I sense a theme building....

A theme that seems to over-arch 343’s new Halo. Halo 4, the Forerunner Saga, The Kilo 5 trilogy.

The identity of species and race vs. the identity of the individual.

In the first Halo, we have some very distinct sides. Covenant vs. UNSC vs. Flood. Single races/coalitions duking it out. That really isn’t lasting. The Covenant has fractured and fractured again. In fact, there really isn’t a “Covenant” anymore.

There seem to be increasing tensions concerning ONI. They have always been a little shadowy, and if you’ve been on this forum recently, there are rumors of a UNSC schism ahead.

Those general factions from before aren’t working. They are breaking apart.

And then there are the Forerunners, who attempt to impose their racial generalizations on the galaxy. IE- “All humans are bad!”

You have the rumored impending Precusor/Flood judgement, which will attempt to “unite” all life in the galaxy.

And then you have Chief (Who, BTW, is struggling with his personal identity) and the Covenant Sepratists fighting all of this.

Now, I know I’ve made a sloppy job of explaining this, but does anyone see what I’m getting at?

I get what you’re saying. I’m really glad 343i is doing this, too often in sci-fi’s every single member of a certain species is considered bad and members of another species are all considered good. Even Bungie did this in their games.

> I get what you’re saying. I’m really glad 343i is doing this, too often in sci-fi’s every single member of a certain species is considered bad and members of another species are all considered good. Even Bungie did this in their games.

That mindset sort of describes the Kilo-5 series, sadly.

It would be awesome to see in the next halo game the unsc breaking apart into rival factions. Just imagine a level where you would have to battle other humans, possibly trading lead with other Spartans!!! Can’t wait for halo 5!!!

What you see leads to the Precursors unification plan. 343 is doing a great job with the lore.

> I get what you’re saying. I’m really glad 343i is doing this, too often in sci-fi’s every single member of a certain species is considered bad and members of another species are all considered good. Even Bungie did this in their games.

The Planet of Hats trope.

> > I get what you’re saying. I’m really glad 343i is doing this, too often in sci-fi’s every single member of a certain species is considered bad and members of another species are all considered good. Even Bungie did this in their games.
>
> That mindset sort of describes the Kilo-5 series, sadly.

How do you figure?

Just because a couple of characters acted like that was the case doesn’t mean that was the theme being expressed… IMO, Traviss developed (most) characters with legitimate motivations…

All the elites said or acted like humans were evil.

You mean the one elite whose viewpoint we saw?

Or the many that were understandably upset at a human being at a site they considered religiously significant?

Either way I hardly think that portrays all the race as good or bad…

The fact that there were factions, including the Arbiter, including the rural elites at the end of TTW…

I seriously think this has just become a “bash Traviss anyway possible fest.” I seriously fail to see how you can argue her books presented whole races as inherently good or bad… instead of individuals, which, IMO is what she did…

Oh you know I just remembered that quite a few elites acted that way… but Traviss did have her characters develop…

I’m not saying you don’t have a point, I’m just saying I don’t think it’s as strong as you think it is. Obviously, as an example, the Arbiter doesn’t regard all humans as evil… hell many Elites seem amazed with Phillips.

> You mean the one elite whose viewpoint we saw?
>
> Or the many that were understandably upset at a human being at a site they considered religiously significant?
>
> Either way I hardly think that portrays all the race as good or bad…
>
> The fact that there were factions, including the Arbiter, including the rural elites at the end of TTW…
>
> I seriously think this has just become a “bash Traviss anyway possible fest.” I seriously fail to see how you can argue her books presented whole races as inherently good or bad… instead of individuals, which, IMO is what she did…

So because a human was at a holy site that gives them the right to hate all humans? You might want to re-read the novels again because even Thel’s attitude has changed to “tolerance” more than accepting.

Because you don’t understand what was written and must have missed the dozens of times the elites talked down about the humans in the novels.

Because she never gave another view besides the negative ones. Elites think all humans are lairs that are “endlessly colonizing” even though the elites are no less deceitful and have had at least 2,000 years to colonize. You then have ONI Not doing anything to make the elites wrong in those assumptions by having all this power post war that is somehow un-checked.

Thel specifically says that there are some humans who have honor… That doens’t mean he loves humans but it certainly contrasts with your point. Clearly, the Arbiter isn’t “evil” for tolerating instead of embracing humanity.

I also don’t think hating humans makes them, as a species, “evil” and I definitely don’t think having a riot in the book means that she’s portraying all of the race as evil…

Many humans talk down to other races, as well, does that mean that she portrayed every human in the universe as evil?

The books are right after a giant war that almost caused the extermination of humanity and the destruction of the Covenant… of course there are going to be cultural conflict between humans and elites… Just because she wrote during the period of obvious tension and elites and humans weren’t friendly doesn’t mean she was writing about the race as if they were evil, that’s just your projection of her attitude, IMO.

You are going to ignore the context behind him saying that and what he said next?

> “There are honorable humans,” ‘Vadam said, resting his hands on the balustrade. “I’ve fought alongside them. None of us would be alive now if there weren’t. But I plan to agree to a treaty, not because I have any fondness for humans but because I love Sanghelios.”

It was strategic as most elites didn’t want the peace treaty to start with. So he added in " i don’t really like humans but this is for us" to accommodate to them.

What sense does that even make? We shouldn’t be made because she turned the elites into stereotypical conservative pro military rednecks?

> The idea was so appalling that he stopped in his tracks. What was he doing worrying about the humans? They were no more than an infestation, backward vermin, and could be eradicated.

> Jul read through the station idents: Piety had had radio contact with Kig-Yar from within a human-occupied sector, a colony world that had once been called Sqala. No. That world is not theirs. They’re interlopers. I won’t dignify them by calling their infestations colonies. It was now called Venezia. And it would pay for harboring criminals.

Humans don’t talk down about other races to the extent and derogatory degree the elites were in Karen’s novels. I don’t even think the brutes would use such language when talking about another race.

Humanity had no threat of extermination seeing as dozens of colonies were skipped to get to reach and the covenant weren’t having any luck finding the Rebels. The centeral government would have collapsed but humanity in itself would have been fine since the covenant would have been disbanded due to internal strife. Which was the entire reason they started skipping colonies in the first place.

This goes back to the statements i linked from Jul in the novel. He (a mature sangheili) has been reduced to the mental capacity of a human child. What he says is more or less translated into " If the humans didn’t have so many colonies due to their unneeded expansion the covenant wouldn’t have broken up and we wouldn’t be in this mess right now.".

That is the logic being shown whenever an elite complains about how many worlds the humans have (which in comparison the elites should have several dozen times more) and tries to make that the sole reason for the situation they are in now. I think it is Jul’s wife that brings up the notion that they had been too defendant on the covenant for even the most basic things. That is the conclusion that an adult should come to, not making piss poor excuses and trying to blame another race for their own social issues.

Logic goes further down the drain when the elites (which are acting like Krogan) would rather focus on suing all the resources they have left in an attempt to attack if not remove humanity rather than focus on fixing their society. If you just spent 30 years with “unlimited” resources, armed with thousands of advanced warships, and had the support of several races numbering in the trillions,etc; and you still couldn’t take out humanity why the hell would you think could do that all by yourself? That is stupid and completely goes against how the elites have been represented in the past. Not to mention if they really were “honorable” you think they would own up to being manipulated and admit that they were wrong to attack humanity for no reason. You don’t see that, instead they are even more pissed off at humanity that the covenant split up as if we seriously had anything to do with that.

I could spend all day talking about the injustice in these books but seeing as anton has already written a 14,000 word essay on the subject of how stupid the elites have become why don’t you just read that?

Again, I fail to see how most of that correlates to Traviss making the entirety of Elite society “evil.” Self interested? Irrational? In many ways, yeah.

I didn’t mean to ignore what was said next, it just wasn’t relevant to the point. The Arbiter doesn’t have to have fondness for humanity to be good. (Rather than evil or bad) And just because the one of the characters who is narrating the Sanghelli side of the story is bigoted, does not mean that every elite is. That’d be quite silly, and I can’t think of what you would have wanted?

Should Elites and Humans just get along in the storyline? Nah - that would be ridiculously unrealistic. Of course there’s still hate there.

Do you think most humans would have fondness of say… Grunts? Jackals? Drones? Of course not! I don’t see why Elites have to be fond of humans to be good… and I don’t see the relevance there.

Remember, the Elites had little to no knowledge of anything resembling economics as far as I can tell… I expect there to be irrational blame being spread in such a state of collapse. And as you said - at least one Elite, Jul’s wife, is trying to be rational about it.

So if Traviss gives to different opinions from the Elites POV and what actions to take, how can you come to the conclusion that Traviss made the elites basically evil bigots? I totally see her stories as realistic to the situation it was applied to.

But I WILL read that essay over the next day or two.

Did i ever say the elites were evil? I stated that is how they are making the humans out to be.

You seriously don’t see Jul,Telcam, or any of the other elites in the novel being portrayed as childish,self centered, and bigots?

The reason for the hatred don’t make sense and don’t even seem to be war related. They are trying to blame humans for the state they are in rather than take responsibility and admit that they were too dependent on others doing their work for them.

I don’t see how you can call somebody honorable but not have any sort of fondness for them whatsoever. we already know from some works that the elites were questioning why the humans weren’t being offered into the covenant because they were honorable. If the elites see themselves as honorable and call humans the same must there not be some affection in that? We already know that the elites did view our resourcefulness and tenacity with respect. They don’t respect any other race in the covenant other than the hunters and prophets.

So because the elites were completely ignorant of their own society while calling other races inferior that gives them the right to then turn around and somehow blame those failings on another race that had absolutely nothing to do with that attachment?

Travis didn’t give any other opinions and that is the entire issue.

Why don’t you just read the essay because that is already typed up and more in depth than anything i am willing to write here.

I agree, and while I have my own problems with some of the lore decisions of 343, they do seem to be taking the story in a more mature direction.

> Did i ever say the elites were evil? I stated that is how they are making the humans out to be.

Maybe you didn’t, but that’s what kicked off the discussion. The actual words used were good/bad, but it was obviously meant in that context.

> You seriously don’t see Jul,Telcam, or any of the other elites in the novel being portrayed as childish,self centered, and bigots?

I didn’t say that. I said that just because some characters were bigoted, self centered and childish doesn’t mean she portrayed the entire culture that way. And I’m saying it’s certainly logical that they are that way. She was focusing on THOSE characters, and why Jul is such a big enemy of humanity. Of course he’s gonna be a bigoted guy.

> The reason for the hatred don’t make sense and don’t even seem to be war related. They are trying to blame humans for the state they are in rather than take responsibility and admit that they were too dependent on others doing their work for them.

What society do you know that collapses WITHOUT people spreading irrational blame?

> I don’t see how you can call somebody honorable but not have any sort of fondness for them whatsoever. we already know from some works that the elites were questioning why the humans weren’t being offered into the covenant because they were honorable. If the elites see themselves as honorable and call humans the same must there not be some affection in that? We already know that the elites did view our resourcefulness and tenacity with respect. They don’t respect any other race in the covenant other than the hunters and prophets.

There are many different Elites… some may not hold those same viewpoints, and clearly, Jul doesn’t. I do agree, though, that Traviss did take some liberties in changing the apparent view of Sanghelli culture… but you are exaggerating it. I don’t see why you don’t think it’s logical that the Sanghelli would be in a state of irrational politics…

> Travis didn’t give any other opinions and that is the entire issue.

Even you said that Jul’s wife felt that they should focus on rebuilding their society. So what that she didn’t like humans either… Traviss DID portray at least one other viewpoint within Sanghelli society.

> > Did i ever say the elites were evil? I stated that is how they are making the humans out to be.
>
> Maybe you didn’t, but that’s what kicked off the discussion. The actual words used were good/bad, but it was obviously meant in that context.
>
>
>
> > You seriously don’t see Jul,Telcam, or any of the other elites in the novel being portrayed as childish,self centered, and bigots?
>
> I didn’t say that. I said that just because some characters were bigoted, self centered and childish doesn’t mean she portrayed the entire culture that way. And I’m saying it’s certainly logical that they are that way. She was focusing on THOSE characters, and why Jul is such a big enemy of humanity. Of course he’s gonna be a bigoted guy.
>
>
>
> > The reason for the hatred don’t make sense and don’t even seem to be war related. They are trying to blame humans for the state they are in rather than take responsibility and admit that they were too dependent on others doing their work for them.
>
> What society do you know that collapses WITHOUT people spreading irrational blame?
>
>
>
> > I don’t see how you can call somebody honorable but not have any sort of fondness for them whatsoever. we already know from some works that the elites were questioning why the humans weren’t being offered into the covenant because they were honorable. If the elites see themselves as honorable and call humans the same must there not be some affection in that? We already know that the elites did view our resourcefulness and tenacity with respect. They don’t respect any other race in the covenant other than the hunters and prophets.
>
> There are many different Elites… some may not hold those same viewpoints, and clearly, Jul doesn’t. I do agree, though, that Traviss did take some liberties in changing the apparent view of Sanghelli culture… but you are exaggerating it. I don’t see why you don’t think it’s logical that the Sanghelli would be in a state of irrational politics…
>
>
>
> > Travis didn’t give any other opinions and that is the entire issue.
>
> Even you said that Jul’s wife felt that they should focus on rebuilding their society. So what that she didn’t like humans either… Traviss DID portray at least one other viewpoint within Sanghelli society.

  1. Still didn’t say what he claims i said.

2.It’s hard to focus on one group and accept that when you refuse to show other sides to the story.That is one of the main issues, the lack of conflicting point of views. You can’t have the first book predominately showing how an elite thinks only have one mindset. If Pro-human alliance elites were brought up or others that see they are at fault for their own collapse then it would be fine. But you can’t have every elite in the novel have the same mindset and then have one elite that is slightly more intelligent than the rest and call that Perspective.

Rai’s Point of view isn’t even heavily focused on anyway because she is a female which is funny since Karen is a woman herself.

Jul himself is interesting because he talks so much crap about humanity and how he wants to wipe them out but then after his wife dies he only wants to get revenge? Again, it isn’t like the elites could take us on alone anyway nor would we sit there and let them build up to do so.

3.China has been an empire for Eons and if they were to fall for whatever reason (which is a doubt since they have been around for so long and have a handle on things) They wouldn’t blame peru for all of their problems despite the low contact they have with them.

The Elites have been technologically advanced for thousands of years There is absolutely no logic for them to blame their shortcomings on a race that they have only known for 30 years and have constantly chided for being inferior to them. If you see a spider on the wall while walking downstairs and trip is it the spiders fault? You have been walking for years, you know how to pay attention and you should have been focused on the stairs instead of the spider. Why would you go out of your way to find blame in something that had nothing to do with your predicament? Just admit you weren’t paying attention and get back up.

That is what People with the cognitive processes above a 3 year old would do. instead, the elites would rather stay on the ground,rub dirty on their knees and conjure all this hate towards the spider and then state they want to eradicate every spider on the globe. They want to focus all this attention on eradication while they are down instead of working on picking themselves back up.

4.I am not the only one that understands the implications of what karen has done and if you would take the time to read the link i posted you would see that. Ignore the viewpoints; the point is there aren’t any more than those negative ones in the book and it isn’t like those go in hand with anything prior. If there were other and more logical points in the novels then it would just be an ignorant point of view that happens in any society, but when you give one example and consistently stick with it i have no reason to believe other views exist if you won’t even take the time to write out or even acknowledge that others exist.

5.If everybody says Kill kill kill and one person says “don’t” that does not nor should it count as a single point of view. It especially should not count as multiple.

> Now, I know I’ve made a sloppy job of explaining this, but does anyone see what I’m getting at?

I do, but I don’t think it is something intentional. The closest thing to saying that in Halo 4 is when Cortana says that she is saving Chief not for Humanity, but for John. Other than that though I can’t think of much else, especially not in Kilo-5.

> 1. Still didn’t say what he claims i said.

What exactly do you think I claim you said?

> 2.It’s hard to focus on one group and accept that when you refuse to show other sides to the story.That is one of the main issues, the lack of conflicting point of views. You can’t have the first book predominately showing how an elite thinks only have one mindset. If Pro-human alliance elites were brought up or others that see they are at fault for their own collapse then it would be fine. But you can’t have every elite in the novel have the same mindset and then have one elite that is slightly more intelligent than the rest and call that Perspective.

Why not? It seems perfectly realistic to me. That’s how things always happen… do you think people really understand what all went down in the 2007 financial crises? Or do you think they wanted someone to blame, and greedy bankers were a popular and easy thing for most people to blame. And I assure you most people don’t study economics. When things go bad people ALWAYS look for a scapegoat.

> Rai’s Point of view isn’t even heavily focused on anyway because she is a female which is funny since Karen is a woman herself.

I don’t see how you came to that conclusion, many of the characters in Kilo-5 are women and have attention focused on them…

> 3.China has been an empire for Eons and if they were to fall for whatever reason (which is a doubt since they have been around for so long and have a handle on things) They wouldn’t blame peru for all of their problems despite the low contact they have with them.

You are so wrong about that. I can pretty much assure you that if the Chinese economy collapsed, many Chinese people WOULD blame other countries, like America. Maybe no Peru, specifically, but I hardly see how that specific country is a valid parallel.

> The Elites have been technologically advanced for thousands of years There is absolutely no logic for them to blame their shortcomings on a race that they have only known for 30 years and have constantly chided for being inferior to them. If you see a spider on the wall while walking downstairs and trip is it the spiders fault? You have been walking for years, you know how to pay attention and you should have been focused on the stairs instead of the spider. Why would you go out of your way to find blame in something that had nothing to do with your predicament? Just admit you weren’t paying attention and get back up.
>
>
> That is what People with the cognitive processes above a 3 year old would do. instead, the elites would rather stay on the ground,rub dirty on their knees and conjure all this hate towards the spider and then state they want to eradicate every spider on the globe. They want to focus all this attention on eradication while they are down instead of working on picking themselves back up.

Except that they aren’t tripping over spiders… their empire is collapsing. So yeah, there is gonna be a lot of irrational behavior. You really think it only works if everyone acts logically? Do you realize how non sensical that is? Just because they’ve flown around in space doesn’t make them smart… hell it’s even talked about in the books. They can’t repair their ships. They don’t know how they work.

They are blaming humanity because there is no one else to blame, other than themselves. And because there are many individuals comprising of that society… many are gonna end up hating humans. It makes perfect sense.

> 4.I am not the only one that understands the implications of what karen has done and if you would take the time to read the link i posted you would see that. Ignore the viewpoints; the point is there aren’t any more than those negative ones in the book and it isn’t like those go in hand with anything prior. If there were other and more logical points in the novels then it would just be an ignorant point of view that happens in any society, but when you give one example and consistently stick with it i have no reason to believe other views exist if you won’t even take the time to write out or even acknowledge that others exist.

You’re completely misunderstanding me. I’m saying that she did make changes that have deep implications for the story. Obviously. I’m saying those changes were, for the most part, logical and justifiable. And there ARE multiple viewpoints, you just either don’t like any of them, or discount them. There’s the Arbiter’s view, there’s Raia’s view, there’s Telcams’ view and then there’s Jul’s.

And obviously, since we were following the story arc of how and why Jul got to where he is… you’re going to get the viewpoint of a guy who hates humans.

> 5.If everybody says Kill kill kill and one person says “don’t” that does not nor should it count as a single point of view. It especially should not count as multiple.

What? Of course it does. That doesn’t make sense, you can’t choose to define multiple as “at least a significant chunk of people” or anything other than more than one. I see your point that she portrays large parts of Sanghelli society in a way that you didn’t like, and in a way which is bigoted… but that doesn’t mean that she didn’t have any viewpoints from less bigoted members of Elite society, and it doesn’t mean that there aren’t non bigoted Elites. We’re just dealing with the Elites who are central to conflict…