Hey. I just saw someone use that instance in the comics in which Zukor grabs Katara and hurts her and refuses to let go as a proof that it's a toxic relationship. What are your thoughts on that?
Show of hands who remembershow Zuko got his scar?
That’s right: he was burnedby his father at the age of 13 because he stuck up for a group of soldiers who weregoing to be used as cannon fodder.
Fast forward four years, andKatara and Aang are crossing a boundary into a Fire Nation colony in the EarthKingdom illegally, without any prior notification. They are warned to leave,which they ignore. The soldiers then attack, which they have every right to do,as the Fire Nation has not surrendered control of the colonies.
Katara then tries to, at best injure, and at worst kill, aFire Nation soldier with an icicle. So why does Zuko restrain her?:
Zuko: [HoldingKatara, and stopping the icicles.] Katara! Stop!Katara: Let go, Zuko! You’re hurting me! Don’t make me hurt you back!Zuko: I’m hurting you?! Whatare you doing to my soldiers?! My people?!Aang: [The Fire Nation guard flees behind him.]Let go of her, Zuko! She said you’re hurting her!Zuko: First, she has to agree to stop attacking my people!
What are you doing tomy soldiers? My people?
First, she has to agree to stop attacking my people!
Anyone who thinks Zuko’srelationship with Katara is a factor in this scene doesn’t understandwho Zuko is as a person. His focus isn’t on Katara at all—it is on a threat tohis people, the same people he wears ascar on his face for, and for the exact same reason. If Aang had beenhurling that icicle—you bet Zuko would have tried to restrain him. If Sokka hadbeen hurling his boomerang—Zuko would have grabbed his wrists too, no question. To think that Zuko would exhibit this “toxic” behavior toward Katara alone and that he would have gamely let anyone else hurl deadly objects at one of his troops is absurd. These fans are desperate to personalize an encounter that would have been exactlythe same no matter who was attackingZuko’s soldiers.
But that leads us to an interesting point—namely, that “The Promise” has Aang and Zuko take far more severe actions against each other thanZuko and Katara do. Yet no one ever says that Aang trying to kill Zuko is proofthat they shouldn’t rebuild the world together. No one ever says that Zuko putting ahit out on Aang in Season Three means their friendship must be toxic. No oneever believes that Zuko and Aang are bad for each other based on actions thatare taken in war.
Yet Kαtααng fans repeatedly use things like the “pirates”scene where Zuko kidnaps Katara (he kidnapped Aang, too, in Season 1, let’s notforget), or the scenes where Zuko and Katara go toe-to-toe in battle, asrepresentative of how their (romantic) relationship would be. Why is that?
Equating fighting on oppositesides of a battle to toxicity and abuse in a romantic relationship is not onlydisingenuous, but wrong. It is a disservice to actual abusevictims and disparaging to actual soldiers. If you can understand that the sameairbender who slammed Zuko into the ceiling during the pilot tried to make friendswith him once Zuko had rescued him, or that the same person who threatened tofeed Sokka to a sea monster ended up falling in love with him once they wereallies, you should have no problem understanding why Zuko’s actions towardKatara in this scene have no bearing on their peacetime relationship, ofwhatever nature that may be.
