ruff-feather

[ruff-feather]

It's The Chosen One (in a cloak) !!!

idk why, but seeing him in a cloak makes me happy for some reason.

Though the drawing itself won't be so happy at the end, since I'm planning on making him visit the gravestone of a certain person. (He shall not get caught there, hence the cloak.)

[ruff-feather]

Victim doesn't want Chosen to redeem himself, Victim wants revenge. Victim wants Chosen to suffer, just like they all did. Victim wants karma.

And for as long as Victim's wants keep that way, I fear we won't see any improvement on Chosen's perspective of the past and taking responsibility. Instead, I fear he will back track from the half-assed reforming path he set, because the world once again proved him being violent is what gives him freedom. (Though I don't expect Alan to take that narrative, not at all.)

I do wonder how repentance/atonement is supposed to go for Chosen while he’s being held under duress. Accepting accountability and taking responsibility for his past would require being vulnerable, at least emotionally, and…being vulnerable is one of the last things he’s gonna do while surrounded by enemies who have no qualms about mistreating him.

[ruff-feather]

I can see where both sides are coming from, honestly.

On one hand, I don't think it's too far off for people to assume Dark is the one to do it—because up until now, we've never seen Chosen harm any sticks on camera, on the counter side, we've seen him refrain from it. That could've very much been proven wrong, considering how little of their rampage we've seen up until now, but I do imagine it just doesn't sit right with how people viewed Chosen. On the other hand, as you've said, Mitsi is supposed to be a representative of what their rampage caused to everyone in Newgrounds (I think that's the cannon name now, though I'm not sure) so completely excluding Chosen as a cause of it would be to exclude all of the damage Chosen caused to the internet.

Or would it?

I still believe in the theory that Dark could've been the one to do it, though I don't expect it to be real all that much. Though if it indeed is Dark, I think it has a much more meaning with Chosen than to suggest he's innocent in the pain courses to sticks. He might've not joined it himself, but he caused pain for so many hearts by not attempting to stop it in time. He might've not been a first degree responsible one, but he still has some of it on him. Even if he stopped doing the destroying acts, he still can't take back the damage he caused. Even if he changed, he hasn't actually been redeemed because he's still yet to try and face the consequences of his past actions rather than ignoring it completely. Even if he wasn't the murder, he still knew who it was and never went to the police with it.

Again, this is just a possibility, one that I don't personally don't see being the case. But I disagree with your opinion on what would it mean for Chosen if it actually was to happen –so have this unasked rant, I guess.

(Side note: the proof against Dark is small. Because even if the fire exploded like Dark's does, it's very much flames like Chosen's are. Soo.. yeah.)

So there’s debate on which aspect of the angel of death was the one to actually kill Mitsi: Chosen or Dark.

Several have pointed out that the attack which took her life bore more resemblance to Dark’s powers than to Chosen’s. And I’m sure other arguments have been made on both sides, I honestly haven’t looked.

I’d like to take a look at this from a thematic angle. Keep in mind, a major theme being set up this season is accountability.

We were vaguely aware of Chosen’s and Dark’s atrocities before this episode, but now they are brought into sharper focus through the personal stories of Victim, Agent, and Mitsi. It is through Mitsi’s loss, and how those around her respond to it, that we come to know the true impact of the attacks.

By focusing on the loss of Mitsi in this personal way, the narrative makes her into a symbolic representation of every tragic casualty of the angel of death. Her death is held up by the narrative as proof of their evil. How Mitsi and her death are handled will be reflective of how the attacks in general are regarded, as the story goes on.

Let me say that last part again:

How Mitsi and her death are handled will be reflective of how the attacks in general are regarded, as the story goes on.

Think about that for a moment.

Think about what this would say about Chosen, if we’re considering him and Dark as individuals rather than as the perceived single entity that is the angel of death.

If Dark is Mitsi’s killer…then what is Chosen being held accountable for?

If Mitsi’s death represents the angel of death’s casualties as a whole, and responsibility and blame for her death is placed solely on Dark…this would, effectively, relieve Chosen of any accountability regarding the massacre.

Which would undermine the themes being set up, and place Chosen in a very odd place narratively.