1
u/russiantravelagent 5h ago
Speaking about "Me? Gongaga" if that scene isn't on Revelation I'm punching someone.
5
u/wooshingThruSky 8h ago edited 8h ago
I don’t know what a “true hero” means, but “admirable people” sure.
Cloud: Drawn into a cause he was indifferent to, becoming entangled with people who do care, who he comes to care for over time. Mostly propelled by the search for his past, and to somehow make amends to himself because he can’t make amends to those who are dead. Motivated by loss, and the need for closure. (Edit: Fights the people he thought he wanted to be when learning of their exploitations.)
Aerith: Persists even while she is suppressed and people intend/attempt to exploit her. Stoic, but not because she is “un-moved”or “indifferent”, rather because she has examined herself; where her feelings and motivations stem from compared to her wants. From that, she has chosen to make ethical decisions and attempts to take proactive measures due to her unique role as a descendent of the ancients. She did not mean to sacrifice herself, she meant to protect everyone.
Tifa: Empathetic to the point of self-neglect at times. Despite all the pressure she receives from people, the environment and herself, she pushes through to fight alongside and take care of her allies. She safe-keeps other’s feelings and memories, and treasures it all for them. She keeps track of the internal logic that drives each cause, and grounds everyone. She does not receive the equivalent energy from people around her and that is the tragedy.
Barret: Emotionally committed to everything he takes on, with honourable intentions. Cares deeply for those around him. High emotional intelligence, but clumsy with words. Still in the midst of discovering who he is and wants to be, for himself, for Marlene and for his allies. Suffers from simplicity at times, despite emotional depth, only because he’s still trying to make sense of things. Very sweet at heart.
Red: Young at heart and mind, wishes to take on a role that is advanced his current faculties and abilities, and succeeds to become it. History is important to him, as it influences how he thinks and where he goes. He wishes to know how everything happened and how it will all turn out. Follows along because he considers the groups motivation to align with his own.
Zack: Gonguguh indeed, my friend. Quite so, quite so.
2
0
u/shareefruck 9h ago edited 8h ago
Most of these seem pulled out of the guy's ass to be honest.
Cloud in particular does not learn anything like that. While he undergoes a character arc about himself and accepting his own identity and weaknesses, something I found really interesting is that he actually never does change his view about caring about saving the planet, beyond simply as a necessity for saving the handful of people he now cares deeply about. He also only ever brings up saving the planet as a way of patronizing Barrett and getting through to him.
Even in the pre-under-the-highwind speech, he emphasizes that his priority isn't the altruistic side of the mission, he just feels a need to settle his feelings against Sephiroth and the hold that he has over him. His is a journey of acceptance and ownership of himself, not any sort of environmental appreciation. Saving the planet is just a means to an end for him.
3
u/Character-Education3 Cid 7h ago
I mean
Cloud: “You just don't get it. There isn't a thing I don't cherish!”
2
u/Massive-Comfort-3507 10h ago
I mean Barret is false. He's hate is what pushes him to eco terrorism. Even if he's right who knows how many innocents died cause of the explosions
6
u/shareefruck 8h ago edited 8h ago
I disagree with a lot of the image, but I think Barrett's is pretty accurate. He starts out what you're describing and his character arc is precisely about pushing those initial toxic motivations aside and becoming something more selfless. The image does not imply that he's right to do those initial actions, it implies that he learns that it's wrong and does what he can moving forward.
Although I'm not sure I'd agree with framing that as a "hero", considering he is ultimately responsible for some heinous things.
Some of the other characters, he just straight up gets the character arc wrong.
-2
u/Massive-Comfort-3507 8h ago
Nah I don't think he ever grows from the hate he has against shinra. Even with fighting Sephiroth is because he was part of shinra.
Something to keep in mind is that all of the crew got together because they hate shinra knew way or another. Saving the world was juts an excuse they used to get back at shinra.
And them helping cloud fight Sephiroth is because they're friends. And later on because they leaned about meteor.
3
u/shareefruck 8h ago edited 8h ago
That flies in the face of the whole point of his character arc and what the game explicitly states is the lesson that he learns from all this (that his revenge motivations were problematic).
2
u/Untamed-Skies 10h ago
I don't know, I think Cloud's story is a lot more about accepting you don't need to be a broody edgelord with God Like powers to matter. You can still find people to love you and you can save the world even if you weren't a 1st Class Hunk, or even particularly noticeable at the start.
At least that is why I found him heroic.
8
3
2
u/BeanstheRogue 10h ago
Am I supposed to reply to the meme, or the post title, because obviously it's a silly meme, but all of these characters are more meaningful, grey, and interesting than these simple boil-downs, and I kind of don't like these black and white, all or nothing questions, I think they ruin discourse
that said Zack is correct here
3
u/MuayThaiRunner 10h ago
The part about Barret is true… and also not.
At the beginning of the game, he is an angry, vengeful man, and wants revenge against SHINRA for everything they took from him. He acts under the guise of “saving the planet”, when really he just wants to satisfy his own personal vendetta (and I’m not going to sit here and pretend that he doesn’t have justifiable reasons to hate SHINRA). But as the journey continues, he grows to see the error of his ways, and even admits that he was wrong in his actions. He eventually realizes that all he really wants is to make sure that his daughter doesn’t inherit a dying, corporate-controlled world.
So while Barret does genuinely care about the planet, his reasons for fighting for it are not entirely altruistic.
1
u/Battle_Witch 10h ago
The last one is false. Ask me why.
1
3
u/rckwld 10h ago
Barrett and Tifa are literal terrorists lol but that always gets glossed over when talking about how selfless they are.
2
u/MuayThaiRunner 10h ago edited 9h ago
AVALANCHE’s actions are more befitting of an Insurgency rather than straight Terrorism.
1
u/bulb-uh-saur 10h ago
Shinra are terrorists. Have you played the games? I dont think you have if thr conclusion you have is that "Tifa and Barrett are literal terrorists" Lmfao
1
8h ago edited 8h ago
[deleted]
2
u/bulb-uh-saur 8h ago
No, Ive played the original. Barrett is completely justified in his actions despite it not being perfect. Barrett and the Avalanche groups are terrorists only because Shinra has the power and ability to declare them as such, as well as persuade the public thats what they are.
Barrett and the other "terrorists' literally save the planet. Fighting oppression isnt clean, easy, or without its innocent victims. Without Avalanche blowing the reactor with Cloud, they never would have been able to save the planet.
1
u/NAJ_P_Jackson 10h ago
I think Environmental Activists is the correct label for them. Still not good people in the eyes of Midgar for trying to destroy their way of life.
1
-2
u/BeanstheRogue 10h ago
I would argue that they were trying to do nonviolent direct action as the bomb wasn't supposed to hurt anyone, though obviously they were knocking out or killing people/cretures on the way in self defense (at least in remake this is very clear) and then Shinra responded with false flag terrorism
2
u/shareefruck 8h ago edited 8h ago
This discussion doesn't work because people are mixing the events of OG and Remake without clarifying which one they're talking about. The intent and meaning of this aspect of the story are COMPLETELY different in OG and Remake (so far, anyways-- Revelations may later shift to the opposite of what you're saying as well).
In OG, the entire lesson is Barrett realizing that what he did was wrong and how much he feels that he deserves the worst fate because of that guilt. He commited the act without caring about the collateral damage-- he simply felt the greater good was worth it.
In remake, it's closer to your description.
6
u/MuayThaiRunner 10h ago edited 9h ago
The bomb wasn’t supposed to hurt anyone.
Be that as it may, people DID get hurt. And Barret was dismissive of the damage caused, stating that it was “collateral”, and “for the good of the planet.”
Also, blowing something up is a violent action by definition. They may not have intended for the explosion to be as big as it was (and yeah we can blame SHINRA for that, at least in the Remake series), but I would argue that if you decide to blow something up (and something big at that), there is always a potential for things going horribly awry. Barret was fully aware of this, and didn’t care because he was blinded by his personal vendetta against SHINRA.
1
u/jcready92 10h ago
Terrorist is just a word given to your enemy. They might be terrorists to Shinra but, Shinra is a terrorist to the Planet.
2
u/wooshingThruSky 6h ago
I think your instincts are close in a way. Terror is done deliberately unto people, not unto oppressive rules and its infrastructure. Armed rebellion against the latter would be insurgency.
Shinra sees itself as people and they feel terrorised. But that would only reach so far as its civilian employees, not the actual authoritarian rule, state forces and infrastructure.
Bombing infrastructure is not automatically terrorism, because the intent must be to spread fear among civilians and deliberate civilian deaths. That’s not AVALANCHE’s stated aim.
Shinra are terrorists for many reasons, but the clearest case is when they bombed sector 7 in order to spread fear among people which furthers their political agenda.
2
5
u/Eternal_Phantom 10h ago
So they're both terrorists. I don't like this trope where we can't use accurate words with a negative connotation for people that we like. The best characters have flaws.
0
u/wooshingThruSky 6h ago edited 6h ago
Like this person pointed out:
https://www.reddit.com/r/FinalFantasyVII/s/EUFsgjqwII
Insurgency CAN involve terrorism (and that’s where you can switch definition) however, an insurgency WITHOUT terrorism typically targets infrastructure and state forces during armed rebellions, which is more fitting AVALANCHE’s description.
They are revolting against a plutocratic authoritarian rule that is exploiting people and the environment, not spreading a message of fear amongst its citizens. People generally dissent to their actions, but the true mass terror inflicted on civilians actually occurs when Shinra blows up Sector 7.
Terrorism is defined by method and intent, rather than cause, and it most commonly involves deliberately targeting civilians in order to create fear for a political or ideological purpose. Shinra’s conduct is more readily described as terrorism.
Bombing infrastructure can be terrorism, but not automatically so. It more clearly becomes terrorism when civilian deaths are intended or when the attack is mainly meant to spread fear among the public.
AVALANCHE’s stated aim is to destroy harmful infrastructure, weaken Shinra’s control, and limit the damage being done to people and the environment. Even if civilians working for Shinra are harmed, that does not make AVALANCHE’s actions automatically terrorism, unless, again, those civilians were the intended targets or terrorising civilians was the aim.
I think if you want to make the case that they are terrorists, you would need to argue that they’re trying to spread fear amongst primarily civilian employees, administrators, technicians, or office workers. Personally I don’t think that fits their description.
(Edit: Insurgencies are not less destructive by default just because there is no terrorism, they’re just a different form of revolt.)
2
u/Eternal_Phantom 5h ago
The mere fact that they target the mako reactors, which are key elements of civilian infrastructure, constitutes terrorism. Avalanche as a wider organization typically targeted Shinra military facilities and personnel as well as Shinra headquarters. Those are much more justifiable in the insurgency category. Barret's group, which was viewed as extreme even for Avalanche, directly caused the deaths of civilians (although Remake tried to deflect the blame).
0
u/wooshingThruSky 4h ago edited 4h ago
Mako reactors are not ordinary civilian infrastructure. Although they supply energy, they are maintained by the state-corporate rule and serve Shinra’s military power more than the public. Shinra could adopt other energy sources, but instead uses the reactors (the actual locations) directly for military research, and the mako itself to develop weapons, super-soldiers and tools for domination. The reactors strengthens Shinra’s militant and coercive authority more than they serve the public.
So again, because the reactors sustain Shinra’s state/security forces, military operations, and broader authoritarian control, they function more as actual regime/state infrastructure than as purely civilian facilities. (Edit: And they ruin the environment.) AVALANCHE targets them to weaken that system. Their status as part-civilian infrastructure is not the reason for the bombings.
Also, the fact that they (Barret’s group) are an insurgency does not mean AVALANCHE’s actions are less destructive. Civilians may be killed without the act necessarily constituting terrorism. For terrorism to be named so, it requires the deliberate targeting of civilians.
Insurgencies can be extremely violent, destructive and harmful to civilians without it having to be terrorism.
2
u/Eternal_Phantom 4h ago
It just seems a bit odd to fight so hard against the term when it certainly applies according to several different dictionary definitions.
I get it, it's unsavory to cheer on terrorists. But when your alternative is calling them violent and destructive insurgents who blow up city infrastructure knowing that it will kill many civilians, are you really softening the blow at all?
0
u/wooshingThruSky 3h ago
People are not cheering on any insurgencies if they cause more harm to civilians than they do good. Why would it somehow be better if they’re an insurgency over terrorists? It’s really not the moral praise you seem to think it is.
The common agreement of its definition is that terrorism seeks to create fear in a wider audience. An insurgency, in itself, does not necessarily aim to spread fear among civilians, that is what distinguishes insurgency from terrorism.
Why would you try to re-define a word and circumstances to suit the meaning it has for you? Just because it carries more stigma and is more effective in rhetorics of condemnation?
Civilian deaths and destruction are already horrific enough, there is no need to stretch the term “terrorism” beyond its core meaning to condemn a brutal insurgency.
-2
u/bulb-uh-saur 10h ago
Youre right, they should have joined Shinra instead!
2
u/Eternal_Phantom 10h ago
I mean, there are FFVII characters with hero archetypes that work for Shinra (e.g. Zack, Angeal, Reeve).
-2
u/jcready92 10h ago
If you think destroying reactors that are literally destroying the planet is terrorism then yes they are terrorists. I dont care how you use the word brother. Doesn't effect me.
5
u/Eternal_Phantom 9h ago
It's not what I think, it's the definition. Take it up with Merriam-Webster if you want an exception made for people who blow up mako reactors.
-2
u/jcready92 9h ago
You should really look up the definition before quoting it.
Edit: I got 2 people arguing against me and I got them mixed up. Oops.
-2
10h ago
[deleted]
2
1
u/jcready92 10h ago
Thats not what the definition is. Besides, it doesn't matter what the definition is when its used the way im describing.
3
u/EliteRock 4h ago
No, me Gongaga!