This is somewhat of a continuation of the post I made recently: but I think Marco and Cassieās relationship dynamic is a very interesting one. They are on the surface of it the advocates of opposing ideologies, and the closest emotionally to Jake so that he is always feeling the contrasting pull of both. And by connection they are the resident āsmart onesā of the group, the ones that tend to notice things others donāt and make the most cogent intellectual arguments. Except that (in a running theme of the series of the contrast of how each character is viewed by others vs. reality, and how those roles they are stereotyped into in the pressure cooker of war affect them) only Marco is really acknowledged and named by the others as āthe smart oneā, as an appellation constantly referred to them when they are being introduced (Rachel is the brave one, Jake is the leader, Tobias is the one who is a hawk, etc.). Yes Cassie will sometimes get a shout out as being deep or emotionally understanding, but never āsmartā, even if she has about as many moments of finding the intelligent solution or realizing something as Marco does. And I think this speaks to how Cassieās ideas seem too out-of-left field, she thinks ādifferentlyā and is likely to be dogpiled by everyone as a result, while as noted in one of the books (canāt remember which) Marcoās complaining and cautiousness (and by extension his ruthlessness) says what everybody thinks but doesnāt want to say, just on a more intelligent and insightful level, itās the same āgenreā but with more insight. Even Cassie herself internalizes it, referring to Marco as the smartest one and herself as a dumb tree-hugger.
Interestingly, the only time I can think of she is referred to as āthe smartest oneā the way Marco often is by Marco himself in #45. In this book, Marco wants to rescue his mother but, from his position of logical ruthlessness, thinks it would only harm others for his own personal benefit. And then Cassie is the one who is able to come up with an objective reason why saving her would benefit them and their cause, and Marco responds by thinking that āI just wouldnāt again forget that, in some ways, Cassie is the bravest and smartest of my friendsā. He appreciates Cassie and her intelligence because when someone else, like Jake, tries to tell him do act with his heart, thereās not much of an argument to it and it is something he can easily debunk, itās all just foolish and not pragmatic. But Cassie is smart enough to actually make him believe, by his own logic, that he can dare to hope for himself.
Thereās also the dynamic between them of selfishness/personal gain vs. selflessness, where it quickly becomes unclear who is supposed to represent what. But just a recap if you havenāt read that: I talked in my earlier post about how Cassieās fundamental drive/motivation is that the animal world is cold, running on just survival, of oneself and those genetically close to oneself (as she realizes in #9 and has a bit of a breakdown about), and to prove there is something more and the world is not senseless, every sapient being has to use their ability to morally reason (as she articulates in Megamorphs #2) to do whatever an animalĀ wouldnāt. Marco starts out as the opposite, the one out of all the Animorphs who is most associated with personal āsurvive and protect oneās familyā goals. In the early books, he is the most concerned about the risk of death they run, for himself and how it would emotionally crush his father, and often points out that the people they are helping are not people he personally knows or is related to, so why should he risk his life for them? When he decides to fully commit himself to the war, itās not out of some far-reaching altruism but because he now knows his mother is a Controller and he might be able to rescue her. Contrasting Cassieās desire to transcend the reasoning of an animal, the ruthlessness that Marco desires is āanimal-codedā in #15, where he loves the shark morph for giving him the simple and ruthless animal instinct that allows him to escape his uncertainties and insecurities.Ā
But something strange happens along the way. Step by step, Marco transitions from using the sharkās logic, the animal ruthlessness, for its typical purpose of survival of oneās genes to expanding it to the whole planet, being willing to appropriate that animal instinct for the benefit of all of humanity even at the expense of his personal benefit (being willing to sacrifice his mother no matter how much it emotionally destroys him) ā appropriating the logic of selfishness for a selfless cause, and taking the same risks even though heās given up on saving what personally matters to him from it. And Cassieās fundamental driving principle of avoiding that self-serving logic also means avoiding the āanimalās actionā even when it would have a great utilitarian benefit, which gradually starts to look an awful lot like selfishness. In #19, Cassie is willing to risk her friendsā torture and death, and in the long run the enslavement of humanity, so she can convince Aftran that there is another way besides parasitism. This makes perfect sense with her convictions, as the animal logic would say the Yeerks are biologically forced to be humansā enemies, and humans for their own survival must see them as enemies to kill, but her beliefs means she must try to find a way that they can use their sapience to transcend that, otherwise what would be the point of living and winning in the first place? But itās still a different kind of selfishness; not a selfishness for oneās own preservation, but that of potentially causing much suffering of others so one can personally feel morally sound and avoid despair. And I just love that dynamic where it quickly becomes unclear within the character foil relationship who is supposed to be the selfish or personally driven one and who is supposed to be the selfless, caring for everyone person. Just a fascinating dynamic.
