#s.e.a..

Like the flicker of sadness, guilt and hesitation seen in Olruggio's expression when Coco expressed her love and passion for magic and his inventions ( she's already growing on him ). He felt guilty and sad when he thought about all that passion being erased by the Knights Moralis. He was already subconsciously protective of Coco.

As for Agott ( as I've elaborated in my other analysis ), we see her guilt in her body languages in Ep 5 ( hunched shoulders, unsure posture, flickering eyes, and not talking much to Coco after she contributed so much and helped them come up with the idea of defeating the dragon because Agott felt guilty and didn't know what to do with that guilt after all ).

Also in Vol. 2 we have this conversation between Agott and Olruggio -

(Witch Hat Atelier, Vol.2, Kamone Shirahama)

On the surface this feels like a normal conversation between a master and a student. However I choose to view this a bit differently. Olruggio doesn't disapprove of Agott's enthusiasm to get better. It's realistic and practical in his perspective to want to do so, but here we see the clash of their purposes -

For Olruggio, his purpose lies in helping people and improving his magic ( for personal satisfaction and contribute better to again, - helping people ). For Olruggio the need to get better is directly proportional to his need to contribute better in the society.

For Agott, her purpose lies first and foremost, in proving her worth - that she is better, that she isn't a failure or a mediocre witch - this is her objective, and while she does care for people and even love them, this is something that is fueling her primarily. She wants from people and acknowledgement of her ( the subject ) capability and self worth, while Olruggio wants an acknowledgement that his inventions ( objects ) are useful, that he is useful thus. Both don't know what to do with themselves and feel uncomfortable when this purpose is removed.

So in the end, both put their worth on the external environment and people as I stated earlier. Both are tremendously loyal. Both are selective of their inner circles. Both demonstrate love primarily through actions and advice on improvement, because words feel uncomfortable and vulnerable for both.

Olruggio knows that lure of driving themselves to be there, to excel for perfection ( his inventions ), the need to feel useful and worthy of the care you receive from others, and the need to give back and back, but not feeling that ease when receiving things in general.

Both are uncomfortable by the ideas of unpaid debts after all ( even in interpersonal relationships ).

Firstly, the art style is so intricately drawn. The attention to detail on that petrification spell especially, was insane. I think the magic system, from what I've watched, is so detailed. There's no handwaving of mechanics so far. They are beautifully explained and at the same time so simple to understand.

From what I saw, one of the main themes, according to me is how knowledge is handled ( magic as a metaphor for knowledge and technology in the real world. ) Magic as a system is so simple, yet that simplicity and the way it was common and easy to master among everyone was what made humanity such brutes - unrestricted creativity ran wild, and served self interests. Yet when magic was restricted and hidden from the society as a whole, the system become stagnant ( capable humans with real potential are denied access to knowledge which could make them great. Many perspectives are lost. Yet the witches see the bloodshed of the past and are afraid ( understandable position, though that fear becomes a handicap to innovation).

Another interesting philosophical theme I see is the clash of ideas of determinism and possibilism. There's a structural similarity, in possibilism seeing technology as a tool to enhance human development and human choices, not paying much heed to the constraints of nature ( as Qifrey said body modification was a forbidden magic since it twisted someone's nature ) and determinism in the attitude of the witches who often state that body modification goes against the laws of nature, and thus healing through magic too, falls within nature's constraints, thus showing strict adherence to the boundaries of nature and staying within them ).

Coco learning magic in the beginning through her passion for magic and observation of Qifrey likely tells me that the show's main path would be towards neo determinism, which takes the middle path between possibilism and determinism, stating that innovation can follow within nature's limits.

"We journeyed to all those different places. Everything seemed so brilliant and new. And you were always there in those beautiful memories."- Himmel the Hero

When I finished watching Frieren S1, I had this feeling of warmth and sadness, as if I was bidding goodbye to old friends that I had gone on a journey with, when I began watching.

The most jarring thing to me was the conversation between Wirbel and Frieren at the end :

"Death isn't the only goodbye in this life. But I guess you already know that." - Wirbel

This line especially struck me in the heart. Because the arc had finally come to a full circle. We started S1 by Himmel's death and his final goodbye to Frieren but we all know that Himmel's death wasn't the only goodbye at first. It was Frieren who first waved her friends goodbye to travel and wander for eighty years. So to Frieren, this sentence essentially implies that she should cherish the memories of the present and be more careful with her relationships moving on - because death isn't the only thing that ends relationships - miscommunication, drifting away, or finding better people can end relationships just as fast. So this sentence implies that every relationship is sustained in small actions and how they compound to define bigger actions later on.

For example - We can see when during the dusl between Frieren, Fern and Frieren's replica, when Fern's staff broke, Fern was devastated, but Frieren wasn't, because things to her were always transient at this point, and memories were the one she would always take with her. She thought the memory of the staff would be enough for Fern. Except it wasn't and we saw how Frieren took actions to remedy Fern's staff and considering her perspective and sentiments too, showing how relationships are maintained by small acts of care and how relationships change you in small ways. Frieren is attempting understand.

Wirbel also references this principle of small changing the large, when he says that despite Himmel having done many glorious heroic things, if he hadn't saved their village, they wouldn't be alive to read the tales. And also when he acknowledged that he once thought that the local gossip of bravery and small Good deeds bored him until he realised how people have everyday lives and how small inspires and shapes the large. Thus it was the small deeds and Himmel's lesser known tales of glory that shaped Wirbel's future path.

This statement of Wirbel's at the end is a callback to how things have come full circle and how Frieren is learning and growing, by going beyond her comfort zones, trying to understand human beings, even when she's an elf and even when they'd all die at the end, which is incredibly brave of her.

Speaking of - Wirbel - I wasn't expecting to have him impact me this way, because he's an incredibly powerful and ruthless mage, who acknowledges his weaknesses and moves despite them - he doesn't leave his teammates during the second task - which shows a deep loyalty ( but he wouldn't let it hinder him if the events went south ). We can see him taking a pause before attempting to kill Übel, which is such a realistic portrayal ( sure he has to kill, but he doesn't have to like it - this shows us the humanity in his brutality - as Übel correctly diagnosed in him). He is incredibly fleshed out as a character. He is also very realistic about his odds , almost giving up when he heard Ehre was dead ( until he found out she wasn't - and despite there being not much time left, still moved to catch the Stille. ) He admits his struggles, is the thing. He is not that ashamed of his weaknesses ( often admitting them truthfully like he did with Übel - he works around them or with them - this could be a sophisticated deflection mechanism too - where one premptively acknowledges criticism before the other person can point it out, to retain the feeling of control. )

I think he parallels a young Denken in the way both are incredible tactical fighters, loyal underneath, except Wirbel is a bit less flexible than Denken and more impulsive than him.

Anyways, returning from that tangent, watching that conversation between Frieren and Wirbel made me sad in a way, because they'll all split up and go their separate ways, to their separate journeys, and perhaps, as Himmel liked to think, meet again.

I had grown so attached to these characters during the First And Second Stage of Mage exams and was sad to see them go their separate ways.

Heiter manipulated Frieren at the beginning and handed Fern to her and shows how good intentioned actions can also be highly manipulative.

It was a ruthless decision since Heiter cared for Fern and knew his own time was short, and he wanted the best possible guardian for her. Frieren was one, and Heiter manipulated her into doing it, since Frieren was extremely skilled at magic ( 1000 year old elf ), but also gave Frieren something to look after, so she wouldn't be alone or be drifting again after his death ( Heiter was highly perceptive for someone who hid it behind jokes. )

Now here's the thing, Heiter knew the impact of Himmel's death on Frieren which was one of the few things that actually shattered a sort of glass wall she'd built around herself, always wandering. Time passes differently for elves so Frieren spends a longer time mourning someone, or avoiding the grief by burying herself in little tasks, like tracking down Flamme's grimoires and going from village to village, helping people.

Frieren is not apathetic. She processes slowly because again immortality means plenty of time, which leads to more hesitance to go out of a comfort zone and confront the grief and actually move on, that can be seen as apathy to beings with shorter lives. Let's remember that Frieren also delayed fighting the Demon King until Himmel's Party found her ( and various other reasons ). So my point is, deep in his core, he didn't want Frieren to be hit by his death, and wanted her to remember him as the person she made good memories with, rather than a person she'd lost. Again, Frieren felt guilty for not visiting Himmel soon enough, and being oblivious to his affections until he died. So she visited Heiter, time to time. Heiter leveraged this exact guilt and guilt tripped her into staying.

I'm saying that Frieren had some idea that the immortality spell wasn't going to be possible in a short period of time, but she was going to try for him even if it would be futile, because of this exact guilt. So perhaps she thought, even if it wasn't going to be possible, atleast she should stay with Heiter, and give him and Fern company over his last years in a way she didn't do with Himmel.

So I guess both had their reasons and that's why it makes this type of manipulation interesting. Frieren stayed for those years out of her own free will. And Heiter technically did tell her that he would like her to take care of Fern as a favour to which Frieren denied because she wanted to avoid, even subconsciously, attachments ( see my points about elves and their comfort zones.)

Heiter then created a scenario ( immortality ) that compelled Frieren to stay due to her internal reasons of guilt which Heiter knew, which again would lead to formation of attachments towards Fern ( because Frieren is famously oblivious until suddenly, she's attached ).

Even if that didn't work, Fern would have learnt enough magic to survive on her own from Frieren in that interval. And another thing, being around Heiter again, would remind her of the Heroes Party's days together strengthening her attachments to both Heiter and Eisen.

Or even if Frieren didn't get attached, on his Death Bed Heiter could have again made the same request he made when Frieren first visited, and whether it would have worked or not, the probability of it working in Heiter's favour is very high, since death gives the request more finality.

Now again, I want to come to Fern, to whom Heiter was very attached too ( could be also read as more attached to than Frieren, since father - daughter bonds can be strong), he also didn't want her to be alone because he's seen what losing her actual parents had done to Fern ( that scenario would be painful), and I think it was this scenario that prompted the way Heiter acted the way he did, inducing his manipulations ( whether they can be called direct manipulation or not is again questionable to me. )I think it was more like, Heiter closed all paths Frieren had or made those other paths look unviable, and nudged her towards the path that would lead her to taking care of Fern by her own choice ( or was it her own choice? ).

But he did it in a way that benefitted both Fern and Frieren simultaneously and the way it is framed makes it feel almost right ?

Symbiotic manipulation ( the audience can see that it clearly benefitted all the parties in a way so that the manipulation aspect of the thing doesn't get talked about enough).

And now I would like to add another interesting example I take from a different fandom -In Harry Potter, People often call Dumbledore evil for doing what he did, ( engineering situations that made Harry's fight with Voldemort inevitable ). His logic was for the greater good of the system ( Wizarding World as a whole ).

Now I'm not defending those choices, Dumbledore could have gone other ways but again interesting parallel between Dumbledore and Heiter there, they both acted believing they were right ( the scales differed ), and for the good of people. Dumbledore was thinking more towards systems while Heiter was thinking towards people and on a smaller scale .

So why are people not offended ( even on a smaller scale ) by Heiter ? ( Is he more relatable to people, and that judging him would require judging and questioning ourselves and that's uncomfortable ?)

Also note : I'm not saying their manipulation styles are similar. Dumbledore manipulated children and took a more active role than Heiter in nudging people. But he did do it for the greater good and to, prevent a worse future.

They can be called structurally similar as in they both, use the environment and close people's paths until only a few remain and people choose among those few paths, for themselves.

So again, was Heiter justified in doing what he did ? Maybe. So can Heiter be called morally ambigous? Is my question. Or is he simply a very complex human making complicated choices like all of us do ( neither good or evil, just complicated?)