Untitled

People killed: around three quarters of a million.

“What happened to rebel Vi” is that Vander took her to the bridge where her parents died in his revolution and asked her what she was willing to lose. Then she meets Cait who is gentle and kind while still being tough and it makes her rethink how she sees topside. When Jinx tells her she changed too, that’s what she’s talking about.

I’m sorry if you thought Vi was going to be a topside-hating revolutionary in Season 2, but that’s clearly not where her character arc was going. Remember how she forced her way between Ekko and Cait? It seemed very straightforward that was the role her character was taking on.

I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Now, I get being annoyed that that was what they chose to do. You don’t have to love the creative decisions of media, just like media doesn’t have to compromise its creative direction to satisfy you. But not liking that they went that direction is not the same as the show having bad writing or engaging in character assassination.

Everything Vi did in season 2 was very much in character with how she changed and who she became throughout Season 1. Hell, she used enforcers and Hextech to raid Shimmer facilities before Commander Kiramman ever threw on a beret. So, yes, actually wearing the uniform was a huge and complicated decision that she was definitely not happy about, but it also fell in line with what she had been doing.

There’s meat for another post at some point about the three different Zaun/enforcer partnerships we see in the show: Vander/Greyson, Silco/Marcus, and Cait/Vi; but I’m not going to go into that now.

TLDR: “Rebel Vi” who wants to fight all of topside hasn’t existed since the end of the second episode of the show.

>I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Having the two cities work together against a common enemy is just a cheap way to resolves the conflict because it addresses none of the issues and has takes away any meaningful motivation.

Saving the world is a base line goal it tells us nothing about the characters or there ideals. Because of coarse people are going to go in and save the world.

Also no there were never talks about reaching common enemy in the first season. In fact its kind of clear that a lot of season 1 indicates that some characters are going to cut ties with one another.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

Some of the biggest emotional beats in season one were people from topside and bottom coming together. When Vi says they’re oil and water and can’t mix, you’re not supposed to agree with her.

Finally, there’s a reason why the last words of season one are “what could have been.” It’s because that future where Zaun gained its independence is gone. Maybe way down the line it could happen, but Jinx destroyed that chance for now. It’s also not framed as a triumphant, righteous moment.

The show didn’t chicken out. It told the story it was always and very obviously going to tell. There’s a difference between a theme going unaddressed and unresolved. Arcane didn’t wave a wand and resolve all of the issues between Piltover and Zaun—which is why the ending isn’t some sunshine and rainbows celebration. No one cheers as the Noxians leave while Pilties and Zaunites hug in the streets.

However that doesn't mean that were ended fits the themes in what the show set up (intentional or not). And good example of this would have the be this statement here.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

I feel like this was never meant to be foreshadowing for anything the show was setting up. Because when you take into account this statement "A common enemy from beyond the walls" is propaganda.

Because if you really look into the larger world of Rune-terra take into broader account of what the Rune-wars were. That Piltover is essentially just building a wall from the outside world and in turn decided to just shut themselves off from everyone.

And this is made even more clear with how magic works in League of Legends. Magic doesn't "Corrupt people's minds with weird blotchy shit" its just a tool dependent on how a person uses it.

The planet of Rune-terra (A planet literally called magic earth) is made of magic, there is literally various examples of magic shown here.

Further south of Zaun there is an Aztec empire with citizens who can channel elemental magic, to the west there is an archipelago in where people can channel the magic of god the life and motion. And north west of that there is Ionia a place .The empire of Noxus has variety of mages. . Heck Piltover's origins began with a bunch of people worshiping a wind spirit.

And so taking that all into consideration you can see the wall that Piltover built up and their staunch rejection of magic is in of itself regressive to the broader the contexts of the world. (Second only to Demacia which is so anti-magic that it literally has their own fantasy ICE that captures mages and imprison's them).

As for the statement of "One city" Ekko in S2 refutes the claim stating

"You say we are one city but whenever it rains we are the one's getting wet"

Which show's off that Piltover claims to be one city but in reality there not.

And so even if you want to claim this is foreshadowing you have to take into account the broader contexts of what this statement means in the show itself.

First, bringing in non-show-canon material is not proper analysis. Arcane is Arcane. It deviates significantly from other established lore and backstory. Until otherwise explicitly stated, Runeterra lore outside of Arcane is not applicable to a reading of the show.

Ekko’s statement has literally nothing to do with whether or not the two sides coming together to fight a common enemy was foreshadowed, particularly given it’s a Season 2 quote where they were building to that conclusion. Or do you think they didn’t know how the second season would end while they were making it?

Now, you can argue that you don’t like the ending and you feel it didn’t match what you interpret to be the themes of the show. That’s fine. You not liking the ending doesn’t mean it wasn’t planned and foreshadowed. As I believe I said in one of these exchanges, sometimes stories suffer because creators are too married to their original plan even when the story may be pulling in a different direction. (While I’m not a fan, “How I Met Your Mother” is a pretty good example). Stories that are internally inconsistent in their themes are fairly common, particularly ones that are trying to be more nuanced in their messages or that try to create sympathetic villains that they still need to be villains.

My saying the show foreshadowed this ending is neither an endorsement nor condemnation of the ending itself. It is simply looking at the way the story was told and the clear set up that they were likely moving in this direction.

They establish two sides of a conflict, create sympathetic characters on both sides, had a major theme of the first season be two separate partnerships of people from each side (Vi/Caitlyn, Jayce/Viktor), introduce a potential common enemy at the beginning of the final act of the first season then have two characters discuss a previous time when the two sides fought together toward the end of that same act. While it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gone a different way, the setup was absolutely there.

Now, you can totally argue that it’s a cheap way of resolving the conflict (though I’d argue part of the point is that it wasn’t fully resolved), and I would say that’s fair. Arcane, as a show, is not perfect. There are definitely things I would change about it. But that doesn’t mean the ending wasn’t planned.

First, bringing in non-show-canon material is not proper analysis. Arcane is Arcane. It deviates significantly from other established lore and backstory. Until otherwise explicitly stated, Runeterra lore outside of Arcane is not applicable to a reading of the show.

Not true, Arcane has been officially been called canon to Runeterra lore prior to Season 2's premiere (And as of late there has been a smaller ongoing story that is currently taking place after Arcane in the league canon that feature ideas and concepts from the larger Rune-terra lore,such as "The Darkin", Demons, as well as the locations of both Ionia and Demacia and their respective cultural views towards magic). Heck the Black-Rose being here is a sign that a lot of the lore of Runeterra is canon.

Ekko’s statement has literally nothing to do with whether or not the two sides coming together to fight a common enemy was foreshadowed, particularly given it’s a Season 2 quote where they were building to that conclusion. Or do you think they didn’t know how the second season would end while they were making it?

I'm just saying that Ekko's statement brings criticism towards the idea of "Piltover being one city", just showing off that the theme of unity isn't a strong one. Even if that were the intention or not.

Now, you can argue that you don’t like the ending and you feel it didn’t match what you interpret to be the themes of the show. That’s fine. You not liking the ending doesn’t mean it wasn’t planned and foreshadowed. As I believe I said in one of these exchanges, sometimes stories suffer because creators are too married to their original plan even when the story may be pulling in a different direction. (While I’m not a fan, “How I Met Your Mother” is a pretty good example). Stories that are internally inconsistent in their themes are fairly common, particularly ones that are trying to be more nuanced in their messages or that try to create sympathetic villains that they still need to be villains.

Yes that is what I was stating here. I just started off admitting that this was planned I'm trying my best to judge for what it is and not what I think it should be. And I'm just arguing that when looking over the broader context of the world of Runeterra and what Arcane has presented feels out of place.

They establish two sides of a conflict, create sympathetic characters on both sides, had a major theme of the first season be two separate partnerships of people from each side (Vi/Caitlyn, Jayce/Viktor), introduce a potential common enemy at the beginning of the final act of the first season then have two characters discuss a previous time when the two sides fought together toward the end of that same act. While it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gone a different way, the setup was absolutely there.

Again not going to deny this was planned i'm not going to refute that. "However" I want to at least discuss some aspects of these ideas here.

Because while yes the show has presented both sides of the conflict however it never feels like there were ever going to put aside their differences for a common foe. If anything the show highlighted a theme of division more than anything.

Specifically in how every partner team up in the show failed.

Vander and Silco's team up falls a apart,Vander and Loris team up falls a part, Vi and Powder's relationship falls a part, Caitlyn and Vi's team up falls a part, Jayce and Vi's team up last only briefly and falls a part, Jayce and Silco's deal falls a part. (And in the original lore both Ekko and Vi fall a part as well as Viktor and Jayce).

The show intentionally or not presented a theme in where two people come together and then split a part often due to one side failing to make good on there end and they become enemies. That was Tragedy in all of this, in that everyone is their enemy. Something reflected in the S1 finale in where Jinx recognized Vi will never love for who she is and so blew up the council as they were about to vote for peace. So the first season ends not on a note unity but division.

As for Ambessa nothing about her up to this point nothing about her was different then how anyone else acted to this point.

Want to say none of this was the intention of the writers fair enough I'm not going to argue against that. However you can at least see why people would make the claim that this doesn't line up with the show the crew presented in the first season.

Also, not for nothing, but being xenophobic and being anti-Imperial invasion aren’t the same thing.

We can’t have a conversation if you’re not going to be honest.

Again, there are significant deviations between Arcane and established canon. Anything post arcane that wants to include it as canon also has nothing to do with the established canon of the show as it was airing.

Nothing in the show is canon that wasn’t explicitly stated as such, particularly details that would significantly impact the theme or plot. To make the understanding of your show reliant on materials outside of the general knowledge of your audience (which for Arcane was largely people that have not and will not further explore the lore of Runeterra) would be absolutely terrible storytelling at least.

Going back to Ekko’s statement, the whole point of “coming together to fight a common enemy” is that the two sides have to initially be apart. Him re-establishing the division just emphasizes the initial conflict the story is addressing—not making claims as to its resolution. Zaun and Piltover having diverged in purpose over two hundred years also has nothing to do with them initially joining forces against a common enemy. If they had continued to be friends or even just allies, the story of them fighting an enemy off together wouldn’t exactly be compelling.

Similarly, having the partnerships hit a rough patch or break up is classic story-telling. Have you never watched a rom com? It’s called the “second-act breakup.” There’s also the “all is lost” trope or “dark night of the soul” trope. Stories like to show heroes coming back from near defeat when all hope seems lost and win. Again, super basic story structure in just about every piece of fiction.

There’s a reason why so many trilogies have a dark second installment (Star Wars, A:TLA.) It’s generally solid storytelling to have your audience wondering how things will ever resolve and wondering if all is lost. It’s the classic “how will they get out of this one?”

The point of showing the failure of Silco and Vander’s relationship was in part to show how our current characters broke or at least put a dent in that cycle. Vi and Caitlyn and Jayce and Viktor are separated SO they can find each other again. That’s not a flaw in the storytelling, and it definitely doesn’t mean the story is saying they can never work together. The point—throw in Vi and Jinx and Jinx and Ekko too—is that all of these relationships ran the risk of falling to the same destructive patterns of those who came before, but their love was strong enough to overcome those divisions. They succeeded, or at least made progress, where their parents and mentors failed.

Ambessa was introduced murdering an unarmed child and immediately starts pushing to escalate the conflict so she can manipulate it to gain resources. This is classic imperialism. There’s also the fact that she was introduced at the moment when a future antagonist would likely be introduced so you don’t have to spend time establishing them in the next season.

While I disagree with your statement that Viktor is the main antagonist in the end, that also has no bearing on whether or not the show was building toward the two sides working together to defeat a common enemy. They joined forces to get rid of Ambessa, who had been terrorizing Zaun prior to turning her army on Piltover, and to stop Viktor. Both were threats to both cities, which is why they joined forces.

Arcane has interesting, nuanced characters, but still uses a lot of fundamentally basic story tropes, themes, and structures. And that’s fine. Again, it’s also fine if you didn’t like that they joined forces because it basically punted a lot of the structural problems between Piltover and Zaun down the road—something I’d argue they acknowledge in the epilogue. Sure, Sevika’s on the council, and they had a shared memorial, but was anything really resolved? No—not yet. That’s why I think Vi and Cait’s last scene is so important. Yes, they have each other, but they’re still in the fight. The path to a better future is there, but it won’t be easy.

O.k I will admit fault on my part. I should worded this better. Instead of "I feel like this was never meant to be foreshadowing for anything the show was setting up". And more like just based on what the show has presented, it feels more like we were suppose to take the opposite from this statement. In that this was the tragedy of Arcane that the city that born on unity is eroded due to city not actually adhering to this principle. To simply say "Magic is bad and Jayce should of never of messed with it" feels so narrow minded compared to how the first season sets itself up.

Nothing in the show is canon that wasn’t explicitly stated as such, particularly details that would significantly impact the theme or plot. To make the understanding of your show reliant on materials outside of the general knowledge of your audience (which for Arcane was largely people that have not and will not further explore the lore of Runeterra) would be absolutely terrible storytelling at least.

I mean things like the old origins of Piltover beginning as a place that worshiped a wind-spirit and how she was reused as a spirit of fresh-air due to Zaun's pollution are still canon as seen in S2 Act 1.

And even then Arcane was very much prone to just introducing things like "The Black Rose" even though they have nothing to do with anything.

Because that's the thing if your meant to create a story that uses characters and narrative events from the OG LoL lore then people are going to correlate it the lore of League to it.

However even if we want to disregard the large world of Runeterra when examining Arcane. The idea of "Standing tall against the Rune-wars" aren't the words of unity there the words of propaganda, the idea of "Building a wall to our enemies" is meant to

Going back to Ekko’s statement, the whole point of “coming together to fight a common enemy” is that the two sides have to initially be apart. Him re-establishing the division just emphasizes the initial conflict the story is addressing—not making claims as to its resolution. Zaun and Piltover having diverged in purpose over two hundred years also has nothing to do with them initially joining forces against a common enemy. If they had continued to be friends or even just allies, the story of them fighting an enemy off together wouldn’t exactly be compelling.

The thing about Ekko's statement is that what he is saying that there was "never" any unity to begin with, it was just a lie created by the elite.The emphasis of "the divergence" doesn't feel like its meant to highlight the inevitable unity of both cities. Rather highlight the division of the cities.

Because intentional or not Arcane was a story about the inevitable division due to differences.

There’s a reason why so many trilogies have a dark second installment (Star Wars, A:TLA.) It’s generally solid storytelling to have your audience wondering how things will ever resolve and wondering if all is lost. It’s the classic “how will they get out of this one?”

Here's the issue with this read,the difference between Arcane and stuff like (Star Wars and A:TLA) is that those stories were black and white to begin with. There was an obvious big-bad. Meanwhile Arcane was written as story about "Two opposing forces that are neither good or bad" and the conflict between the two groups. On top of that the antagonist of both of there stories were built up to and were a part of the central conflict. Meanwhile Ambessa is character whose motivation has nothing to do with anything with the central conflict. The darker moment wasn't driven by Ambessa it was driven by the two cities themselves.

And a lot of the more "darker moments" aren't meant to be the low-point in which the "Good guys" walk out of. Rather the dark signifies a broke relationship that can't be fixed. Hence the song "What could of been" a song that signifies "The happy unity that can no longer be". That path is broken and we can no longer try to have what we once had.

Ambessa was introduced murdering an unarmed child and immediately starts pushing to escalate the conflict so she can manipulate it to gain resources. This is classic imperialism.

And Jinx committed acts of terrorism that killed so many people. And left many children either orphaned or serve lung damage.

And Mel tried her best to build up Piltover at the expense of the undercity. And "also" manipulates to gain resources as well.

Jayce put up an Embargo as well as place a lot of enforcers on the bridge between the cities.

Heck Silco entire operation with Shimmer.

Nothing about what Ambessa is that different from what the rest of the cast has done. That's the point of morally complex stories, things like slicing peoples necks isn't meant to signify "Their the bad guy" rather it just meant to signify the norm of the world.

The world Arcane established is one in where you either have to be strong and powerful or manipulative and cunning. Or as Ambessa said "You either a Wolf or a Fox". Because that is just how the show established itself as. The Dualism between opposites not the two opposites facing a new opponent.

And that is the tragic angle of the show. The characters are forced into roles due to the way society is structured. And so to just look at Ambessa as just "A warmonger" and not someone who was forced into this role due to society just like everyone feels narrow minded.

Want to argue that the intention of the show was that Ambessa is the "Big bad" fine. However what the show has presented thus far is a contradiction to this very notion. Due to presenting a story that emphasizes that "You either need to be strong or smart to survive" and in turn making Ambessa appear no different to anyone else.

There’s also the fact that she was introduced at the moment when a future antagonist would likely be introduced so you don’t have to spend time establishing them in the next season.

I mean not really because the show was focused squarely on the two cities. I'm not arguing she came in with good intentions (or just solely good intentions) rather that how she was presented didn't seem like she would be the villain that everyone rally's against.

While I disagree with your statement that Viktor is the main antagonist in the end, that also has no bearing on whether or not the show was building toward the two sides working together to defeat a common enemy. They joined forces to get rid of Ambessa, who had been terrorizing Zaun prior to turning her army on Piltover, and to stop Viktor. Both were threats to both cities, which is why they joined forces.

The reason why I brought up Viktor as the big-bad, is to tie back to your statement about the difference between Xenophobia and Imperialism. In that Viktor's usage of the Arcane "is" the Xenophobia towards magic and Hex-tech. My argument isn't the story this wasn't was the original direction, rather that wasn't what they wrote in the end just states that "You should fear the unknown, and trying to go against things is wrong".

Arcane has interesting, nuanced characters, but still uses a lot of fundamentally basic story tropes, themes, and structures. And that’s fine.

I'm not arguing that this wasn't the intention to end on the note of uniting. However I'm just arguing that intentionally or not, the show didn't write a narrative about "coming together" they wrote a story about falling a part.

Let’s be real, saying you poorly worded “I don’t see this as foreshadowing” when called out on lying about saying you never said it wasn’t foreshadowing and saying you meant something completely different is, at best, intellectually dishonest.

The wind spirit lore in Season 2 was colorful set dressing, not, as I pointed out, something meant to have major implications toward understanding the plot or theme. It creates a deeper world, but does not mean we should assume all Runeterra lore should be considered canon or fundamentally impact our understanding of Arcane. That would be terrible storytelling.

Piltover in Arcane is not at all established as xenophobic against any community other than Zaun. Their biggest source of income is trade through the hex gates. You are fixating on the presence of the wall in that scene because it’s something for you to latch onto instead of the most obvious reading of the story.

Again, I literally cannot help you if you don’t get how story structure and conflict work. You noticed the cities are divided. Well spotted. It’s almost like that’s the surface-level conflict of the story. You have basic literacy. The question the story needs to then answer is what are they going to do with this conflict. Arcane could have gone a few ways, but it was clear that they were establishing a lot of set up that there was going to be some form of working together.

The fact that you have decided the story is about “inevitable division due to differences” tells me that you are completely overwriting the show’s themes with your own. It’s like you saw Vi say they’re like oil and water and just stopped the critical thinking process there—as if the show wasn’t obviously going to show Vi is wrong in that moment. Did you not think they were setting Vi and Cait up to be endgame? Again, a couple that serves as one of our avatars of the broader conflict because you need to personify these big themes to give the audience a better reason to care.

Even your example using Ekko completely contradicts your interpretation. What is Ekko doing in that scene? Who is he with? He’s working with Heimerdinger and Jayce. They are, in that moment, working together to try to solve a common problem. (A plot which leads to the AU where Piltover and Zaun have reunified, and shows Ekko that he can’t give up trying to fight for a better future or on a relationship he felt was irreparable.)

“What could have been” is about the ending that couldn’t be—an independent Zaun. That best outcome is gone. That’s why that isn’t what we get—please refer to my comments on the ending being largely unresolved and there still being a fight. What it doesn’t mean is that the show is declaring these sides can never get together—particularly at the midpoint of the story.

Ambessa was a deliberately setup outsider who killed without remorse from an imperial power. Everything about her set up was to establish that she was a threat up to and including how a character we had an established relationship with, Mel, reacted to her. Now, could they have subverted expectations? Sure. But Ambessa becoming the main antagonist of season 2 was super predictable. You not being able to see that on a rewatch is honestly a mind boggling as it is so incredibly obvious. That’s not saying she’s not complex or not a product of her own environment. Most good villains are both, and I enjoy her as a villain, but she was set up as the threat. She was set up as a villain.

Your return to the Viktor “point” is again you trying to completely change your argument retroactively. You keep pretending you aren’t arguing that this wasn’t the plan of the show, but that is what you consistently do. It also in no way challenges any of my points.

Your final point also has one tiny flaw—it completely ignores how over and over again in Arcane it shows characters coming together in different ways and contexts and for different reasons. You see the obstacles put in our characters’ ways and decide the show is showing us that they’re insurmountable even as it shows the characters doing just that. You took being shown difficulty as being shown impossibility.

Again, it’s like you saw the oil and water scene and decided that was the theme of the show.

That said, I never said the sole theme of the show was people coming together. I said that was the ending the show was building toward. That doesn’t make it the main theme as much as it makes it the mechanism to find some form of resolution—uneasy and unsatisfying as it was. The themes of Arcane are about the cycle of violence, love, legacy, community, oppression, trauma, trust. A nihilist declaration that divisions are too strong is the perspective of someone like Silco, maybe, but can only be seen as the major theme of the story if you choose to ignore the ways that characters refuse to give up, even when everything is telling them they should. And, yeah, it doesn’t always work out. And it’s hard. And there’s a reason there isn’t a fun musical montage of everyone celebrating as Noxus retreats.

If the show had needed in season one, you would have a leg to stand on, but it didn’t.

I'm admitting my own faults here. I just saying Silco's words of "unity" when contrasted to Ekko's statement show off a theme of "Division" not unity. The story begins with a united city that gets divided in the end. Whether intentional or not isn't the case. Rather the fact that it highlights a theme of division.

Piltover in Arcane is not at all established as xenophobic against any community other than Zaun. Their biggest source of income is trade through the hex gates. You are fixating on the presence of the wall in that scene because it’s something for you to latch onto instead of the most obvious reading of the story.

My point about bringing up the wall is meant signified that a story that places emphasis on "The founding of the city being built to fend off the rune wars" is just a story of xenophobia. And yes i'm aware of the Hex-gates of coarse i'm aware of this fact. However prior to the Hex-gates people were very much dismissive of the Arcane and its potential.

Again, I literally cannot help you if you don’t get how story structure and conflict work. You noticed the cities are divided. Well spotted. It’s almost like that’s the surface-level conflict of the story. You have basic literacy. The question the story needs to then answer is what are they going to do with this conflict. Arcane could have gone a few ways, but it was clear that they were establishing a lot of set up that there was going to be some form of working together.

You keep on going on about "story structure" as If I don't know about TV-tropes or any of this.

And here's the thing about "Troupes" stories about a "Divided group unifying against a bigger bad" happen in stories were 1. The groups are actually divided 2. There isn't a power dynamic between them and there equals 3. The conflict isn't a class one. A lot of those stories are about two "Equal factions" working together to fight another.

Meanwhile the way Arcane set it up was with a "Class conflict" something that doesn't "end"

The fact that you have decided the story is about “inevitable division due to differences” tells me that you are completely overwriting the show’s themes with your own. It’s like you saw Vi say they’re like oil and water and just stopped the critical thinking process there—as if the show wasn’t obviously going to show Vi is wrong in that moment. Did you not think they were setting Vi and Cait up to be endgame? Again, a couple that serves as one of our avatars of the broader conflict because you need to personify these big themes to give the audience a better reason to care.

Oh my god I listed so many other examples of the two people "dividing" its not "Just" Cait and Vi that signified the theme of division. Its was the split of Vander and Silco, the failings of Grayson and Vander's team up, the failure in Jayce and Vi's team, the failure of Jayce and Silco's deal ,and more importantly "The Failure in Vi and Jinx's relationship.

Vi and Jinx in S1 represented the core theme of "Division". The two sisters stand against the world (This city was built to fend off the Rune-wars) however Vi betrayed Jinx and ruined their relationship (You say we are one city but any time it rains were the ones who get wet) Heck the fact that S2 also ends with their relationship splitting up again is also sign of division.

Again want to argue this wasn't intentional fine. I'm not saying that it was. Rather I'm saying the showed tried to be "One thing" but presented another instead.

“What could have been” is about the ending that couldn’t be—an independent Zaun. That best outcome is gone. That’s why that isn’t what we get—please refer to my comments on the ending being largely unresolved and there still being a fight. What it doesn’t mean is that the show is declaring these sides can never get together—particularly at the midpoint of the story.

The song also referred to the broken relationship between Vi and Jinx. In this moment Jinx realized that Vi will never love her for who she is and in turn this was her swan song to their ruined relationship. So it feels less like an "Unresolved ending" and more like tragedy the story leans on.

Even your example using Ekko completely contradicts your interpretation. What is Ekko doing in that scene? Who is he with? He’s working with Heimerdinger and Jayce. They are, in that moment, working together to try to solve a common problem. (A plot which leads to the AU where Piltover and Zaun have reunified, and shows Ekko that he can’t give up trying to fight for a better future or on a relationship he felt was irreparable.)

Ekko is teaming up with Jayce and Heimerdinger yes however he is talking about supposed Unity that the city is suppose to be about. The group is "unified" however one side is getting more benefits then the other. Heck that is what the conversation is focused on.

As for the AU storyline. This where the theme of unity the show wants to establish doesn't work. Jinx "Killed people" she tried to kill Ekko, killed many of his friends. And the story is expecting "him" to forgive Jinx just because he met an alternate version of her.

Ambessa was a deliberately setup outsider who killed without remorse from an imperial power. Everything about her set up was to establish that she was a threat up to and including how a character we had an established relationship with, Mel, reacted to her. Now, could they have subverted expectations? Sure.

Yes she is an imperialist however that is the norm of this world. You are either and Ambessa or your a Silco. We see time and again that the world forced people into specific roles in order to get by. She is set up as just another person in a world were the strong and the smart survive.

Its like you have never watched "Game of Thrones" before. There are many stories with political themes that introduce new characters

But Ambessa becoming the main antagonist of season 2 was super predictable. You not being able to see that on a rewatch is honestly a mind boggling as it is so incredibly obvious. That’s not saying she’s not complex or not a product of her own environment. Most good villains are both, and I enjoy her as a villain, but she was set up as the threat. She was set up as a villain

Here's the thing though Ambessa "didn't" because we have a world were none of the characters are hero's or villains. We have seen the main characters do equally depraved things as Ambessa.

Want to say this was the intent fine. I'm not arguing against that this wasn't the case. However that is just not what the story presented a different theme.

Your return to the Viktor “point” is again you trying to completely change your argument retroactively. You keep pretending you aren’t arguing that this wasn’t the plan of the show, but that is what you consistently do. It also in no way challenges any of my points.

I literally just brought up how Viktor's ascension was planned out and admit that this was the plan based on a lot of symbolism in the first season hinting towards him being the end game villain. I'm not saying this wasn't planned.

Your final point also has one tiny flaw—it completely ignores how over and over again in Arcane it shows characters coming together in different ways and contexts and for different reasons. You see the obstacles put in our characters’ ways and decide the show is showing us that they’re insurmountable even as it shows the characters doing just that. You took being shown difficulty as being shown impossibility.

So many of these failures "End" as failures. Vander and Silco both never resolved anything about their relationship. Jinx has went to far down a dark path with so much "Blood" on her hands and ends with her falling off with Vi.

The show presented relationships "Falling a part" after one person fails to deliver on their promise to other. And even then this is only continued by having Vi and Jinx's relationship split up once again.

So don't blame me for seeing these events as Insurmountable when that is literally what the story has presented in the end.

I said that was the ending the show was building toward. That doesn’t make it the main theme as much as it makes it the mechanism to find some form of resolution—uneasy and unsatisfying as it was. The themes of Arcane are about the cycle of violence, love, legacy, community, oppression, trauma, trust. A nihilist declaration that divisions are too strong is the perspective of someone like Silco, maybe, but can only be seen as the major theme of the story if you choose to ignore the ways that characters refuse to give up, even when everything is telling them they should. And, yeah, it doesn’t always work out. And it’s hard. And there’s a reason there isn’t a fun musical montage of everyone celebrating as Noxus retreats.

Yes Arcane's themes are of the cycle of violence, love, legacy, community, oppression, trauma, trust. And those themes painted a "Tragedy" which highlight the darker elements of the show. Silco's views are not some "Nihilistic outlook" that just the way the world of Arcane operates, that is the entire "tragedy" of the story. That love leads us to hurt people in our lives. That society forces us into specific roles we in order to survive. And that in turn leads the characters to hurt the people they care about even when we didn't intend to. And in turn its not about "Silco's Nihilistic world view" its the characters Nihilistic world view. Arcane is about the failed partnership between two people who see view it as them against the world. And in turn that world view leads to them turning on the closest person they know. Because viewing the world in this narrow minded view leads to them making enemies of the people they care about. The theme song of the show is called "Enemy" and is about how betrayal leads to everyone believing its them against the world. (Specifically from someone they were close with).

The division between groups and the falling a of relationships is the core identity of the series. And with each contexts they present one story. Jinx "Killed people", Silco killed people, Jayce hurt the under-city and betrayed Viktor, Vander drowned Silco. All the contexts are bloody and messed up and relied on so much baggage that has been constantly And as for "not giving up others" we barely see that Vi gave up Jinx at the end of S1. Caitlyn gave up on the under city. We see many people literally "Give up" on trying to make amends with their respective partners.

As someone else put it "The love was there,it didn't change anything". As for the whole "Funeral" the whole fight with Noxus itself is against a faceless enemy in where the tragedy is shown on the side of Piltover but never on side of Noxus, Heck Jinx pulls up to the fight and shoots down the Noxian soldiers with big epic music and were not suppose to bad an eye in how they frame the deaths of the Piltover citizens and yet the lives of the Noxian soldiers are treated like nothing. No sense of irony towards how "Everybody wants to be my enemy" is shown in a positive light here. That its wrong to view your closest ally as an enemy but its ok the view the rest of the world as bad.

So, have a good life. I’m not going to block you, but I am no longer interested in this conversation where you keep trying to retcon your points and ignore what actually happened in the show. I do have better things to do. Maybe in a year when you rewatch the show again you’ll feel differently, but I have no interest in handholding you through it anymore.

“What happened to rebel Vi” is that Vander took her to the bridge where her parents died in his revolution and asked her what she was willing to lose. Then she meets Cait who is gentle and kind while still being tough and it makes her rethink how she sees topside. When Jinx tells her she changed too, that’s what she’s talking about.

I’m sorry if you thought Vi was going to be a topside-hating revolutionary in Season 2, but that’s clearly not where her character arc was going. Remember how she forced her way between Ekko and Cait? It seemed very straightforward that was the role her character was taking on.

I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Now, I get being annoyed that that was what they chose to do. You don’t have to love the creative decisions of media, just like media doesn’t have to compromise its creative direction to satisfy you. But not liking that they went that direction is not the same as the show having bad writing or engaging in character assassination.

Everything Vi did in season 2 was very much in character with how she changed and who she became throughout Season 1. Hell, she used enforcers and Hextech to raid Shimmer facilities before Commander Kiramman ever threw on a beret. So, yes, actually wearing the uniform was a huge and complicated decision that she was definitely not happy about, but it also fell in line with what she had been doing.

There’s meat for another post at some point about the three different Zaun/enforcer partnerships we see in the show: Vander/Greyson, Silco/Marcus, and Cait/Vi; but I’m not going to go into that now.

TLDR: “Rebel Vi” who wants to fight all of topside hasn’t existed since the end of the second episode of the show.

>I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Having the two cities work together against a common enemy is just a cheap way to resolves the conflict because it addresses none of the issues and has takes away any meaningful motivation.

Saving the world is a base line goal it tells us nothing about the characters or there ideals. Because of coarse people are going to go in and save the world.

Also no there were never talks about reaching common enemy in the first season. In fact its kind of clear that a lot of season 1 indicates that some characters are going to cut ties with one another.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

Some of the biggest emotional beats in season one were people from topside and bottom coming together. When Vi says they’re oil and water and can’t mix, you’re not supposed to agree with her.

Finally, there’s a reason why the last words of season one are “what could have been.” It’s because that future where Zaun gained its independence is gone. Maybe way down the line it could happen, but Jinx destroyed that chance for now. It’s also not framed as a triumphant, righteous moment.

The show didn’t chicken out. It told the story it was always and very obviously going to tell. There’s a difference between a theme going unaddressed and unresolved. Arcane didn’t wave a wand and resolve all of the issues between Piltover and Zaun—which is why the ending isn’t some sunshine and rainbows celebration. No one cheers as the Noxians leave while Pilties and Zaunites hug in the streets.

However that doesn't mean that were ended fits the themes in what the show set up (intentional or not). And good example of this would have the be this statement here.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

I feel like this was never meant to be foreshadowing for anything the show was setting up. Because when you take into account this statement "A common enemy from beyond the walls" is propaganda.

Because if you really look into the larger world of Rune-terra take into broader account of what the Rune-wars were. That Piltover is essentially just building a wall from the outside world and in turn decided to just shut themselves off from everyone.

And this is made even more clear with how magic works in League of Legends. Magic doesn't "Corrupt people's minds with weird blotchy shit" its just a tool dependent on how a person uses it.

The planet of Rune-terra (A planet literally called magic earth) is made of magic, there is literally various examples of magic shown here.

Further south of Zaun there is an Aztec empire with citizens who can channel elemental magic, to the west there is an archipelago in where people can channel the magic of god the life and motion. And north west of that there is Ionia a place .The empire of Noxus has variety of mages. . Heck Piltover's origins began with a bunch of people worshiping a wind spirit.

And so taking that all into consideration you can see the wall that Piltover built up and their staunch rejection of magic is in of itself regressive to the broader the contexts of the world. (Second only to Demacia which is so anti-magic that it literally has their own fantasy ICE that captures mages and imprison's them).

As for the statement of "One city" Ekko in S2 refutes the claim stating

"You say we are one city but whenever it rains we are the one's getting wet"

Which show's off that Piltover claims to be one city but in reality there not.

And so even if you want to claim this is foreshadowing you have to take into account the broader contexts of what this statement means in the show itself.

First, bringing in non-show-canon material is not proper analysis. Arcane is Arcane. It deviates significantly from other established lore and backstory. Until otherwise explicitly stated, Runeterra lore outside of Arcane is not applicable to a reading of the show.

Ekko’s statement has literally nothing to do with whether or not the two sides coming together to fight a common enemy was foreshadowed, particularly given it’s a Season 2 quote where they were building to that conclusion. Or do you think they didn’t know how the second season would end while they were making it?

Now, you can argue that you don’t like the ending and you feel it didn’t match what you interpret to be the themes of the show. That’s fine. You not liking the ending doesn’t mean it wasn’t planned and foreshadowed. As I believe I said in one of these exchanges, sometimes stories suffer because creators are too married to their original plan even when the story may be pulling in a different direction. (While I’m not a fan, “How I Met Your Mother” is a pretty good example). Stories that are internally inconsistent in their themes are fairly common, particularly ones that are trying to be more nuanced in their messages or that try to create sympathetic villains that they still need to be villains.

My saying the show foreshadowed this ending is neither an endorsement nor condemnation of the ending itself. It is simply looking at the way the story was told and the clear set up that they were likely moving in this direction.

They establish two sides of a conflict, create sympathetic characters on both sides, had a major theme of the first season be two separate partnerships of people from each side (Vi/Caitlyn, Jayce/Viktor), introduce a potential common enemy at the beginning of the final act of the first season then have two characters discuss a previous time when the two sides fought together toward the end of that same act. While it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gone a different way, the setup was absolutely there.

Now, you can totally argue that it’s a cheap way of resolving the conflict (though I’d argue part of the point is that it wasn’t fully resolved), and I would say that’s fair. Arcane, as a show, is not perfect. There are definitely things I would change about it. But that doesn’t mean the ending wasn’t planned.

First, bringing in non-show-canon material is not proper analysis. Arcane is Arcane. It deviates significantly from other established lore and backstory. Until otherwise explicitly stated, Runeterra lore outside of Arcane is not applicable to a reading of the show.

Not true, Arcane has been officially been called canon to Runeterra lore prior to Season 2's premiere (And as of late there has been a smaller ongoing story that is currently taking place after Arcane in the league canon that feature ideas and concepts from the larger Rune-terra lore,such as "The Darkin", Demons, as well as the locations of both Ionia and Demacia and their respective cultural views towards magic). Heck the Black-Rose being here is a sign that a lot of the lore of Runeterra is canon.

Ekko’s statement has literally nothing to do with whether or not the two sides coming together to fight a common enemy was foreshadowed, particularly given it’s a Season 2 quote where they were building to that conclusion. Or do you think they didn’t know how the second season would end while they were making it?

I'm just saying that Ekko's statement brings criticism towards the idea of "Piltover being one city", just showing off that the theme of unity isn't a strong one. Even if that were the intention or not.

Now, you can argue that you don’t like the ending and you feel it didn’t match what you interpret to be the themes of the show. That’s fine. You not liking the ending doesn’t mean it wasn’t planned and foreshadowed. As I believe I said in one of these exchanges, sometimes stories suffer because creators are too married to their original plan even when the story may be pulling in a different direction. (While I’m not a fan, “How I Met Your Mother” is a pretty good example). Stories that are internally inconsistent in their themes are fairly common, particularly ones that are trying to be more nuanced in their messages or that try to create sympathetic villains that they still need to be villains.

Yes that is what I was stating here. I just started off admitting that this was planned I'm trying my best to judge for what it is and not what I think it should be. And I'm just arguing that when looking over the broader context of the world of Runeterra and what Arcane has presented feels out of place.

They establish two sides of a conflict, create sympathetic characters on both sides, had a major theme of the first season be two separate partnerships of people from each side (Vi/Caitlyn, Jayce/Viktor), introduce a potential common enemy at the beginning of the final act of the first season then have two characters discuss a previous time when the two sides fought together toward the end of that same act. While it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gone a different way, the setup was absolutely there.

Again not going to deny this was planned i'm not going to refute that. "However" I want to at least discuss some aspects of these ideas here.

Because while yes the show has presented both sides of the conflict however it never feels like there were ever going to put aside their differences for a common foe. If anything the show highlighted a theme of division more than anything.

Specifically in how every partner team up in the show failed.

Vander and Silco's team up falls a apart,Vander and Loris team up falls a part, Vi and Powder's relationship falls a part, Caitlyn and Vi's team up falls a part, Jayce and Vi's team up last only briefly and falls a part, Jayce and Silco's deal falls a part. (And in the original lore both Ekko and Vi fall a part as well as Viktor and Jayce).

The show intentionally or not presented a theme in where two people come together and then split a part often due to one side failing to make good on there end and they become enemies. That was Tragedy in all of this, in that everyone is their enemy. Something reflected in the S1 finale in where Jinx recognized Vi will never love for who she is and so blew up the council as they were about to vote for peace. So the first season ends not on a note unity but division.

As for Ambessa nothing about her up to this point nothing about her was different then how anyone else acted to this point.

Want to say none of this was the intention of the writers fair enough I'm not going to argue against that. However you can at least see why people would make the claim that this doesn't line up with the show the crew presented in the first season.

Also, not for nothing, but being xenophobic and being anti-Imperial invasion aren’t the same thing.

We can’t have a conversation if you’re not going to be honest.

Again, there are significant deviations between Arcane and established canon. Anything post arcane that wants to include it as canon also has nothing to do with the established canon of the show as it was airing.

Nothing in the show is canon that wasn’t explicitly stated as such, particularly details that would significantly impact the theme or plot. To make the understanding of your show reliant on materials outside of the general knowledge of your audience (which for Arcane was largely people that have not and will not further explore the lore of Runeterra) would be absolutely terrible storytelling at least.

Going back to Ekko’s statement, the whole point of “coming together to fight a common enemy” is that the two sides have to initially be apart. Him re-establishing the division just emphasizes the initial conflict the story is addressing—not making claims as to its resolution. Zaun and Piltover having diverged in purpose over two hundred years also has nothing to do with them initially joining forces against a common enemy. If they had continued to be friends or even just allies, the story of them fighting an enemy off together wouldn’t exactly be compelling.

Similarly, having the partnerships hit a rough patch or break up is classic story-telling. Have you never watched a rom com? It’s called the “second-act breakup.” There’s also the “all is lost” trope or “dark night of the soul” trope. Stories like to show heroes coming back from near defeat when all hope seems lost and win. Again, super basic story structure in just about every piece of fiction.

There’s a reason why so many trilogies have a dark second installment (Star Wars, A:TLA.) It’s generally solid storytelling to have your audience wondering how things will ever resolve and wondering if all is lost. It’s the classic “how will they get out of this one?”

The point of showing the failure of Silco and Vander’s relationship was in part to show how our current characters broke or at least put a dent in that cycle. Vi and Caitlyn and Jayce and Viktor are separated SO they can find each other again. That’s not a flaw in the storytelling, and it definitely doesn’t mean the story is saying they can never work together. The point—throw in Vi and Jinx and Jinx and Ekko too—is that all of these relationships ran the risk of falling to the same destructive patterns of those who came before, but their love was strong enough to overcome those divisions. They succeeded, or at least made progress, where their parents and mentors failed.

Ambessa was introduced murdering an unarmed child and immediately starts pushing to escalate the conflict so she can manipulate it to gain resources. This is classic imperialism. There’s also the fact that she was introduced at the moment when a future antagonist would likely be introduced so you don’t have to spend time establishing them in the next season.

While I disagree with your statement that Viktor is the main antagonist in the end, that also has no bearing on whether or not the show was building toward the two sides working together to defeat a common enemy. They joined forces to get rid of Ambessa, who had been terrorizing Zaun prior to turning her army on Piltover, and to stop Viktor. Both were threats to both cities, which is why they joined forces.

Arcane has interesting, nuanced characters, but still uses a lot of fundamentally basic story tropes, themes, and structures. And that’s fine. Again, it’s also fine if you didn’t like that they joined forces because it basically punted a lot of the structural problems between Piltover and Zaun down the road—something I’d argue they acknowledge in the epilogue. Sure, Sevika’s on the council, and they had a shared memorial, but was anything really resolved? No—not yet. That’s why I think Vi and Cait’s last scene is so important. Yes, they have each other, but they’re still in the fight. The path to a better future is there, but it won’t be easy.

O.k I will admit fault on my part. I should worded this better. Instead of "I feel like this was never meant to be foreshadowing for anything the show was setting up". And more like just based on what the show has presented, it feels more like we were suppose to take the opposite from this statement. In that this was the tragedy of Arcane that the city that born on unity is eroded due to city not actually adhering to this principle. To simply say "Magic is bad and Jayce should of never of messed with it" feels so narrow minded compared to how the first season sets itself up.

Nothing in the show is canon that wasn’t explicitly stated as such, particularly details that would significantly impact the theme or plot. To make the understanding of your show reliant on materials outside of the general knowledge of your audience (which for Arcane was largely people that have not and will not further explore the lore of Runeterra) would be absolutely terrible storytelling at least.

I mean things like the old origins of Piltover beginning as a place that worshiped a wind-spirit and how she was reused as a spirit of fresh-air due to Zaun's pollution are still canon as seen in S2 Act 1.

And even then Arcane was very much prone to just introducing things like "The Black Rose" even though they have nothing to do with anything.

Because that's the thing if your meant to create a story that uses characters and narrative events from the OG LoL lore then people are going to correlate it the lore of League to it.

However even if we want to disregard the large world of Runeterra when examining Arcane. The idea of "Standing tall against the Rune-wars" aren't the words of unity there the words of propaganda, the idea of "Building a wall to our enemies" is meant to

Going back to Ekko’s statement, the whole point of “coming together to fight a common enemy” is that the two sides have to initially be apart. Him re-establishing the division just emphasizes the initial conflict the story is addressing—not making claims as to its resolution. Zaun and Piltover having diverged in purpose over two hundred years also has nothing to do with them initially joining forces against a common enemy. If they had continued to be friends or even just allies, the story of them fighting an enemy off together wouldn’t exactly be compelling.

The thing about Ekko's statement is that what he is saying that there was "never" any unity to begin with, it was just a lie created by the elite.The emphasis of "the divergence" doesn't feel like its meant to highlight the inevitable unity of both cities. Rather highlight the division of the cities.

Because intentional or not Arcane was a story about the inevitable division due to differences.

There’s a reason why so many trilogies have a dark second installment (Star Wars, A:TLA.) It’s generally solid storytelling to have your audience wondering how things will ever resolve and wondering if all is lost. It’s the classic “how will they get out of this one?”

Here's the issue with this read,the difference between Arcane and stuff like (Star Wars and A:TLA) is that those stories were black and white to begin with. There was an obvious big-bad. Meanwhile Arcane was written as story about "Two opposing forces that are neither good or bad" and the conflict between the two groups. On top of that the antagonist of both of there stories were built up to and were a part of the central conflict. Meanwhile Ambessa is character whose motivation has nothing to do with anything with the central conflict. The darker moment wasn't driven by Ambessa it was driven by the two cities themselves.

And a lot of the more "darker moments" aren't meant to be the low-point in which the "Good guys" walk out of. Rather the dark signifies a broke relationship that can't be fixed. Hence the song "What could of been" a song that signifies "The happy unity that can no longer be". That path is broken and we can no longer try to have what we once had.

Ambessa was introduced murdering an unarmed child and immediately starts pushing to escalate the conflict so she can manipulate it to gain resources. This is classic imperialism.

And Jinx committed acts of terrorism that killed so many people. And left many children either orphaned or serve lung damage.

And Mel tried her best to build up Piltover at the expense of the undercity. And "also" manipulates to gain resources as well.

Jayce put up an Embargo as well as place a lot of enforcers on the bridge between the cities.

Heck Silco entire operation with Shimmer.

Nothing about what Ambessa is that different from what the rest of the cast has done. That's the point of morally complex stories, things like slicing peoples necks isn't meant to signify "Their the bad guy" rather it just meant to signify the norm of the world.

The world Arcane established is one in where you either have to be strong and powerful or manipulative and cunning. Or as Ambessa said "You either a Wolf or a Fox". Because that is just how the show established itself as. The Dualism between opposites not the two opposites facing a new opponent.

And that is the tragic angle of the show. The characters are forced into roles due to the way society is structured. And so to just look at Ambessa as just "A warmonger" and not someone who was forced into this role due to society just like everyone feels narrow minded.

Want to argue that the intention of the show was that Ambessa is the "Big bad" fine. However what the show has presented thus far is a contradiction to this very notion. Due to presenting a story that emphasizes that "You either need to be strong or smart to survive" and in turn making Ambessa appear no different to anyone else.

There’s also the fact that she was introduced at the moment when a future antagonist would likely be introduced so you don’t have to spend time establishing them in the next season.

I mean not really because the show was focused squarely on the two cities. I'm not arguing she came in with good intentions (or just solely good intentions) rather that how she was presented didn't seem like she would be the villain that everyone rally's against.

While I disagree with your statement that Viktor is the main antagonist in the end, that also has no bearing on whether or not the show was building toward the two sides working together to defeat a common enemy. They joined forces to get rid of Ambessa, who had been terrorizing Zaun prior to turning her army on Piltover, and to stop Viktor. Both were threats to both cities, which is why they joined forces.

The reason why I brought up Viktor as the big-bad, is to tie back to your statement about the difference between Xenophobia and Imperialism. In that Viktor's usage of the Arcane "is" the Xenophobia towards magic and Hex-tech. My argument isn't the story this wasn't was the original direction, rather that wasn't what they wrote in the end just states that "You should fear the unknown, and trying to go against things is wrong".

Arcane has interesting, nuanced characters, but still uses a lot of fundamentally basic story tropes, themes, and structures. And that’s fine.

I'm not arguing that this wasn't the intention to end on the note of uniting. However I'm just arguing that intentionally or not, the show didn't write a narrative about "coming together" they wrote a story about falling a part.

“What happened to rebel Vi” is that Vander took her to the bridge where her parents died in his revolution and asked her what she was willing to lose. Then she meets Cait who is gentle and kind while still being tough and it makes her rethink how she sees topside. When Jinx tells her she changed too, that’s what she’s talking about.

I’m sorry if you thought Vi was going to be a topside-hating revolutionary in Season 2, but that’s clearly not where her character arc was going. Remember how she forced her way between Ekko and Cait? It seemed very straightforward that was the role her character was taking on.

I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Now, I get being annoyed that that was what they chose to do. You don’t have to love the creative decisions of media, just like media doesn’t have to compromise its creative direction to satisfy you. But not liking that they went that direction is not the same as the show having bad writing or engaging in character assassination.

Everything Vi did in season 2 was very much in character with how she changed and who she became throughout Season 1. Hell, she used enforcers and Hextech to raid Shimmer facilities before Commander Kiramman ever threw on a beret. So, yes, actually wearing the uniform was a huge and complicated decision that she was definitely not happy about, but it also fell in line with what she had been doing.

There’s meat for another post at some point about the three different Zaun/enforcer partnerships we see in the show: Vander/Greyson, Silco/Marcus, and Cait/Vi; but I’m not going to go into that now.

TLDR: “Rebel Vi” who wants to fight all of topside hasn’t existed since the end of the second episode of the show.

>I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Having the two cities work together against a common enemy is just a cheap way to resolves the conflict because it addresses none of the issues and has takes away any meaningful motivation.

Saving the world is a base line goal it tells us nothing about the characters or there ideals. Because of coarse people are going to go in and save the world.

Also no there were never talks about reaching common enemy in the first season. In fact its kind of clear that a lot of season 1 indicates that some characters are going to cut ties with one another.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

Some of the biggest emotional beats in season one were people from topside and bottom coming together. When Vi says they’re oil and water and can’t mix, you’re not supposed to agree with her.

Finally, there’s a reason why the last words of season one are “what could have been.” It’s because that future where Zaun gained its independence is gone. Maybe way down the line it could happen, but Jinx destroyed that chance for now. It’s also not framed as a triumphant, righteous moment.

The show didn’t chicken out. It told the story it was always and very obviously going to tell. There’s a difference between a theme going unaddressed and unresolved. Arcane didn’t wave a wand and resolve all of the issues between Piltover and Zaun—which is why the ending isn’t some sunshine and rainbows celebration. No one cheers as the Noxians leave while Pilties and Zaunites hug in the streets.

However that doesn't mean that were ended fits the themes in what the show set up (intentional or not). And good example of this would have the be this statement here.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

I feel like this was never meant to be foreshadowing for anything the show was setting up. Because when you take into account this statement "A common enemy from beyond the walls" is propaganda.

Because if you really look into the larger world of Rune-terra take into broader account of what the Rune-wars were. That Piltover is essentially just building a wall from the outside world and in turn decided to just shut themselves off from everyone.

And this is made even more clear with how magic works in League of Legends. Magic doesn't "Corrupt people's minds with weird blotchy shit" its just a tool dependent on how a person uses it.

The planet of Rune-terra (A planet literally called magic earth) is made of magic, there is literally various examples of magic shown here.

Further south of Zaun there is an Aztec empire with citizens who can channel elemental magic, to the west there is an archipelago in where people can channel the magic of god the life and motion. And north west of that there is Ionia a place .The empire of Noxus has variety of mages. . Heck Piltover's origins began with a bunch of people worshiping a wind spirit.

And so taking that all into consideration you can see the wall that Piltover built up and their staunch rejection of magic is in of itself regressive to the broader the contexts of the world. (Second only to Demacia which is so anti-magic that it literally has their own fantasy ICE that captures mages and imprison's them).

As for the statement of "One city" Ekko in S2 refutes the claim stating

"You say we are one city but whenever it rains we are the one's getting wet"

Which show's off that Piltover claims to be one city but in reality there not.

And so even if you want to claim this is foreshadowing you have to take into account the broader contexts of what this statement means in the show itself.

First, bringing in non-show-canon material is not proper analysis. Arcane is Arcane. It deviates significantly from other established lore and backstory. Until otherwise explicitly stated, Runeterra lore outside of Arcane is not applicable to a reading of the show.

Ekko’s statement has literally nothing to do with whether or not the two sides coming together to fight a common enemy was foreshadowed, particularly given it’s a Season 2 quote where they were building to that conclusion. Or do you think they didn’t know how the second season would end while they were making it?

Now, you can argue that you don’t like the ending and you feel it didn’t match what you interpret to be the themes of the show. That’s fine. You not liking the ending doesn’t mean it wasn’t planned and foreshadowed. As I believe I said in one of these exchanges, sometimes stories suffer because creators are too married to their original plan even when the story may be pulling in a different direction. (While I’m not a fan, “How I Met Your Mother” is a pretty good example). Stories that are internally inconsistent in their themes are fairly common, particularly ones that are trying to be more nuanced in their messages or that try to create sympathetic villains that they still need to be villains.

My saying the show foreshadowed this ending is neither an endorsement nor condemnation of the ending itself. It is simply looking at the way the story was told and the clear set up that they were likely moving in this direction.

They establish two sides of a conflict, create sympathetic characters on both sides, had a major theme of the first season be two separate partnerships of people from each side (Vi/Caitlyn, Jayce/Viktor), introduce a potential common enemy at the beginning of the final act of the first season then have two characters discuss a previous time when the two sides fought together toward the end of that same act. While it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gone a different way, the setup was absolutely there.

Now, you can totally argue that it’s a cheap way of resolving the conflict (though I’d argue part of the point is that it wasn’t fully resolved), and I would say that’s fair. Arcane, as a show, is not perfect. There are definitely things I would change about it. But that doesn’t mean the ending wasn’t planned.

First, bringing in non-show-canon material is not proper analysis. Arcane is Arcane. It deviates significantly from other established lore and backstory. Until otherwise explicitly stated, Runeterra lore outside of Arcane is not applicable to a reading of the show.

Not true, Arcane has been officially been called canon to Runeterra lore prior to Season 2's premiere (And as of late there has been a smaller ongoing story that is currently taking place after Arcane in the league canon that feature ideas and concepts from the larger Rune-terra lore,such as "The Darkin", Demons, as well as the locations of both Ionia and Demacia and their respective cultural views towards magic). Heck the Black-Rose being here is a sign that a lot of the lore of Runeterra is canon.

Ekko’s statement has literally nothing to do with whether or not the two sides coming together to fight a common enemy was foreshadowed, particularly given it’s a Season 2 quote where they were building to that conclusion. Or do you think they didn’t know how the second season would end while they were making it?

I'm just saying that Ekko's statement brings criticism towards the idea of "Piltover being one city", just showing off that the theme of unity isn't a strong one. Even if that were the intention or not.

Now, you can argue that you don’t like the ending and you feel it didn’t match what you interpret to be the themes of the show. That’s fine. You not liking the ending doesn’t mean it wasn’t planned and foreshadowed. As I believe I said in one of these exchanges, sometimes stories suffer because creators are too married to their original plan even when the story may be pulling in a different direction. (While I’m not a fan, “How I Met Your Mother” is a pretty good example). Stories that are internally inconsistent in their themes are fairly common, particularly ones that are trying to be more nuanced in their messages or that try to create sympathetic villains that they still need to be villains.

Yes that is what I was stating here. I just started off admitting that this was planned I'm trying my best to judge for what it is and not what I think it should be. And I'm just arguing that when looking over the broader context of the world of Runeterra and what Arcane has presented feels out of place.

They establish two sides of a conflict, create sympathetic characters on both sides, had a major theme of the first season be two separate partnerships of people from each side (Vi/Caitlyn, Jayce/Viktor), introduce a potential common enemy at the beginning of the final act of the first season then have two characters discuss a previous time when the two sides fought together toward the end of that same act. While it doesn’t mean they couldn’t have gone a different way, the setup was absolutely there.

Again not going to deny this was planned i'm not going to refute that. "However" I want to at least discuss some aspects of these ideas here.

Because while yes the show has presented both sides of the conflict however it never feels like there were ever going to put aside their differences for a common foe. If anything the show highlighted a theme of division more than anything.

Specifically in how every partner team up in the show failed.

Vander and Silco's team up falls a apart,Vander and Loris team up falls a part, Vi and Powder's relationship falls a part, Caitlyn and Vi's team up falls a part, Jayce and Vi's team up last only briefly and falls a part, Jayce and Silco's deal falls a part. (And in the original lore both Ekko and Vi fall a part as well as Viktor and Jayce).

The show intentionally or not presented a theme in where two people come together and then split a part often due to one side failing to make good on there end and they become enemies. That was Tragedy in all of this, in that everyone is their enemy. Something reflected in the S1 finale in where Jinx recognized Vi will never love for who she is and so blew up the council as they were about to vote for peace. So the first season ends not on a note unity but division.

As for Ambessa nothing about her up to this point nothing about her was different then how anyone else acted to this point.

Want to say none of this was the intention of the writers fair enough I'm not going to argue against that. However you can at least see why people would make the claim that this doesn't line up with the show the crew presented in the first season.

Also, not for nothing, but being xenophobic and being anti-Imperial invasion aren’t the same thing.

“What happened to rebel Vi” is that Vander took her to the bridge where her parents died in his revolution and asked her what she was willing to lose. Then she meets Cait who is gentle and kind while still being tough and it makes her rethink how she sees topside. When Jinx tells her she changed too, that’s what she’s talking about.

I’m sorry if you thought Vi was going to be a topside-hating revolutionary in Season 2, but that’s clearly not where her character arc was going. Remember how she forced her way between Ekko and Cait? It seemed very straightforward that was the role her character was taking on.

I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Now, I get being annoyed that that was what they chose to do. You don’t have to love the creative decisions of media, just like media doesn’t have to compromise its creative direction to satisfy you. But not liking that they went that direction is not the same as the show having bad writing or engaging in character assassination.

Everything Vi did in season 2 was very much in character with how she changed and who she became throughout Season 1. Hell, she used enforcers and Hextech to raid Shimmer facilities before Commander Kiramman ever threw on a beret. So, yes, actually wearing the uniform was a huge and complicated decision that she was definitely not happy about, but it also fell in line with what she had been doing.

There’s meat for another post at some point about the three different Zaun/enforcer partnerships we see in the show: Vander/Greyson, Silco/Marcus, and Cait/Vi; but I’m not going to go into that now.

TLDR: “Rebel Vi” who wants to fight all of topside hasn’t existed since the end of the second episode of the show.

>I feel similar about people who act like the show was betraying its premise because it ended with reconciliation/Zaun and Piltover working together. Again, the fact that two of the most important relationships were between characters from both sides and that they made a point of talking about Zaun and Piltover first coming together against a common enemy was a pretty clear indicator that was the plan.

Having the two cities work together against a common enemy is just a cheap way to resolves the conflict because it addresses none of the issues and has takes away any meaningful motivation.

Saving the world is a base line goal it tells us nothing about the characters or there ideals. Because of coarse people are going to go in and save the world.

Also no there were never talks about reaching common enemy in the first season. In fact its kind of clear that a lot of season 1 indicates that some characters are going to cut ties with one another.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

Some of the biggest emotional beats in season one were people from topside and bottom coming together. When Vi says they’re oil and water and can’t mix, you’re not supposed to agree with her.

Finally, there’s a reason why the last words of season one are “what could have been.” It’s because that future where Zaun gained its independence is gone. Maybe way down the line it could happen, but Jinx destroyed that chance for now. It’s also not framed as a triumphant, righteous moment.

The show didn’t chicken out. It told the story it was always and very obviously going to tell. There’s a difference between a theme going unaddressed and unresolved. Arcane didn’t wave a wand and resolve all of the issues between Piltover and Zaun—which is why the ending isn’t some sunshine and rainbows celebration. No one cheers as the Noxians leave while Pilties and Zaunites hug in the streets.

However that doesn't mean that were ended fits the themes in what the show set up (intentional or not). And good example of this would have the be this statement here.

As for fighting a common enemy not being discussed, go back and rewatch the scene where Jayce talks to Silco. They talk about what brought Zaun and Piltover together in the first place, a common enemy from beyond their walls (this is what a middle school English teacher might call foreshadowing.) Silco says people have a short memory—kind of like this fandom.

I feel like this was never meant to be foreshadowing for anything the show was setting up. Because when you take into account this statement "A common enemy from beyond the walls" is propaganda.

Because if you really look into the larger world of Rune-terra take into broader account of what the Rune-wars were. That Piltover is essentially just building a wall from the outside world and in turn decided to just shut themselves off from everyone.

And this is made even more clear with how magic works in League of Legends. Magic doesn't "Corrupt people's minds with weird blotchy shit" its just a tool dependent on how a person uses it.

The planet of Rune-terra (A planet literally called magic earth) is made of magic, there is literally various examples of magic shown here.

Further south of Zaun there is an Aztec empire with citizens who can channel elemental magic, to the west there is an archipelago in where people can channel the magic of god the life and motion. And north west of that there is Ionia a place .The empire of Noxus has variety of mages. . Heck Piltover's origins began with a bunch of people worshiping a wind spirit.

And so taking that all into consideration you can see the wall that Piltover built up and their staunch rejection of magic is in of itself regressive to the broader the contexts of the world. (Second only to Demacia which is so anti-magic that it literally has their own fantasy ICE that captures mages and imprison's them).

As for the statement of "One city" Ekko in S2 refutes the claim stating

"You say we are one city but whenever it rains we are the one's getting wet"

Which show's off that Piltover claims to be one city but in reality there not.

And so even if you want to claim this is foreshadowing you have to take into account the broader contexts of what this statement means in the show itself.

Sure, it's fair to find it annoying but the people who read those novels generally don't want a monarchy in real life, enjoyment of it doesn't indicate that they're subconsciously anti-democratic and the popularity of that type of fiction isn't an indicator of some growing social ill.

Yes, thank you, this is something I can argue with.

So there are layers to this.

How deep was the understanding of class struggle to begin with? I would say not very deep. There was a relationship of economic exploitation that was alluded to (the mines) but most of the characters we see were not miners, and weren't being economically exploited by Piltover. And the three main ways of responding to oppression didn't reflect an understanding of class struggle either. There was a) Vander. Who's first idea was to start a bar and I guess an independent business community? That is not class struggle. And yeah he led a rebellion but... to what end? What were the concrete demands? b) Silco. Who had some absolute banger lines of dialogue. But whose tactics (starting a drug empire and turning people into drugged-up zombie fighters) actually disempowered average Zaunites. and c) The Firelights. Who started an isolated commune rather than directly organizing within the population. And who seemed to see Silco as the main enemy more than Piltover. You see this again when Vi confronts the council in s1, and her issue with them is not that they're exploiting and oppressing Zaun, her issue is that they aren't sending police after Silco. So where was the class struggle supposed to come from? Honestly, Sevika was the only one who expressed real revolutionary sentiment, and the show made a point of demonstating that she was not getting much traction.

Where did the show indicate it was going with the conflict between Zaun and Piltover? In the very first scene, in the midst of the worst conflict between the two cities, Powder is singing about a "friend across the river". Vi and Caitlyn's entire relationship is representative of the possibility of reconciliation between the two cities. When Jayce meets with Silco at the end of s1, they mention how the two cities came together in the first place to face threats from outside their walls. I think, looking back on s1, it was pretty clear which direction the show was headed in.

I would also point out the way that the show deals with themes of duality. There's Viktor's monologue about the two sides of humanity, there's what Jinx says to Vi about the two of them always being together even when they're apart, etc. The nature of duality as dealt with on the show is that the two sides are inseparable. Each side conditions and shapes the other. Each side only exists as such because of the other. So one cannot overcome or triumph over the other, they can only continue to exist in tension with one another.

Does coming together to face an outside threat constitute "forgetting" about the conflict? I would say not. It is a way of temporarily eliding the conflict, but the conflict never went away. It was a significant moment when a few people from the undercity came to join the enforcers; it was significant because bad blood still existed between them. More importantly, the majority of Zaunites did not join up with the enforcers, but instead fought through their own organization and with their own means - they did not trust Piltover to lead them in battle and fought for themselves. Then after the battle, tensions continue, as demonstrated by the shot of Sevika at the council. The conflict between Zaun and Piltover is not forgotten - it's just not resolved.

Arcane is not a traditional TV show where chunks of the season are written at various times and the writers can respond to how they feel the story is going and the audience reception, or where the writers can only break half a season at a time without having a clear idea of where it's going to end. Season 2 was written and produced as a unified whole. Nothing was "forgotten" or "dropped". Things may not have gone the way certain audience members wanted them to, but that's not the same thing. There was a plan for all the elements of the story, and that story was executed.

Here's the problem with this take. I never seen any of these as example of unity but rather this false sense of unity that leads to division. Because throughout the show there is heavier theme of division there is of unity in where we have two people teaming up to inevitably split away. Vander and Silco fall apart. Vi and Jinx falls apart .Vi and Caitlyn's team up fall a part. Jayce and Vi fall apart. Jayce and Silco falls a part. Jayce and Viktor falls a part. Anytime two people come together it always fails, usually because the former of the group fails their promise to the later.

The sentiment of the two cities itself is also something that is challenged by the show. Silco states that this city was forged on unity. However when taking Ekko's statement "You claim we are one city, but anytime it rains were the one's who get wet" this unity was a lie.

The first season ends on the note of Jinx cutting ties with Vi. So to claim the theme was always unity feels disingenuous to me.

Does coming together to face an outside threat constitute "forgetting" about the conflict? I would say not. It is a way of temporarily eliding the conflict, but the conflict never went away. It was a significant moment when a few people from the undercity came to join the enforcers; it was significant because bad blood still existed between them. More importantly, the majority of Zaunites did not join up with the enforcers, but instead fought through their own organization and with their own means - they did not trust Piltover to lead them in battle and fought for themselves. Then after the battle, tensions continue, as demonstrated by the shot of Sevika at the council. The conflict between Zaun and Piltover is not forgotten - it's just not resolved.

Here's the issue with this sentiment the whole issue with uniting against a common foe isn't the problem that it "Solved the issues between the cities" rather because it strips all nuance away and ends everything on the note of a generic marvel movie. And this is something that both Christian Linke and Amanda Overton talk about in a reddit AMA.

Both of them go on how a narrative that involves outside forces attacking the characters don't really say anything interesting about the characters in the end of the day. Viktor's "Glorious evolution" was an empty idea because it relies on end of the world stakes and supernatural forces driving his character instead of it being a more grounded one.

To address the more thematic point (which i do in the original post after the part that you quote): Arcane isn't really about unity or division per se, it's about duality, which encompasses both of those things. Duality is the interaction between unity and division.

With the character pairs, they're all in a cycle of falling apart and coming back together. This happens with Vi and Jinx, Vi and Caitlyn, Jayce and Viktor. Silco and Vander are together in the AU.

Regarding the cities, the Art and Making of book says: "... Here are two cities intertwined in a double helix of creation and annihilation, inextricably at odds but also interdependent and not all that different from each other. ..."

Yeah, the relationship between the two cities is unequal, it's not mutually beneficial as the origin story we're given might imply, that's the whole problem, that's the whole tension that needs to be overcome. I would also point to the very first scene of the show as an example of this, as I do in the original post. Vi and Powder experiencing the worst conflict ever between the two cities, while Powder is singing about a "friend across the river". That tension is precisely the point. And dealing with that entails a constant process of moving apart and coming together again.

Regarding the final battle being "generic marvel movie", I made a post about that critique a while ago.

I don't think the AMA answer proves your point, actually. They say an alien invasion isn't relatable, and then draw a comparison with Silco wanting to win a civil war and say that that's also unrelatable, but there's a personal aspect to it that IS relatable to audiences.

The battle at the end of Arcane isn't a random alien army. It's Mel's mother. It's the woman that Caitlyn has been working with for however long. It's personal for them. It's Viktor and Jayce. There's personal relationships and stakes there. It's Mel standing up for her principles. It's Caitlyn taking responsibility. It's Viktor and Jayce reconciling after taking divergent paths. It's Jinx finding the will to fight, using her destructiveness to save people, and saving Vi's life. Rather than stripping away nuance, the battle is a backdrop for all of these personal stories coming together.

It's not end-of-the-world stakes that make a final battle bad, it's the absence of personal stakes. And the final battle in Arcane is rich with personal stakes. We're not meant to wonder whether or not these characters will decided to save the world, we're meant to wonder whether Mel can successfully stand up for herself against her mother, whether Jayce and Viktor can ever see eye-to-eye again, etc.

Regarding Viktor specifically, I don't think we were shown that he was merely being driven by supernatural forces. When we see him in the hexspace he's very much with it, he has agency. In the recent AMA one of the writers said that the situation was that Viktor couldn't tell where he ended and where the Hexcore began. It was an extension of his previous story, losing himself in this technology, feeling the weight of these massive problems and this urgency to solve them, but this time having the power to follow through.

I think not liking that the show moved toward larger-than-life problems is a legitimate reason to not personally, subjectively enjoy the direction the show went in, but can't agree that on its own that's a legitimate objective criticism of the show. I'd say the direction it went in is characteristic of the genre, and if you don't like it, fair enough, but it's still a valid choice for the story.

My quoting of Ekko is meant to reflect why this case of "The Two cities uniting" isn't the case, because the statement of about "Being one city" was never the case. Arcane has constantly shown unity "Failing". Vander and Silco bond "falls a part due to Silco's recklessness and Vander violent actions ", Vander and Grayson alliance"fails due to Vander failing to keep the peace and Grayson's high demand", Vi and powders bond "falls a part due to Powder's recklessness and Vi's unchecked anger", Vi and Caitlyn team-up "falls a part due to Vi not wanting Caitlyn to get hurt", Jayce and Vi team up "Falls a part due to Jayce turning back on his deal", Jayce and Silco's deal "Falls a part due to Silco not wanting to turn in Jinx". And finally Vi and Jinx the two try to reconcile things but failing. So to claim Silco's statement about "One city" to be foreshadowing doesn't align with what the rest of the show is about.

Because what they present is a story of division in where two people's relationship falls a part. And so to claim the show would end on this note feels disingenuous

Because when looking at things on a Macro-level Piltover is stated to be the city of progress that stood hand and hand against "The rouge mages" is narrow mined when looking into the larger world of Runeterra. The building of walls in Piltover isn't some means of standing against the world, its blocking the city from interacting with the rest of the world.

Because Magic in League of Legends isn't some corruptive force that messes with people's minds or create weird blotchy things as with Viktor's Hex-core or The Anomaly in the Hex-gates chamber. Its a natural part of the world that anyone can tap into. There are so many cultures on Runeterra that have their own views towards Magic and how its should be used.

To address the more thematic point (which i do in the original post after the part that you quote): Arcane isn't really about unity or division per se, it's about duality, which encompasses both of those things. Duality is the interaction between unity and division. With the character pairs, they're all in a cycle of falling apart and coming back together. This happens with Vi and Jinx, Vi and Caitlyn, Jayce and Viktor. Silco and Vander are together in the AU.

I agree Arcane is about duality and how this theme of love bringing people together and pushing them a part. However the reason why this works in the first season is because there is consistent narrative in where alliance fails and there is no going back to what they once had. That is the tragedy of S1's finale Jinx recognize Vi will never love her for who she is and so cut's ties.

And so for S2 to just be a duel mirror of S1 and try to have certain story elements follow beat for beat of dualism. It takes away a lot of agency from the characters and in turn makes the fluctuation between the characters roles feel forced and often lack luster. Caitlyn go's for being driven by vengeance towards Jinx at all cost, to being manipulated by Ambessa and recognizing the tole of Ambessa's actions, to giving up the fight for Jinx all within the span of 6-7 episodes. And so this fluctuation doesn't feel meaningful compared to the more structured way S1 did it.

The battle at the end of Arcane isn't a random alien army. It's Mel's mother. It's the woman that Caitlyn has been working with for however long. It's personal for them. It's Viktor and Jayce. There's personal relationships and stakes there. It's Mel standing up for her principles. It's Caitlyn taking responsibility. It's Viktor and Jayce reconciling after taking divergent paths. It's Jinx finding the will to fight, using her destructiveness to save people, and saving Vi's life. Rather than stripping away nuance, the battle is a backdrop for all of these personal stories coming together

Here's the issue with this Ambessa joining Viktor's plan is kind of dumb, Viktor states that he wants to assimilate the entire world into a singular hive mind (Which includes her). And so her going along with Viktor's plan just feels dumb. Especially when her desire of fighting "The Black Rose" feels empty due to the group not having any greater significance to the story of Arcane and just seem more like a set up for the spin-off show. As for Caitlyn's fighting her as a means of going against the woman who manipulator her, that feels some-what cheap because she did some questionable things without Ambessa's influence during the start of the season. (And this manipulation on Ambessa's part was just very brief). And so her fighting Ambessa out of personal beef is kind of a weak motivation in this season.

As for Jayce and Viktor's conflict. A lot of their conflict is nebulous due to there being no relatable ground behind it. Viktor's go's from guru healer to FF villain to being redeemed in the span of three episodes. And on top of that his desire to rid of the world of Free-will come free-will doesn't come from any meaningful place. Viktor was a healer who only healed people who wanted to be healed and there wasn't anything wrong with his Commune. All Jayce had to do was tell Viktor that he met his future self and warn about these future events, let him read his mind and that's it problem solved, however the plot needed him to be dumb for this in order to move the story into this direction.

Jinx has absolutely no personal motivations in this fight. While sure you can make the claim about Jinx using her destructive tendencies to save people instead of just destroy. However she just wrangled into this fight without any deeper interpersonal drive (Caitlyn had Ambessa, Jayce had Viktor, and all she got was lobotomized Vander). So while you can make the argument about a more thematic moment for Jinx going in this fight. Narratively speaking she really doesn't have any greater connection to what is going on here.

Regarding Viktor specifically, I don't think we were shown that he was merely being driven by supernatural forces. When we see him in the hexspace he's very much with it, he has agency. In the recent AMA one of the writers said that the situation was that Viktor couldn't tell where he ended and where the Hexcore began. It was an extension of his previous story, losing himself in this technology, feeling the weight of these massive problems and this urgency to solve them, but this time having the power to follow through.

Back to what I've said about Viktor's story being crammed into 3 episodes. A lot of what happened to him doesn't feel like an interesting exploration of his losing himself to technology. And while I can believe this was all set up from the start I feel like it was no longer the natural direction of his character. Viktor made begrudgingly made peace with his death and had no longer wanted to pursue the greatest he wished. "In our pursuit for greatness we failed to do good" (Summarized this season here). On top of that I find the whole basis of The Hex-tech being this narrative of the dangers of Hex-tech to be somewhat misguided

as this person perfectly explained.

I think not liking that the show moved toward larger-than-life problems is a legitimate reason to not personally, subjectively enjoy the direction the show went in, but can't agree that on its own that's a legitimate objective criticism of the show. I'd say the direction it went in is characteristic of the genre, and if you don't like it, fair enough, but it's still a valid choice for the story.

To me all art is subjective. However judging the show for what it was trying to be and now what I wished it was. I can generally say on an artistic stand-point I can appreciate the show wanting to explore dualism by having season 2 be an inversion of Season 1 that ultimately begins the same way it ends. And not just simply have the characters just simply end up like how they did in their original LoL lore (Which on a personal note I think is more compelling, but am fine ithat they didn't do it)

However this pursuit of having everything mirror each other has led to so much of the story feeling forced. In where every thing has to follow a certain beat for beat moment. In where contrivance are created to get to these points. And ultimately it all feels so nebulous in the end. And in turn I think the need to have everything mirror each other is unecessary.

I don't need a storyline in where in Jinx and Caitlyn's arcs are reversed to reflect each other. S1 did it just fine by reflecting how they both interact with Vi

I don't need "Pretend it's the first time" to have Ekko see another side to Jinx. Ep.7 of S1 "The Boy savior" already highlighted this dualism perfectly in their fight.

I don't need a Act 1 of S2 to mirror the fight between Vander and Silco with Vi and Jinx in order to reflect each other. The entirety of S1 had already reflected their entire relationship.

Another thing I want to take into account is the fact that "This isn't the ending most of the characters and that there is more going to happen with Vi,Caitlyn,Jinx,Ekko and Mel. So to end the show with something that begins the same way it ends feels underwhelming.

Not sure what you want to do but you want to help? ACLU has actions you can take broken down into time intensity:

Got 15 minutes to call your representative, senators and governor? 5Calls has hundreds of scripts you can read off and will auto connect you! (It genuinely takes less than 15 mins for all of them and frequently you get a voicemail so you don’t even have to talk to them!)

Wanna get out and protest? Mobilize has thousands of events across the country listed at all times!

The day is won through thousands of individual acts of resistance hitting them on all sides! These resources are just a drop in the bucket, I guarantee there is something you can do to help!

Collective action is endangering their personal comfort and well-being and the things some of them have been working for for decades. They're puffing up REAL BIG. It's fluff. They're lashing out HURTING AND KILLING people. That's real. That's also what they were going to do anyway, eventually, even if they weren't desperate. It is real harm--AND it is showing real weakness, on their part.

Don't fall for the illusion. This is the time to act, to push, to stand together. If you don't know how, check those links.

The United States actually had open borders until 1924. There was no cap on immigration, and people were only denied access based on race and disability. (x)

The Immigration Act of 1924 had an overall negative impact on the economy (x) (x) and foreign relations with Asia, but Hitler praised it (x), because it was just blatant eugenics (x).

ICE didn't exist until 2003 (x)

Being undocumented is not actually classified as a crime (x). If it was, cases would be handled by the judicial branch, and defendants would receive the benefits of due process. But because it isn't, it is handled by the executive branch, and defendants do not get due process, in clear violation of their rights. That means no lawyers, no jury, and no real judge.

Immigration "judges," who are not required to have nearly as much experience or education in law as real judges (x), face no consequences for wrongful deportation, they are only really evaluated based on how many people they process.

While it's difficult to pin down an exact number, there have been an estimated 4,000 wrongful detention/deportations by 2010 alone (x - this one suggests a possible 20,000) (x - this one confirms over a thousand), with several reported on in mainstream media (Mark Lyttle, Pedro Guzman, Roberto Dominquez, Andres Gonzalez, Esteban Tiznado-Reyna).

In April 2025, there were several more confirmed wrongful deportations, including a 2-year-old citizen deported to Honduras (x) (x), a 10-year-old with brain cancer on her way to a medical appointment (x), and a 7-year-old and her 4-year-old brother with stage 4 cancer (x).

No, no, and NO.

AO3 does not live in “the cloud” because that is other people’s computers, and other people’s computers are vulnerable to censorship.

AO3 is on its own computers. It does still have to be housed somewhere, and I suppose a determined enough hater could try to find that place and go after it, but it’s a lot harder than sending spurious complaints to Amazon or whomever going “BadWrong things are hosted on your cloud service!”

AO3 is not “in the cloud.” AO3 is stored on physical machines that the OTW owns.

Because AI.

To paraphrase a comment on a Gamers Nexus video, the reason computer parts are getting so expensive is that a huge amount of RAM and storage that have not been produced yet were purchased with non-existent money to put in gpus and computers that have also not yet been produced to put in data centers that have not yet been built, to be powered by infrastructure that may never appear, to satisfy demand that does not actually exist, to obtain profit that is mathematically impossible.

So that’s fun. But it means that already owning computers that actually do the thing is SO MUCH BETTER than hiring other people to build more capacity to buy more computers to do the thing.

How bad is the RAM crisis? The price of ddr3, which is like 10-15yo tech, is going up. The price of DDR5 is now stupid expensive, 4+ times as expensive as it was a few months ago.

Mostly because there’s only one company in the world that is capable of generating the kind of chips needed and everyone uses that company because the modern world is a very precarious house of cards held together by tissue and string and we have a 50 foot toddler playing Godzilla with international trade.

Major pro Palestine organization in New Zealand finally speaks out about the protests in Iran... on the side of the Iranian regime.

Who would've guessed after the human rights commissioner and race relations commissioner have both previously called John Minto out for taking action which puts the jewish diaspora in NZ at risk.

A religious people with sacred sites? Ban them forever from visiting them! Instead, make them live on land stolen from an entirely different ethnic group!

By the same logic we should have all the non-indigenous people to leave America and give back the land to the native American's. That is more of a ridiculous ask. The ancient of Israel was destroyed for a thousands of years and at that time new people came to take their place. So this is their land now.

A religious people with sacred sites? Ban them forever from visiting them! Instead, make them live on land stolen from an entirely different ethnic group!

I mean your acting like this place didn't hold sacred rights to other people as well. And its not "making" them come over, its allowing for them to come over, because a vast reason why many Jews couldn't escape the holocaust was because America denied them from coming over. (Its much easier to be accepting of Jews then it is taking a piece of land someone else was already living on)

And also many Jews believe Zionism is antithetical to their beliefs.

And that's before we get back to details like 'While the Diaspora started with the conquest of Rome, there have been Jewish people living in those lands for centuries.' No, it's a very simple 'how dare you! We conquered it, you can't come and conquer it back!'