Am I the only one that likes Calia Menethil?

[Aucald]

i think you are not following the logic of the conversation, so i will have to explain it for you:

I'm following the logic of the conversation just fine, you're simply confusing my lack of agreement with a lack of comprehension. I'm also not 100% sure you follow your own argument very well, so I continue to find your explanations a bit suspect.

we are arguing as to whether or not Calia fits as part of the Forsaken, we assess that by determining if Calia fits the Forsaken identity or not. A key component of the Forsaken identity is that they are rejected for being undead, hence the name "Forsaken" and hence their particular history of being persecuted by humans and treated like monsters. You can add that they worship Silvanas, but that is irrelevant to the discussion to be honest.

And as I've said, you can be sure a wide cross-section of people likely hate Calia just by dint of her being undead, sight unseen, in as prejudiced a manner as possible. Prejudicial hatred of the undead is widespread across Azeroth. So if your keystone metric is "rejection by the living" you can be almost completely assured she's automatically hated by many merely for choosing to be undead, unnatural, and so forth.

To determine if she fits with the Forsaken identity we are discussing two separate subjects that dont necessarily contradict each other:

One subject is whether or not Calia is rejected by the rest of the humans. If she does, it means she does fit the Forsaken identity (your position), if she doesnt, it means she doesnt fit the Forsaken identity (my position).

The other subject is as to whether or not she fits the Forsaken identity of choosing to be one.

See the above as concerns the answer to the first part, and for the second, she does and has chosen to be one.

No, as you said, identities take time to change, so the only discussions that actually matter are the other two. The one about as to whether or not Forsaken identity changed towards the idea of choosing to be one and the discussion about whether or not Calia is rejected by the humans. The fact that these two are the only discussions that matters go hand in hand with what i have already said so far.

You cannot appeal to a tradition whose very existence is in flux.

and in the rest of your previous responses in this particular discussion you are both claiming that a) identity changes at a slow rate and b) the identity of the Forsaken already changed towards what you want it to be (choosing to be one), this is problematic because you cant have it both ways, you cant pretend that the phrase "X is becoming Y", means the same as "X is Y", because that is simply not true.

I never made any positive statements or conjecture about "what I want the Forsaken to be," I simply pointed out that you're trying to appeal to a tradition that isn't in evidence, with your implication of an unbroken chain of what the Forsaken are or view themselves to be as if the Forsaken where an unchanging monolith of a people.

And no, im not treating the Forsaken as a monolith, i already answered this, im.. WE are speaking in general terms, we are refering to what the majority of Forsaken think.

You *say* you're not doing that and yet that is the substance of the argument you've been making. Actions, or arguments in this case, speak louder than words (or obtuse rationalizations).

As i said before, this particular discussion is about whether or not Calia is rejected because that determines whether or not she fits with the rest of the Forsaken, but its not about being rejected for any reason, its about being rejected for being an undead. So no, she being a Menethil simply doesnt matter.

And just so we are clear, you are shooting your own foot with the comment about Commander Belmont, because if you prove to me that the Forsaken themselves dont accept Calia, it means she doesnt fit with them and you are essentially conceding the argument.

Funnily enough, I never did say she "fit" with the Forsaken in the first place - if anything, she as well as a few others who are nonetheless accepted as Forsaken (like Sylvanas and the Dark Rangers) are examples of inexplicable inclusion. What I'm contesting is the notion that Sylvanas and the others get a pass on being Forsaken for a variety of reasons (aesthetics, "being rejected," getting grandfathered in, etc.) whereas when it comes to Calia you've got a bunch of self-appointed gatekeepers going "nuh uh" for any of several seemingly arbitrary reasons. I mean Sylvanas and the High Elven Dark Rangers don't fit with the Forsaken either, on several levels, nevertheless, they get a pass, and no one bats an eye at their inclusion. Hell, you just had a bunch of Night Elves die in BfA, get turned undead, and join the Forsaken without a whiff of complaint - no one bothered to do extensive background checks on whether they're rejected by the Kaldorei, or if their attire passes the vibe check.

I snipped the rest of the aside as entirely immaterial to the discussion at hand.

[Piamonte]

I'm following the logic of the conversation just fine, you're simply confusing my lack of agreement with a lack of comprehension. I'm also not 100% sure you follow your own argument very well, so I continue to find your explanations a bit suspect.



And as I've said, you can be sure a wide cross-section of people likely hate Calia just by dint of her being undead, sight unseen, in as prejudiced a manner as possible. Prejudicial hatred of the undead is widespread across Azeroth. So if your keystone metric is "rejection by the living" you can be almost completely assured she's automatically hated by many merely for choosing to be undead, unnatural, and so forth.

It cant be "across Azeroth" because the rest of the horde doesnt hate the undead, but that is irrelevant to be honest because the discussion about Calia's acceptance (or lack of) has always been concerning the humans, a point that has been repeated over and over throughout the discussion, why would we be talking so much about Jaina and Anduin if that wasnt the case????.

You cannot appeal to a tradition whose very existence is in flux.

I never made any positive statements or conjecture about "what I want the Forsaken to be," I simply pointed out that you're trying to appeal to a tradition that isn't in evidence, with your implication of an unbroken chain of what the Forsaken are or view themselves to be as if the Forsaken where an unchanging monolith of a people.

You *say* you're not doing that and yet that is the substance of the argument you've been making. Actions, or arguments in this case, speak louder than words (or obtuse rationalizations).

Aucald i have already responded this several times, yes, identity is in flux and yes, it doesnt change over night, but that only proves my point, if it takes time for the identity of a given people to change it means it will take time before the idea of choosing to be one becomes the identity of the Forsaken. If X is becoming Y over time, that doesnt mean that X is Y.

And as i have also responded before, i dont believe that the Forsaken are a monolith, i dont need to appeal to the Forsaken being a monolith, because if we are talking about identity is enough to refer to what the majority think. Your claim of the Forsaken identity being about choosing to be one only becomes true if the majority thinks it so, but that cant happen because you yourself stipulated that identity cant change over night. You can bring to the discussion Lilian Voss, Calia Menethil, the Forsaken that Silvanas raised, that random Forsaken you mentioned whose name i cant remember right now,but that isnt enough to determine that the identity of the Forsaken has actually changed. These are just breadcrumbs that lends towards a destination, but we are not there yet.

Funnily enough, I never did say she "fit" with the Forsaken in the first place - if anything, she as well as a few others who are nonetheless accepted as Forsaken (like Sylvanas and the Dark Rangers) are examples of inexplicable inclusion. What I'm contesting is the notion that Sylvanas and the others get a pass on being Forsaken for a variety of reasons (aesthetics, "being rejected," getting grandfathered in, etc.) whereas when it comes to Calia you've got a bunch of self-appointed gatekeepers going "nuh uh" for any of several seemingly arbitrary reasons. I mean Sylvanas and the High Elven Dark Rangers don't fit with the Forsaken either, on several levels, nevertheless, they get a pass, and no one bats an eye at their inclusion. Hell, you just had a bunch of Night Elves die in BfA, get turned undead, and join the Forsaken without a whiff of complaint - no one bothered to do extensive background checks on whether they're rejected by the Kaldorei, or if their attire passes the vibe check.

I snipped the rest of the aside as entirely immaterial to the discussion at hand.

So, you dont like the distinction people make between Calia and other (as i like to call them) perfect undead (Silvanas, the dark rangers, the new undead night elves), but that doesnt make the arguments people use to make the distinction arbitrary, they (and i) may very well have reasonable arguments to defend the distinction, you just dont like them.

[Aucald]

It cant be "across Azeroth" because the rest of the horde doesnt hate the undead, but that is irrelevant to be honest because the discussion about Calia's acceptance (or lack of) has always been concerning the humans, a point that has been repeated over and over throughout the discussion, why would we be talking so much about Jaina and Anduin if that wasnt the case????.

The discussion about Calia's acceptance or lack there has always been concerning humans *according to you*, but that's not a stipulation I've ever agreed with, and the Alliance is more than just humans. We're talking about Jaina and Anduin because they're the examples you used to attempt to claim that the whole of the Alliance accepted Calia, which I find spurious at best, and outright false at worst. It also ignores the main fact about Jaina and Anduin that would make them both outliers in terms of accepting her - they both knew her in life as a human. Jaina shares a history with Calia due to her closeness to Arthas before the Third War when she and Calia were good friends. Anduin knows Calia from both Legion and his work with the Conclave, as well as due to her close involvement with the Gathering. Anduin was even part of the process that made Calia what she now is. Both of them share a personal closeness with Calia that the rest of the Alliance pointedly lacks.

Aucald i have already responded this several times, yes, identity is in flux and yes, it doesnt change over night, but that only proves my point, if it takes time for the identity of a given people to change it means it will take time before the idea of choosing to be one becomes the identity of the Forsaken. If X is becoming Y over time, that doesnt mean that X is Y.

And as i have also responded before, i dont believe that the Forsaken are a monolith, i dont need to appeal to the Forsaken being a monolith, because if we are talking about identity is enough to refer to what the majority think. Your claim of the Forsaken identity being about choosing to be one only becomes true if the majority thinks it so, but that cant happen because you yourself stipulated that identity cant change over night. You can bring to the discussion Lilian Voss, Calia Menethil, the Forsaken that Silvanas raised, that random Forsaken you mentioned whose name i cant remember right now,but that isnt enough to determine that the identity of the Forsaken has actually changed. These are just breadcrumbs that lends towards a destination, but we are not there yet.

Your equation is flawed because it makes many assumptions about both the traditions and identity of the Forsaken, which is why I keep going back to referring to your implication of the Forsaken as a monolith. The truth of the matter here, and one I am bit a surprised needs to be spelled out, is that the Forsaken don't have a central overriding pillar of identity - they're a fraternity of choice, expressing many varied reasons for being a part of the Forsaken nation, as it were. For some of them, it is about a unity of rejection, as in being rejected from the living world and hated by the living. For others, it is a rejection of the living world on its terms, an acceptance that they become something else that isn't part of that world anymore. Some are driven by desperation, others by lack of purpose, and still others by a duty of care for those like themselves. There's no single overriding thing that makes any given Forsaken part of the Forsaken nation, and it means different things to different people. For Calia, it's the sense that the Forsaken are the people of Lordaeron she knew in life, and her prerogative is to rejoin them in a form she hopes will allow them to accept her, something she doesn't feel she could achieve as a living person. In that sense, she's not wrong either - many Forsaken too still consider themselves the rightful heirs of the kingdom of Lordaeron, even if it is now a scarred and blighted testament to cruelty.

So, you dont like the distinction people make between Calia and other (as i like to call them) perfect undead (Silvanas, the dark rangers, the new undead night elves), but that doesnt make the arguments people use to make the distinction arbitrary, they (and i) may very well have reasonable arguments to defend the distinction, you just dont like them.

I think the curious phrase "perfect undead" pretty much spells out both the bias and its arbitrariness in a way I couldn't easily convey. So really, all you need to do here is explain what you feel makes Calia exempt from this classification of "perfect undead," because it's not the aesthetic, and it's not about rejection, either. The Night Elven Dark Rangers from BfA even got offered clemency and "forgiveness" directly from Tyrande herself, and are permitted to remain within Bel'ameth despite being part of the Forsaken and the Horde.

[Piamonte]

The discussion about Calia's acceptance or lack there has always been concerning humans *according to you*, but that's not a stipulation I've ever agreed with, and the Alliance is more than just humans. We're talking about Jaina and Anduin because they're the examples you used to attempt to claim that the whole of the Alliance accepted Calia, which I find spurious at best, and outright false at worst. It also ignores the main fact about Jaina and Anduin that would make them both outliers in terms of accepting her - they both knew her in life as a human. Jaina shares a history with Calia due to her closeness to Arthas before the Third War when she and Calia were good friends. Anduin knows Calia from both Legion and his work with the Conclave, as well as due to her close involvement with the Gathering. Anduin was even part of the process that made Calia what she now is. Both of them share a personal closeness with Calia that the rest of the Alliance pointedly lacks.

You dont have to agree to anything, you just need to follow the logic of the discussion. Humans need to accept Calia because humans are the former people of origin of the Forsaken and are humans the ones that persecuted and killed Forsaken and inadvertently caused them to become a nation (thus giving them an identity as a people).

The fact that Anduin and Jaina have personal reasons to accept her doesnt prove that the rest of the humans accept her or reject her, in fact, an option we never considered that someone else here pointed out is that the rest of the humans simply dont know she came back from the grave, which puts Calia in a weird ambiguos place concerning her acceptance, so we are at a stalemate at most here.

Your equation is flawed because it makes many assumptions about both the traditions and identity of the Forsaken, which is why I keep going back to referring to your implication of the Forsaken as a monolith. The truth of the matter here, and one I am bit a surprised needs to be spelled out, is that the Forsaken don't have a central overriding pillar of identity - they're a fraternity of choice, expressing many varied reasons for being a part of the Forsaken nation, as it were. For some of them, it is about a unity of rejection, as in being rejected from the living world and hated by the living. For others, it is a rejection of the living world on its terms, an acceptance that they become something else that isn't part of that world anymore. Some are driven by desperation, others by lack of purpose, and still others by a duty of care for those like themselves. There's no single overriding thing that makes any given Forsaken part of the Forsaken nation, and it means different things to different people. For Calia, it's the sense that the Forsaken are the people of Lordaeron she knew in life, and her prerogative is to rejoin them in a form she hopes will allow them to accept her, something she doesn't feel she could achieve as a living person. In that sense, she's not wrong either - many Forsaken too still consider themselves the rightful heirs of the kingdom of Lordaeron, even if it is now a scarred and blighted testament to cruelty.

Aucald we have had a long discussion about Forsaken identity, we have both implicitly agreed that their core identity is about rejection with the possible adittion of their worship of Silvanas and the idea of choosing to be one. You cannot suddenly say that they dont have a core identity and that they are just many different groups because otherwise many of your previous responses dont make sense.

And rejection IS their core identity,hence the name "Forsaken" and hence their particular history of being chased by human which inadvertently caused that the Forsaken became a nation (you must realize that im following the same line of logic in both this discussion and in the one above this one, something you seem unable to do).

I think the curious phrase "perfect undead" pretty much spells out both the bias and its arbitrariness in a way I couldn't easily convey. So really, all you need to do here is explain what you feel makes Calia exempt from this classification of "perfect undead," because it's not the aesthetic, and it's not about rejection, either. The Night Elven Dark Rangers from BfA even got offered clemency and "forgiveness" directly from Tyrande herself, and are permitted to remain within Bel'ameth despite being part of the Forsaken and the Horde.

YOU said that Silvanas, the dark rangers, the night elves and Calia dont fit the forsaken and that what bothers you is the distinction people make between Calia and the rest. The only thing that Silvanas and the others you mentioned have in common is that their bodies arent rotting (perfect undead) so your problem here is appearance????, i seriusly dont understand your position here.

The night elven dark rangers dont matter because we are not talking about them, we are talking about Calia, they may very well dont fit either.

[Aucald]

You dont have to agree to anything, you just need to follow the logic of the discussion. Humans need to accept Calia because humans are the former people of origin of the Forsaken and are humans the ones that persecuted and killed Forsaken and inadvertently caused them to become a nation (thus giving them an identity as a people).

And "following the logic of the discussion" seems to invariably require agreement with your assertions. The Forsaken were also killed and persecuted by more than humans - fear of the undead is an epidemic across Azeroth, so this enforced assumption that humanity controls the strings of what "rejection" is to the Forsaken is wrongheaded on its face.

The fact that Anduin and Jaina have personal reasons to accept her doesnt prove that the rest of the humans accept her or reject her, in fact, an option we never considered that someone else here pointed out is that the rest of the humans simply dont know she came back from the grave, which puts Calia in a weird ambiguos place concerning her acceptance, so we are at a stalemate at most here.

No, but it demonstrates that they share in a notable exception to everyone else, and strongly implies their acceptance of her is personal and not widespread. I've already explained the nature and general distrust (if not outright hatred) of the part of the majority of the living, so it's pretty easy to square this line of thought, IMO. Having two people who accept her doesn't put Calia in a "weird, ambiguous place concerning her acceptance," it simply shows that while her rejection may be widespread it's not absolutely total. The same can be said for many Forsaken.

Aucald we have had a long discussion about Forsaken identity, we have both implicitly agreed that their core identity is about rejection with the possible adittion of their worship of Silvanas and the idea of choosing to be one. You cannot suddenly say that they dont have a core identity and that they are just many different groups because otherwise many of your previous responses dont make sense.

No, *you* have said that, I've explained that they don't have a true "core identity" and that their identity is formed from a patchwork of influences and causes, a crazy quilt of different factors one could say. Your inability to find the sense in what I've said doesn't mean there is none, either; failure on your part doesn't require or imply failure on my part.

And rejection IS their core identity,hence the name "Forsaken" and hence their particular history of being chased by human which inadvertently caused that the Forsaken became a nation (you must realize that im following the same line of logic in both this discussion and in the one above this one, something you seem unable to do).

Again, repeating an assertion doesn't make it any truer. You need the Forsaken identity to be based on rejection for your argument to be true, but there are far too many exceptions and outliers for this to be the case. The argument might've been truer in the time directly after the Third War when Sylvanas formed the Forsaken as a nation, but her declarations and propaganda don't define them, either. With time, it has also grown less and less true.

YOU said that Silvanas, the dark rangers, the night elves and Calia dont fit the forsaken and that what bothers you is the distinction people make between Calia and the rest. The only thing that Silvanas and the others you mentioned have in common is that their bodies arent rotting (perfect undead) so your problem here is appearance????, i seriusly dont understand your position here.

They don't fit the Forsaken *if* you define the Forsaken by their aesthetic, which many people in this thread have been at pains to do. I don't personally have an issue with Sylvanas, the Dark Rangers (either High or Night Elven), or Calia being part of the Forsaken because my view of Forsaken identity allows for all these subgroups to peacefully and easily coexist. Then again, I'm also not someone with issues accepting Calia as one of the Forsaken. I'm requesting that you, as well as others, explain the nature of why you permit so many other exceptions within the ranks of the Forsaken but draw the line at Calia.

The night elven dark rangers dont matter because we are not talking about them, we are talking about Calia, they may very well dont fit either.

See above.

[Piamonte]

And "following the logic of the discussion" seems to invariably require agreement with your assertions. The Forsaken were also killed and persecuted by more than humans - fear of the undead is an epidemic across Azeroth, so this enforced assumption that humanity controls the strings of what "rejection" is to the Forsaken is wrongheaded on its face.

No, but it demonstrates that they share in a notable exception to everyone else, and strongly implies their acceptance of her is personal and not widespread. I've already explained the nature and general distrust (if not outright hatred) of the part of the majority of the living, so it's pretty easy to square this line of thought, IMO. Having two people who accept her doesn't put Calia in a "weird, ambiguous place concerning her acceptance," it simply shows that while her rejection may be widespread it's not absolutely total. The same can be said for many Forsaken.

No, *you* have said that, I've explained that they don't have a true "core identity" and that their identity is formed from a patchwork of influences and causes, a crazy quilt of different factors one could say. Your inability to find the sense in what I've said doesn't mean there is none, either; failure on your part doesn't require or imply failure on my part.

The forsaken were persecuted and discriminated by humans, this is basic lore, this is undeniable. It was this event that forced them to organized themselves and create their own nation. Their entire identity as a people follows from this historical event.

What puts Calia in a weird place is the possibility that the rest of the humans may not know about her or may be they know about her, but they are indiferent, and about Anduin and Jaina, i could simply say that even if they are biased towards her, as leaders they hold a great amount of influence over their respective people and they could get the other humans to like her.

The more we talk about this, the more clear it is that we simply cannot determine whether or not she is liked or disliked, so let just call it a stalemate.

Again, repeating an assertion doesn't make it any truer. You need the Forsaken identity to be based on rejection for your argument to be true, but there are far too many exceptions and outliers for this to be the case. The argument might've been truer in the time directly after the Third War when Sylvanas formed the Forsaken as a nation, but her declarations and propaganda don't define them, either. With time, it has also grown less and less true.

As i have said several times by now, it may be true that Forsaken identity is changing, but as you just said, it happens over time. So while Y may be true in future, it isnt true yet.

They don't fit the Forsaken *if* you define the Forsaken by their aesthetic, which many people in this thread have been at pains to do. I don't personally have an issue with Sylvanas, the Dark Rangers (either High or Night Elven), or Calia being part of the Forsaken because my view of Forsaken identity allows for all these subgroups to peacefully and easily coexist. Then again, I'm also not someone with issues accepting Calia as one of the Forsaken. I'm requesting that you, as well as others, explain the nature of why you permit so many other exceptions within the ranks of the Forsaken but draw the line at Calia.

I never claimed that she doesnt fit because of appearance, appearance isnt an issue to me, if we cant determine whether or not she is rejected and if Forsaken identity hasnt changed yet, there may other reasons as to why people think she doesnt fit with the Forsaken:

-May be because she is a Menethil (something you have used to both say she is accepted and rejected at the same time).
-May be because she was raised by Light magic instead of Death magic.
-May be (and i just thought of this) because she is morally righteous while the rest of the forsaken are willing to do anything to survive.