#STAY DEAD./Silly | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

lordgeneralsix · 3 months ago

Note

i would absolutely love to hear your thoughts on isterik so if you wanted to ramble..... <3

you're probably gonna regret asking unless you actually enjoy hearing my incoherent thoughts but regardless I am holding your hands so tight rn thank you for asking<3

I have a lot of thoughts about them and I'll try to untangle some of them here .. I guess I'll just start w the obvious and say I feel like watering down isterik to "toxic bc Istvan groomed erik" is a pretty dismissive way to talk about such a raw and volatile display of love. people are once again doing what they did with hansry and trying to understand their relationship through a modern lens when it's not that simple, especially since we're missing a lot of information from two very unreliable narrators. I'm not saying istvan didn't foster an unhealthy relationship with erik by taking him in, caring for him like a father would, and being intimate as lovers - he absolutely did. i'm just honestly bored of the discussions around Problematic relationships starting and ending with "that's toxic" as if Bad People aren't capable of loving just as deeply as anyone else especially if their circumstances are a bit... unusual. I mean, why do people do anything? to live and love, right? and no im not saying it's all okay bc they love each other, it's still bad but both can coexist.

it's interesting that we hear different accounts from both on how they met - istvan found erik during a raid and took him in, but we don't know the details. we don't know what situation erik was in, why istvan was so drawn to him, or hell, if maybe erik killed his own parents instead and istvan is just saying that to protect him. this is the story we hear from istvan, but we get two different recountings from erik. one is in kcd1 where he tells henry point blank that istvan killed his parents and he's stronger than his parents ever were, but then in kcd2 he calls henry a liar about istvan killing his parents. this confused me when I first heard it bc I could've sworn he was aware, so I thought maybe it was a retcon. all well and good I guess, but I thought,, well what if it isn't? as far as I'm aware nothing else has been retconned, so why would this be?

so I try to think of it a different way, just to see if that would even work. maybe it might be a key inconsistency of erik's mental state, showing how he's still trying to grapple what the fuck happened that day. I mean, it's hard to recall all the details of a traumatic event, right? especially if it happens to you so young. maybe erik has no recollection of what really happened and trusts what istvan told him. or he knows and he just doesn't need to justify anything to anyone, especially not to henry. maybe in the first game, since istvan is still alive, he plays up the hardened bandit face and says "yeah, istvan killed my parents in cold blood - know that he doesn't fuck around", but after he dies, well, we've seen him. he's thrown into a rage that will eventually consume him. his entire reason for fighting is gone, and henry bringing up something he tried so hard to ignore... well, yeah, id be pissed too.

again... I'm just speculating. in the end it could just be a retcon and I'm going insane over such a minor detail, oh well. we just don't have enough information to make a conclusion, but I guess that's the point. it's like they both said, we don't understand their relationship and we never will.

moving on from that.... since you were so kind to ask I'm gonna throw in a bit of rare lore about myself to kinda connect why isterik is like the light of god to me - in my own writing I try to explore a wide variety of relationships and character behaviours, almost anything goes really because I do believe fiction should be a safe space for writers to explore concepts without it being reflective of them as people.. some of the best stories I've been lucky to experience have been generally pretty dark, unafraid to explore beyond the boundaries of what we're comfortable with,, because well, it's real. and why not. isterik reminds me of one relationship I have - similarly a relationship that can't easily be defined because of the parties' roles in society, the circumstances of their meeting, and of course as two men. so, my understanding of this relationship does stem from my own experience writing these kinds of relationships, which in turn stems from my observations of people around me.

and I do love that honestly. can't give warhorse enough credit for making their characters so believable. what fascinates me about isterik is that they very obviously love each other and treat each other as equals. its obvious that istvan isn't using erik. he doesn't try to hide how much he cares for him.. why would he beg for erik's life instead of his? istvan has been playing the theatrical villain this whole time, but the moment his right hand man is threatened, he breaks. i've briefly mentioned this before but its unnerving how he begs for erik's life. this game once again shows you how your enemies are just as capable of love and fear whether you like it or not, they're people too.

erik is more than some pawn. if istvan wanted to, he could easily replace him. but erik isn't disposable. istvan saw something familiar within erik and only he could drag it out - he built erik up and protected him the way he wished someone would've done for him after his parents were killed by the turks. he was alone and suffered god knows how long until he finally gained some semblance of control in his life, and then he taught erik to never let anyone take that control away... but who was the one who did that to him in the first place? is he talking to erik or himself? istvan himself has a lot of issues, but if you look past his mad rambling there really is some truth to it (a whole other thing to get into on my istvan analysis... somewhere in the future)

along w that i don't believe erik is entirely some helpless thing that doesn't understand what kind of situation he's in. the tragic thing is he was, but that boy is long dead and buried (and something I won't ever forget is how we see a glimpse of erik being normal through godwin's eyes... horse racing? really? that entire sequence was uncomfortable, erik is completely void of emotion, aside from rage of course, I honestly don't believe all of this was istvan's doing. something must've already been wrong with him, which could explain why istvan kept him and fed that hatred). at the same time, I don't believe erik is any worse than istvan, at least not when he's alive (like i found it interesting that when erik freed istvan, he begged him to flee when istvan wanted to kill henry.. idk how to explain, i feel like istvan was the reason he was even able to 'control' his anger. another thing i need to think on more).

istvan is clearly the one pulling the strings of everyone around him - the enabler - while erik is the muscle (no I'm not saying he's not smart but he's not capable of being manipulative like istvan, check their respective roles in society). he won't last long without istvan. his guiding light is gone. istvan and erik make each other stronger (better for them, worse for us), they fight for each other and for their place in the world - just like henry and hans do. they're really not so different, it's true. henry goes to great lengths to avenge his parents, believing it is the righteous thing to do, but so does erik. they were both horribly wronged and will fight to get that control back no matter the cost. they are products of war, extensions of their lords to be used and discarded. they're lucky if anyone cares about them at all in the end. and this is what istvan was trying to protect erik from and warn henry about. they're the same, but morality separates them in their ultimately selfish actions.

morality. that's the difference. hanush said this exactly in the first game - if i recall correctly, that their honour is what separates them from the common bandit. henry and hans believe in honour, it's what stops them from going too far even if they feel otherwise it in their hearts. henry especially can act on these darker thoughts - taking his revenge too far by taking his anger out on his allies and treating his enemies as subhuman... but isterik aren't caught up about imaginary concepts of mortality and honour, or especially in istvan's case, he doesn't fear god. they revel in their daily routine of pillaging and killing those they deem lesser, a threat. more importantly, they're doing it together (cute date ideas or whatever). anyone who threatens the other is in for a world of pain - I mean of course, no one would let their loved ones be threatened, but to the degree to which istvan and erik will go for each other is what most people would consider extreme. istvan was willing to let his hostages be violated just at the mere thought of erik being harmed, erik is hellbent on skinning henry and by extension hans.. and anyone who gets in his way.... which is why I do expect him to be in kcd3 if it happens, probably not as a major antagonist, but like how henry hunted istvan, erik will hunt henry. i don't see erik's story ending well, whatever he ends up doing to henry or even hans. his entire reason for living was taken from him, he'll burn the world and himself with it because that's the kind of person he is (which yk.... as a tragedy enjoyer.... evil emoji).

despite people thinking in terms of extremes with them, i do think they are capable of being normal with each other.. i mean, we've seen it. how tender istvan became when he said goodbye to erik. how erik was hesitant yet calm in his presence. so much left unsaid, we can't even begin to understand what was taken from erik that night. i wonder how long he stayed at istvan's grave after burying him, how often he went back to talk to him or just sit in silence. maybe he never went back at all. im normal about them. and i will be very normal about kcd3.

so anyway tl;dr I'm incredibly biased and I love when love is so so messy and passionate. they do not need a redemption arc or any kind of justification on Why This Relationship Is Ok Actually or why people who enjoy it are also bad people or whatever juvenile discourse people r having. they're unapologetically fucked up and I love them for it. they don't need to change people need to expand their minds and find enlightenment through isterik. or something

but who knows maybe I'm entirely wrong, this is just rambling off the top of my head bc its 2am now and I'm definitely missing a lot that would usually go in a more well thought out post but... I'll get around to that at some point lol. I would love to hear your thoughts as well or if anyone else feels like discussing this further . go crazy with my blessing

#if isterik has 0 fans im dead. they make me sick. i want what they have . i mean what. who said that #ask a simple question get an essay in return i am. so sorry. kinda. i rlly do appreciate the question tho thanks again<3 #hope I understood this question right if you wanted isterik headcanons or smth I need to have a few drinks first lmao #would love to share silly headcanons in general but I feel like people will throw rocks at me so I stay quiet on that .#kcd2 #kcd2 spoilers #istvan toth #isterik #ask six #six dissects #also i don't feel the need to say this but just in case someone sees this and gets the wrong idea... this applies to fiction only ok #we have fun here #no pearl clutching in my house

36 notes · View notes