Do I do what I want to do? Or do I do what I should do? (original) (raw)

Ok, so I'm still processing the finale, and I have thoughts. Actually, I have too many thoughts, so I decided to break them into three separate posts. This is the first one, the other two (maybe I'll be able to combine them in one?) will appear some time this week.

Warnings: I overanalyse teen vampire shows. In order to make it more bearable, I decided to make this post short, and also to appease you with a pensive otter:

Do I do what I want to do? Or do I do what I should do?

TVD is forever morally questionable, and I often see people judge the characters for being so selfish. They only care about their own. They don't give a shit about common good. They have a chance to destroy all vampires, and they refuse without even thinking. The worst heroes ever, and the most incompetent villains. The thing is... this is THE POINT of this show, and the sole purpose of the finale is to make that point.

The three protagonists meet at the beginning of season 1 because two choices was made: in 2009, Elena Gilbert acted on want, went for a party, and got her parents killed; in 1864, Giuseppe Salvatore acted on principle and shot his sons for treason. That's how a theme was established. The “good brother” shapes himself into who he thinks he should be. The bad brother does whatever the hell he wants. Bonnie doesn't disable the Gilbert device, because it would be wrong. Matt helps Vicky cross over from the other side, because he misses her so much. Bill Forbes doesn't complete his transition, because it's not natural for a person to live forever. Elena violates Jeremy's mind, because she wants to give him a normal life.

The show doesn't frame those choices as a juxtaposition between Good and Evil. This isn't a cautionary tale, Be good, or else... This is, in fact, much more interesting. TVD asks a fundamental, real question: when you have a dilemma, and you don't know what to do, do you trust your principles, or do you trust your instinct?

And this is what the finale was about. It's not an accident that in the beginning we have Bonnie and Damon sharing one scene, and Stefan and Elena sharing another. Damon is this show's damned poster boy for acting on want (which doesn't mean that he's irrational – but Damon judges every single situation individually, and, when in doubt, he's much more likely to follow his gut feeling than an abstract rule), and in this episode Bonnie makes a decision that's gamechanging for her: she's done with forces of nature telling her what she should do, and she saves Klaus because he WANTS to. In the same episode, Elena faces a (heavy-handed :( ) dilemma between “should” and “want”, and she chooses the Salvatore she thinks is more appropriate (You should love the person that makes you glad that you're alive.). The episode ends with Stefan doing the right thing – respecting Elena's decision, because this is what you should do when you love someone.

And you know what? It gets Elena killed.

This isn't how it should be. Doing the right thing should be rewarded, and yet it isn't. The show consequently demonizes following the rules blindly, and it does it in a pretty crafty, subtle way. First they hit hard: Giuseppe, Esther and Alaric are monstrous in their drive to follow the principles, to Do What Buffy Would Do (= everything to wipe vampires off the face of Earth). But okay, those are villains, they do villainy things. What happens in the finale is not so easy to wave off – the protagonists (Elena, Stefan) do the exact same thing, only in a smaller scale. And Stefan's choice gets Elena dead. Following the rules is monstrous? Might be. But then, Elena wouldn't even be on that bridge if Jeremy and Matt hadn't put her in that car – and they did it out of “want”, they broke the rules because they couldn't bear the thought of losing Elena. Add vampire blood – the blood that Meredith gave Elena in good will, breaking the rules to save a life. Elena becomes a vampire because four people made their decisions: Jeremy, Matt and Meredith broke the rules, Stefan followed the rules.

The show poses a problem without solving it. Damon would've saved Elena without blinking, he would've left Matt to die, but can we say that it would be a BETTER option? With Matt dead, and Elena crazy with guilt, and vamp!Alaric still trying to kill them all? So maybe what Stefan did was better? But it can't be, because how can you just let someone you love die such a terrible death? See? No answer. The narrative won't help you see the difference between right and wrong. Not only the characters won't always do the right thing, but also you won't be able to decide what was the right thing to do. Karma won't give you a cookie for being such a good boy. You act on “should” or you act on “want”, and people still die because of your choices. Selflessness is not an answer. Principles are not an answer. Compassion is not an answer. Rules make you a monster. Instinct makes you a monster. Was Elena right to choose Stefan out of “should” instead of Damon out of “want”? How the hell am I supposed to know?

In conclusion: life sucks either way. Let's go eat a migrant village.