Philotic Web

I apologise for the strange question in the poll I tried to make earlier, which made no sense because of its awkward phrasing. So: Is Achilles truly an evil, mad psychopath, or are his strange personality quirks the product of his youth. Is he justified?

Things to remember: Achilles is (pardon me, WAS) also trying to achieve world peace, and was often compared to Peter in his general disposition to others. I actually do not know if I should support Achilles or not. He is willing to get his hands dirty to get what he wants done, done. But he also kills his helpers (under the impression that, seeing him weak, they may, at some future time, pose a threat to him) This might be a product of his childhood in Rotterdam.

I think it was form his childhood. He was pretty bad, killing people who HELPED him, but I though he was funny sometimes...

So? What's your vote?

There is a description somewhere in a book that was in third person seeing through Achilles's eyes. It describes him thinking that whatever happens, the world will eventually bend to his will, etc. One would think that this kind of twisted thinking comes from spoiled children, and Achilles is definitely not spoiled. It is extreme egomania, one that cannot possibly form from a childhood in the slums. Plus, OSC uses that description on purpose to show that Achilles is twisted.

Even though Achilles SAYS he wants world peace, I think it's for his own purposes. He doesn't give a damn about world peace. No, he says he wants to create world peace because achieving it will get him into a position of power.

Good. But just to play Devil's Advocate here, how can you know that he doesn't want world peace? Maybe he just wants the world to make sense to him, and will do anything he can to make the world peaceful under his rule.

It is not world peace if it is under someone's rule.

(I don't know if this is a good reason but) Achilles doesn't want world peace because he would have all that he could ever want and he would not have to work for anything. He would get bored. He would do killin's.

It is not world peace if it is under someone's rule.

um... why not? as long as nobody is fighting....

In his mind, he seriously thought he was doing good. He thought his revenge was justified, and he wanted to benefit along with the whole world. Sound like anyone, Peter Wiggin? Achilles might have been a psycopath, but he believed in what he was doing. He just was doing the wrong thing, whereas Peter Wiggin was doing it right, more or less.

^ he was doing good for himself. What's good for him and what's good for the world are different things!

you cant call achilles 100% evil without second guessing peter wiggin and his motives. essentially, they wanted the same thing. one major difference i would state is that achilles worked by himself and was often a traitor to the people he had promised to help. peter, on the other hand, had an idea and a plan, but did not exacute it himself. the question is: was this smart or is he just a cocky scared little boy who wants to rule the world but not deal with any of the dirty work? the same way you must question achilles: was being a traitor his plan all along or did he just use it because it had worked the first time? after all, these government leaders in the countries who were ruled by achilles were not very smart. one should always know that if a person will stab someone in the back for you, they will also stab you in the back for someone else. so i believe that some of achilles actions were justified because the adults overruling the situations he was placed in were extremely stupid.

about Peter, see my reply in your thread, petra.

As to the rest, just because the adults were stupid doesn't mean he has to kill them. Peter managed without killing the preceeding Hegemon or their rulers. he did it the good way. If Peter had done the "dirty work" as you say, he would have lost any influence he had posessed previosly ad his dreams of world peace would have been lost.

looks like someone is super supportive of peter, crazy tom. i agree with you that achilles shouldnt have killed adults because they were stupid. but peter isnt the most peaceful person either when you take into consideration his many threats to kill ender. also i find it slightly hypocritical how bean and petra do a large amount of the work peter should be doing. dnt get me wrong, i think peter is a genius and hes a good guy but hes also a cocky and he thinks extremely highly of himself just like achilles.

Say that they're both crazy.

Okay then the difference between Peter and Achilles is that Peter's craziness is born from jealousy. He liked Ender when he was born, and he was jealous when he clearly favoured Val. As a result, he treats Ender harshly. But then his baby brother SAVES THE WORLD. Theresa says he is a proud person, so imagine the blow to his pride. Inevitably, Peter'd want to outdo Ender, by whatever means possible. He could be reckless and go about it the same way Achilles does, but he doesn't. It would make him a tyrant while his brother is a saviour.

If that makes him crazy, then so be it. People apparently do not care how crazy you are, as long as you do not create a ripple in the fragile fabric that is society.

And clearly Card intends for us to see that Achilles is just crazy. Intentional or not, it appears as though the plot (or subplot, whatever) has the idea of two crazy characters with the same goals, one is "good" and one is "evil". He makes it really clear that Peter is "good" while Achilles is "evil". I really don't think the question is who is more crazy anymore.

It's a mindLOL designed to be analyzed, questioned, talked about, etc. so I guess what he does is working. Bricks are being..., neh.

I think that he was a sick kids finding love. I mean look at Petra. She had to kiss him. She had to go to the extreme of kissing HIM. He knew wat she was doing. He wanted to get kissed. He wants love.

There is a description somewhere in a book that was in third person seeing through Achilles's eyes. It describes him thinking that whatever happens, the world will eventually bend to his will, etc. One would think that this kind of twisted thinking comes from spoiled children, and Achilles is definitely not spoiled. It is extreme egomania, one that cannot possibly form from a childhood in the slums. Plus, OSC uses that description on purpose to show that Achilles is twisted.

Even though Achilles SAYS he wants world peace, I think it's for his own purposes. He doesn't give a damn about world peace. No, he says he wants to create world peace because achieving it will get him into a position of power.

I would disagree that Achilles is not spoiled, he is spoiled with the power to manipulate others due to his intellect.

I know the poll is closed, but want to thrown in my own 2 Cents.

I feel that the first option is not a good choice. It is the cowardly cop out answer that people always use for others who have done terrible things. I think that that is the answer people give who are afraid to try and understand the person. In my mind this violates the key message of Ender's life of not judging people until you understand them.

I feel that the second choice isn't accurate. Bean's realization that Achilles needs to be killed in the beginning of Shadow clearly shows this.

I also don't think that the last action is acceptable. His implanting Bean and Petra's embroy's in other women, and trying take Bean with him to his death, not to mention his sadistic treatment of Petra in Hegemon, shows that he is cruel and sadistic.

I think the best option would be something along the lines of "An incomprehensible tragedy" We can't judge him because we can't understand him. And if you know someone who can, RUN!!!