Bioware's dislike of the mage rebellion
I really enjoyed Absolution, but it continues to immensely frustrate me that people writing for Bioware refuse to write pro-rebellion mages. Qwydion is a "rebel mage" - whose introductory line about the topic is that she isn't actually a rebel. She's a mercenary who pretends to care about the rebellion because people pay more for a cause. It annoyed me, but also got me thinking:
Since Anders, there have been no (afaik) pro-rebellion mages in major roles in Dragon Age media - and very few pro-rebellion characters have ever been portrayed in a favourable light.
Major mage characters since the start of the mage rebellion (I'm counting from the end of DA2), excluding comics/short stories/Tevinter Nights:
Rhys (Asunder). He starts as a Libertarian who defects to the Aequitarians because of disagreements with a pro-rebellion mage. He votes in favour of mages leaving the Circles, but he's not exactly happy about it.
Felassan (Masked Empire). Not particularly concerned with the rebellion. Definitely has other priorities - the Circle can't really touch him.
Valya (Last Flight). The whole premise behind her existence in the novel (I haven't finished it yet) is that she doesn't want to fight in the rebellion. She would rather die as a Warden than take her chances as a rebel.
Vivienne (Inquisition). We know how this one goes. Pro-Circle, fervently anti-rebellion.
Solas (Inquisition). Not pro-Circle, but he's more apostate than rebel and more *gestures at his whole deal* than apostate.
Dorian (Inquisition). Tevinter, with little to no stakes in the rebellion. Will specifically voice his doubts about whether a full alliance with the mage rebellion is actually a good idea.
Mage Inquisitor (Inquisition). Can absolutely hold anti-Circle and pro-rebellion views. Only a Trevelyan mage Inquisitor can have been a rebel, though.
Qwydion (Absolution). As discussed above, more of a mercenary than a rebel and her only comment on the matter is stating that she isn't one.
Saphira (Absolution). Again, a Tevinter mage with no real stake in the rebellion. Was seemingly in Ferelden during Inquisition, but makes no comment on the rebellion.
And what about the narrative's general treatment of mage characters, particularly mage rebels? Well, it's not good. People have already discussed at length that Anders is almost universally demonised in post-DA2 Dragon Age media that mentions him, but he's not the only one.
The most fervent mage rebels in Asunder are Adrian and Fiona - the former is generally discredited as a scary radical who alienates people with her actions, and the latter is portrayed largely as foolish/weak in Inquisition (I disagree, but the narrative of Inquisition has little time for it). The mage rebellion in Inquisition is seen as a terrible, dangerous group destroying the region just as much as the Templars and for just as bad a reason.
More recent Dragon Age entries are also more generally anti-blood magic - no blood mage companions in Inquisition, no specialisation, characters who will speak against it frequently (most notably Hawke), and a blood mage villain in Absolution. Not to mention that Absolution also inadvertently reinforces the "necessity" of Harrowings by showing that Rezaren failed his.
And that isn't even the end of it!! There's a general narrative arc in Dragon Age which serves to validate the Chantry view of mages - the Blight was (seemingly) caused by Tevinter mages. The elven gods were just powerful mages - and they were slavers just like in Tevinter (making our only two examples of mage-dominated societies also slave-based). Mage companions deceive or betray you, their actions responsible/anticipated to be responsible for hundreds of deaths in a way that isn't the case for other former companions. The mage who found the cure for tranquility accidentally killed everyone in the city. From the Chantry boom onwards, 3/5 of our biggest in-game antagonists/bosses have been mages. If we're counting Absolution, that brings us up to 4/6.
This means that the general message of recent Dragon Age isn't just a disdain for the rebellion and its participants, but also a general lean towards saying that the rebellion should never have happened in the first place - because the Templars are right. Mages are Bad.
This probably isn't much of a revelation for a lot of people, but it stands completely in contrast with how I (and a lot of people) understand mage-related conflicts in Dragon Age. How Bioware have managed to set up a compelling narrative showing oppression+attempts to deconstruct it and then decided that no one should resist it (and if they do, they're never good people) is just.......what.
yousharknotpass
gummygunk
turnnoffyourmind
stormborns
prguitarman
pixelskylines
s-u-f-j-a-n-s-t-e-v-e-n-s
vaporwave
romaincrisis
