don’t come within a two-meter radius of you. And if they don’t back the f*ck up, you shoot them in the kneecap. Then you point the gun at the preggo lady and tell her you’re gonna kill Owen unless she gives you the information you want. Why are you suddenly the most idiotic and incompetent human being? You see, we can’t have characters make rational decisions, we need to show that Ellie is the evilest person to ever exist, no matter how contrived and nonsensical all the events leading up to it are (including discarding Ellie of her core characteristics and skills). Look, she killed an unborn child! Yeah, sounds fine in theory, only problem being:

a) Ellie didn’t know Mel was pregnant b) they attacked her first, she killed them in self-defense c) she had a complete mental breakdown when she found out Kinda the exact opposite of Abby, wouldn’t you agree? Abby knew Dina was pregnant, neither Ellie nor Dina was a threat to her any longer, and she was thrilled to take Dina’s (and her baby’s) life. You can try however hard you like to convince me that Abby is somehow justified here or that she’s a morally grey character, but no matter how you slice it, chief, that is not morally grey, that is repellent and disturbing. I have now done everything in my power to illustrate as detailed and thorough as I was able to why Abby did not have a redemption arc and why both the absence of her arc as well as her deeds independent of it led me to have as strong a negative opinion of her as I do, both as a character within a story and a person within the universe the story is set in. Another question that could be posed, however, and the final thing I wanna address, is whether Abby even needs a redemption arc. After all, there’s a plethora of despicable, morally reprehensible, detestable, and downright loathsome characters in popular media who are widely beloved regardless (we collectively have a soft spot for villains it seems). And I think I’d be much more forgiving if the overall consensus was that yes, Abby is a horrible person, but some people enjoy her regardless because she’s still a well-written character. And if that is your personal stance I would never bash you for that. It only gets exceptionally annoying when the game itself seems to imply that I am a bad person if I do not end up liking Abby. And not for their lack of trying, no, they really tried to a comical degree. This essay is way too long already so I will just quickly outline a fraction of all the cheap and manipulative tactics this game uses to trick us into siding with Abby. a) Play fetch with the dogs that you were forced to kill in earlier parts of the game, don’t you feel bad? No, I do not. The alternative was dying, I did what anyone in that situation would have done. I do not feel bad for protecting Ellie's life. b) Do you hear that sweet Gustavo soundtrack? The one that so many players associate with all the good feelings the first game elicited in them? The one that so well encompasses the “The Last of Us” experience? Yeah, we’ll play it mostly during Abby’s parts of the story and leave it out of Ellie’s (except for the prologue/epilogue), so you feel more inclined to sympathize with Abby. c) Look at how precious Abby is with her kid side character, it’s such a lovely and heartwarming dynamic, reminds me of someone else but I can’t quite put my finger on it. No, we couldn’t have possibly written a different dynamic that doesn’t play on the player’s preexisting emotional associations. How could the audience possibly empathize/connect to a dynamic that isn’t a replica of Joel’s and Ellie’s? d) Look at all those mechanics and weapons in Abby’s gameplay, the strangling people, the shivs, the ladders, the flamethrower/hunting pistol (El Diablo), isn’t it reminiscent of playing as Joel in the first game? Yes, we will continue to shamelessly exploit your emotional investment in characters from the first game (while simultaneously doing everything to thoroughly obliterate said characters you have such a strong connection to). e) Who would have thought? Abby had a dad who was such a good guy, saving Zebras in his spare time (which by the way is so laughable, that’s something a 10-year-old would come up with to make his character sympathetic). Doesn’t really cancel out the fact that he got a hard-on at the chance of killing a 14-year-old child, but he was such a good guy though.

And don’t you love how we once again feel the need to replicate Ellie’s and Joel’s relationship to such a comical degree? Collecting artefacts (cards/coins), bonding over an exotic animal (giraffe/zebra), teasing my daughter about her potential boyfriend (Jesse/Owen), the day trip to a place that becomes like a safe haven to us (museum/aquarium). The main problem I have with these tactics/parallels is that they do not serve any narrative function. They never amount or lead to anything, never play a part in a character’s arc (e.g.: one them reevaluating their opinion of the other because they share similar origins/motivations) or serve to elevate the themes/message during a crucial emotional pay-off. None of these things ever influence the plot, influence a character’s motivation/goals, heightens/showcases/elevates the themes of the story, meaning they do not serve any narrative purpose. And thus, their only remaining function is to manipulate the audience. All these framing devices ultimately reveal that the writers were clearly biased towards one of our two protagonists. They do not hold Ellie and Abby to the same standard. Abby gets her revenge, never aims to forgive Ellie or be the bigger person, and still gets off nearly scott-free, with her life, Lev by her side and the promise of finding the Fireflies. Compared to Ellie who doesn't get her revenge, is expected to be the bigger person by forgiving Abby and still loses everything in the process. Pretty biased for a story that is supposedly about how there's no good or bad side – the writers clearly seem to think there is. Compare this to our introduction to Joel in the first game. One of the first character defining actions we see him take is abandon another family on the side of the road because Joel is the kind of guy that prioritizes taking care of his own. That is who he is. And the game simply presents this to us, never telling us how to feel about it. Similarly, I think it would have worked much better if they made Abby a character defined by clearly setting herself apart from Ellie (instead of ham-fisting all these not-so-subtle parallels in) and letting me make up my own mind about her, instead of constantly and patronizingly forcing me to feel a certain way. If you write a complex, multi-dimensional, compelling character, chances are I will be able to connect to or at least appreciate that character, no matter how villainous, despicable, and loathsome they might be. I personally adore Cersei Lannister from Game of Thrones. And she is an absolute c*nt. I actively despise her within the confines of the story because she continuously tears down my other favourite characters in the most horrific ways. Yet I absolutely adore the artistry, talent and creativity put into creating such a complex and intriguing character, so much so that she is my all-time favourite character. I know the difference between liking a character because they're well-written and liking a character because they're a good person. However, “I don’t like this character because they’re a shitty person, no matter how well-written they might be” is a strong enough argument regardless. A character being a horrible person is justification enough for someone to not like that character. If Abby were well-written, the writers would not have felt the need to resort to blatant and transparent emotional manipulation to force us to feel a certain way about her. The fact that such a large portion of the audience still failed to connect to Abby is not a reflection of the audience’s inability to feel empathy for morally grey characters (again, even the most horrendous villains are often beloved, as long as they are well-written), but instead a reflection of how much the writers failed to create a complex, compelling character we would want to root for.

I’m replaying “Left Behind” and not getting emotional about it at ALL 😭😭😭