I feel

itself was against him - and the inherent tragedy of that. like. they're So Close to digging just a little further and questioning that concept of fate + supposedly inherent character weakness in the first place. this is present in oot - zelda acknowledges him as pitiful, someone who couldn't control the triforce. and in tp, zelda seems to do something like a quiet prayer. this aspect of zelda herself isn't present in wind waker (iirc), but is embodied by the king, who directly compares himself.

That’s a concept that a friend of mine talks about a lot ( @betterbemeta ) in almost those exact words but I asked her and she said she wasn’t sure of the specific post, just that she didn’t get it from someone else.

But, yeah, I feel like... there’s this interesting sort of counter-narrative within the Zelda series, I think? There’s the main narrative, which is the Legend and the Cycle and that it is Correct to perpetuate the Cycle and live out the roles people are given.

But there’s also a lot of counterpoints, of things making it clear that the Cycle is hurting people, that you will not be rewarded or kept safe for perpetuating it- and in Wind Waker this is very interesting, because, a lot of the evidence points to Ganon’s stance- “Your gods abandoned you!” being correct. 

Hyrule was destroyed. Most of its people were killed. Two young people who were active servants of the god at the time were murdered and nothing protected them. Ganon comes across as someone who’d know- because he’s acting as the Divine Opponent, here.

And there’s this scene, late in Wind Waker, where he reads Tetra’s dreams with his power.

This scene sticks with me, because it’s Ganon doing something unnecessary. He’s got no reason to treat Tetra hospitably at this point. He’s got no reason to tuck her into a bed, which he does, or acknowledge that she’s a child, or wonder who she is besides Zelda. 

And, yet, we have this. unexpectedly introspective soft scene, and while it’s followed by the puppet Ganon fight, the things he says there don’t seem just like villainous trash talk, but, nearly a plea for these kids to realize how messed up their situation is. They’re allegedly agents of the gods who are being chewed up by their Fates, used and cast aside, and while he has an agenda in not wanting this to happen (as their given Fate is to be parties in his execution) there’s a bleak humor Wind Waker Ganon has about the situation that, to me, has never actually been contradicted within the Zelda games. Words to the contrary ring hollow. In practice, we watch Hyrule desolated, we watch its executioners throw him on vulnerable populations (in Twilight Princess, the Sages know enough of the modern Twili to recognize Midna in her cursed form- so they had to have known the people they were leaving at the mercy of a wounded, panicked Ganon who was nonetheless fully capable of killing a person with his bare hands at that point).

In Breath of the Wild, which doesn’t even depict Ganon as a person who can argue his point (though the sequel may shed new light on that), he still nonetheless seems correct about the nature of the cycle; Zelda is unabashedly a survivor of child abuse who was forced to pray in sacred springs starting at age seven. 

BotW is basically the series’ most detailed thesis yet that the Cycle broke Link and Zelda and tore pieces from them they’re not getting back. Both of them lost a century. Zelda’s passions and interests were sublimated to force her into a passive role. People they knew and were close to died. Link’s habitual silence is depicted as a product of the anxiety that the hero role pressed on him, and he was also a human shield just to guarantee that of the Champions, Zelda at least could make it, that left him critically injured.

The only real coherent defense raised by the Cycle- which is meta-wise, “justified” by Skyward Sword, which establishes it as an unholy curse- is “this is the only way to save Hyrule” which is never challenged or argued or defended. It’s merely accepted. And we keep watching young, vulnerable kids following the paths laid out by their predecessors and being torn apart by these events.

Link and Zelda don’t look like people who are protected by benevolent gods that shine over them. Repeatedly, the deities of the Zelda setting are depicted as not especially loving. In A Link To The Past, the Triforce itself says it doesn’t care about good or evil, merely that Link has proven his worth and should now make a wish. Other characters in the setting describe it as fickle or a troublemaker. In Skyward Sword, Zelda, regaining Hylia’s memories and thus the clearest potential insight into how Hylia was thinking and feeling, states that Hylia obtained a mortal incarnation basically as bait for Link, who would be driven by compassion to protect his friend, and thus get functionally conned into acting as Hylia’s champion.

I think this is why fanworks that put the chosen three on the same side make sense, because, in this way, Ganon is more a contemporary to the heroes than the King of Hyrule, who, no matter how often he dies, never really has that sense of being a martyred hero who’s lost fragments of himself. Daphnes was able to choose his own death, and the death of his kingdom, on his own terms using the Wind Waker and then the Triforce; Rhoam controls the narrative at the beginning of BotW.

Ganon?

Just from what we know about BotW’s sequel (which is not much at all) Ganon is having a bad time. In a way, his fate seems to combine elements of Link and Zelda’s- he was confined for a long time in a death match with another force (Zelda), and he was heavily and brutally injured and may have lost consciousness (Link) only to awaken in an unfamiliar future where he’s been all but forgotten (both of them).

And part of this is the need that the games seem to have, to have everything be Ganon’s fault, but to never acknowledge or explore the relationships Ganon actually, has with the various entities he ostensibly commands. I love Wind Waker, but, as friends of mine have pointed out- there’s only flimsy excuses at best for Ganon to put the various boss monsters in the environments they’re found in. They’re themed to their environments so that they seem fitting elements, rather than something foreign placed there that’s disrupted an extant order.

It leads to this sense of Ganon more as a pariah than as a true Source Of Evil. Because he’s blamed for everything, including things that don’t actually seem to further any of his stated objectives and in fact, might even work against something he is stated to want (e.g. the withering of the Deku Sprouts in Wind Waker, which are stated to be a potential way to drain the Great Sea and leave the Land Below accessible once again- the big thing Ganon wants- but they’re stated to fail because of Ganon’s magic; or him outright saying he wants the sun to shine on Hyrule when earlier in the game Daphnes accuses him of cursing the entire sea into a state of darkness because he wants everything to be dark)

Ganon’s not blameless and harmless- like. he absolutely did shit and is rarely sorry for it or sorry but not enough to stop- but, it definitely feels like his role as Hyrule’s Enemy is a degree outside of his control, much as the Hero or Princess roles are out of Link and Zelda’s. This is a game series about people being forced into roles that cause them to suffer, and then the end takeaway is I guess It Was Worth It because the Bad Man Died.

I mean shit, the Gerudo, the tribe Ganon originates from, being a vaguely ethnic group mostly made up of women, is practically BEGGING to have a story show how maybe Hyrules colonialism may have impacted them such that it led to a guy like Ganon being how he is. That's a huge leap and White People Fashioned The Enemy They Are Demonizing isn't new, but it's weird Zelda has strayed away from it, at least as far as I can tell.

There is an Irish restaurant chain called Supermacs that has opnened around 100 stores in Ireland since 1978. 

Recently, McDonald’s decided that this small restaurant chain that hasn’t even made it out of Ireland needed to be taught a lesson, and sued them on the basis that “Supermacs” infringes on the “Big Mac” brand name. Which is, of course, absolutely ridiculous.

McDonald’s ended up losing the case, because of course they did, they didn’t have a case to begin with. As a result, McDonald’s lost the rights to the term “Big Mac” across the entire European Union.