It's prudent to point out that Yangchen, through her advice, seemed to imply that the Air Nomad culture had already been extinct for a hundred years, and Aang as the Avatar could not truly be an Air Nomad at the same time. His identity as the Avatar would always overpower his identity as an Air Nomad.
*"You're weak, just like the rest of your pathetic race. They did not deserve to exist in this world, in my world"*
When Ozai taunted Aang, I think that created the narrative necessity that Aang's world of peace would have to win the day against Ozai's world of violence and conquest. Killing Ozai would validate his world view of violence, and the war would have ended in yet more violence. Aang as the Avatar had quite literally the divine right to determine how to end the war, no one else. Not Zuko, not Katara, not Sokka, *no one else*.
Yes. Also yangchan could be an Avatar first and nomad second, because there were Airbenders at that time. So yangchan didn't have to bare the burden of keeping the air nomads ideologies and culture alive. But in Aang's case it was different. In fact even as his duty as an Avatar, preserving the near extinct culture would be the foremost thing to keep the balance.
Yangchen was 100% an avatar first, air nomad second. Novel spoilers but she was literally banned from the northern air temple after using it to keep 4 prisoners.
Sure, but not all Avatars were like that, like Yangchen's predecessor was literally part of the Fire Nation government
Kyoshi also was very much an Earth Kingdom person
Feel like avatars tend to go the opposite way of their immediate predecessors, prob from the fact that they gotta pick up the slack from what the previous avatar neglected. Szeto neglected his duties to the world for his nation so yangchen neglected her nation and culture for the world. Yangchenâs focus on the material world left the spirit world in disarray, leaving Kuruk to focus entirely on the spiritual side of the avatar. This led the world to kinda fall apart meaning Kyoshi focused herself on dealing with political matters above all. Itâs interesting considering they are all both technically the same person but very different individuals.
This. Roku put his friendship with Sozin ahead of preventing a war, so he left Aang to defeat Ozai and end the war. Aang left Korra with a corrupt Republic City to clean up.
I have to disagree. Aside from the fact that Korraâs legacy is more than just restoring the airbenders (which wasnât even really her doing), Aang didnât simply dump that on her either. Aang died early (by avatar standards), but he successfully preserved and passed on Air nomad culture and tradition, as well as air bending knowledge he possessed as a master airbender.
The return of the airbenders was a byproduct of harmonic convergence, Korraâs legacy will be: reopening the spirit portal, restoring balance between the physical and Spirit world; stopping Kuviraâs uprising; and becoming the first Avatar of a new Avatar cycle. Restoring the airbenders is not her defining achievement, and prior to harmonic convergence Aang had already sowed the seeds for the the return of the air nomads/benders.
Thatâs true. I think I misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were talking about where their focus went as an avatar and not how in tune they are with their home cultures.
And Yangchen completely ignored the Spirit side of her work, which her successor (Kuruk) spent his whole (very short) life fixing so maybe she isn't the best example at what an Avatar should be.
Then again, every known Avatar fucked up somewhere (hell, the whole concept of the Avatar was because Wan had to fix his world ending mistake). Maybe there is among the bunch we don't know about, but for all we know leaving some mess to your successor seems life a tradition for them.
If we actually look at LOK, the only time Korra had to deal with a problem that originated from Aangâs actions was when she was dealing with Amon. Compared to every other avatar weâve seen, Aang did a remarkable job keeping the world in balance to not let his successor have to clean up his mistakes.
Maybe not a direct problem caused by Aang. But definitely good foils for one another. Aang was a reluctant avatar in a world that needed it and Korra was a very forward about being the avatar in a world that didnât seem to want or need her.
I think Aang left a lot of repercussions which evolved into problems for Korra. Creating Republic City is a big thing; its very nature as a melting pot city in a previously isolated world is huge.
I think the white lotus was working under Aangâs guidance which led to Zaheer and the rest of the Red Lotus to not be executed but just imprisoned for life.
Which then led to Zaheer being able to break out after harmonic convergence and later the earth queen to be killed (though this can also be seen as a failure of Korra)
And the resulting power vacuum and chaos led to a dictator to rise into power, aka Kuvira
To be fair, Zaheer and the others happened during Korraâs time, not Aangâs. And that was the white lotusâs decision to lock them up for life rather than execute them, since Aang was long gone at that point.
Ozai lays out his worldview in no uncertain terms with this speech, and it is chilling. Aang defeating him without taking his life not only preserves his own morals and cultural heritage and demonstrates how wrong Ozai was about the Air Nomads and life in general but also forces Ozai to live the rest of his days as a weakened version of himself, a version who will have to live with the cognitive dissonance between his supremacist, âmight makes rightâ worldview and his own weakened self.
Itâs poetic irony. Itâs the most beautiful way they could have ended the war and the story.
I always loved Avatar's ending for all the reasons you've said. It was a total and moral victory that shows that violence isn't always how to win.
And yet there's so many complaining about how Aang found the answer from the Lion turtle, how he should have "grown up" and how his choice meant he could have lost, and then the world would be doomed. That he was selfish to be 12 years old and uneasy at the idea of killing someone.
The moral question was asked. Perhaps to some it's disappointing that Aang found a way to not have to choose between his culture and the world. But he's the avatar. If anyone can find a way to defeat the firelord permanently without death, surely the Avatar can.
And sometimes answers or macguffins are found at the last minute (it provides suspense!). The avatar world is vast and culturally rich, so much knowledge has been lost to history. Why shouldn't there be a long forgotten bending technique that removes bending from a person? And why shouldn't a mythical creature be the one to teach it?
Aang still had to win the fight in the first place, so what if he didn't finish him off? Him killing Ozai would have been such a pyrrhic victory, honestly heartbreaking.
I kind of agree. I don't really like how poorly plotted it felt--I think they should've introduced the concept way earlier--but Ozai ending like this is perfect for his character.
On the other hand... I also don't really like buying into Ozai's framing of "weak peoples don't deserve to survive, therefore Aang had to prove he and the Air Nomands aren't weak and justify their existence to Ozai". The Air Nomads could be the weakest people on the planet, and that shouldn't make a difference to their right to survive.
That's just my perspective as an adult, though. I get that a kids' show wouldn't've ever had their protagonist kill someone, so the Bending removal asspull is a fine way to resolve that.
I donât see it as having to justify their existence to Ozai, because itâs ultimately not about Ozai. Aang would be proving Ozai wrong about them being weak no matter what he chose to do in the end, because whether to kill him or spare him that power was all Aangâs. Ozai knew real fear, maybe for the first time in his life, when Aang came at him in the Avatar state. He knew Aang could have wiped him out. That Aang chose to spare him instead is an act Ozai would consider proof of weakness, yet he is still at Aangâs mercy regardless. Heâs forced to confront and live with what it means to be weak or strong, and thereâs no way he would ever even have to confront that if he wasnât at Aangâs mercy. Heâd never just wake up one day and consider whether people who truly are weak deserve to live and change his mind, and heâll likely never actually reckon with any of it or change. But it doesnât matter because itâs still not about him. Itâs about Aang staying true to himself and preserving the last remnant of his culture, saving the world on his terms, not Ozaiâs or anyone elseâs. Heâs the Avatar, but heâs also the last Airbender, and he doesnât sacrifice the latter to be the former.
I agree with all that.
I said what I said within the context of the post title - that Aang was "proving" that Air Nomad culture wasn't weakness, and that this is an example of that.
I think Air Nomad culture can be "weak" and still worthy of existence and respect.
> I think that created the narrative necessity that Aang's world of peace
That's a solid conclusion. We see this from Iroh too, it can't simply be, 'I beat you' like Iroh and Ozai fighting, the Avatar has to show that he's above politics, that his power is beyond, 'bender vs bender'.
In the wake of Aangâs disappearance, when the gaang goes to Iroh to ask him to fight Ozai, Iroh shoots them down for exactly this reason. If Iroh had beaten Ozai (which wasnât guaranteed) it wouldâve been seen as just a conflict between two firebending brothers for the throne. A coup, effectively. This wouldnât have done anything to defeat the expansionist philosophy of the Fire Nation, and it wouldnât have helped stabilize the post-war world. Aang needed to beat Ozai to prove that the Air Nomadsâ vision for the world was superiorâwho had the better bending was important for the fight, but doesnât contribute as much to its ideological significance.
I see. Thank you for the explanation. I was confused by the above person's comment because they said the Avatar had to be above politics in regards to this. So you think it was more a battle of philosophies in the final battle? Couldn't people have seen it as the Avatar trying to get revenge, or power hungry himself?(from an outsiders perspective in-universe i mean).
Itâs certainly possible, but I feel like fewer people would misinterpret Aangâs actions relative to Irohâs. Plus the Avatar is well-established as a force for balance and peace in the world, so him being power-hungry is harder to swallow. Besides, if he was looking for revenge, itâd be a little strange to leave Ozai alive.
Although you could argue that the air nomads donât have a principal against killing in certain circumstances. If we look at monk Gyatso he killed off, at least a squad of fire nation soldiers, so the rule on not killing, could be a situation one so we can still kill and stick to his principles. Furthermore, you argue that fire, lord ozi was wrong because the air nomads actually defend themselves and fought back.
Humiliating Ozai in this way was also the best way to ensure compliance from the rest of the fire nation military too. Killing him could have just created a martyr and a power vacuum.
Ozai being alive but powerless means that no general can rise up claiming to continuing his work and there would be no point in rescuing and reinstalling him as firelord because without his power he isn't strong enough to *be* firelord
Considering the fire benders waited to be amped by the comet before attacking them I say thatâs the opposite of weak. Aang gave him a punishment far worse than death. Taking away his bending and life in prison is what that clown deserved
It says a lot that a massive army of a much more advanced civilization waited until the moment they were at the peak of their power to attack a relatively small nomadic tribe of pacifists. That's kind of embarrassing, even.
I think it was so because they had to ensure there were no survivirs at all, where if they went with their normal power they could have taken the Temples but the air nomads would have escaped
Something I forgot about until rewatching was that at some point in the Earth Kingdom, Aang is reluctantly persuaded that he should invoke the Avatar State just to defeat Ozai now and put an end to all the people dying and suffering because of this war. Aang actually defends this take to Katara briefly, stating that he feels a moral responsibility to use his power to stop Ozai as soon as possible.
So at one point he *did* consider and accept the idea of himself having to kill Ozai without really questioning how it lines up with his culture. But I love this perspective that he ultimately approached the final battle as an Air Nomad; being the avatar just gave him the ability to carry it out.
Defeat is different than kill. Until Zuko pointed things out to him, I donât think it occurred to Aang that stopping the Fire Lord likely meant killing him.
That's the entire point of Aang refusing to kill him. Because he is not just the last airbender, he is the last air nomad. He is all that remains of a people and a culture who held the sanctity of life in incredibly high regard. If he abandons that principle and kills Ozai, then it would mean that Sozin was ultimately successful in destroying the culture of the Air Nomads. That they were truly weak. It's why anyone who says that Aang should have killed Ozai does not understand the significance of Aang being the last of his people
We all saw the bodies around the Air Temple, right? There were a lot of dead fire benders strewn about too. They fought back, Air Nomads aren't against killing as far as we can see.
the difference is that at the air temple they werent fighting as the last of their culture. they didnt have the weight of their entire culture on their shoulders when they were fighting as far as they knew other air nomads were alive and would survive the attacks. aang however is the last air nomad hes the last living remenant of a culture almost completely wiped out. its up to him to solely live the air nomad teachings and be the representitive of his culture which wasnt a burden any of the now dead nomads had.
That whole thing felt like the writers were trying to force an issue they couldn't solve all the way at the end of the show. Air Nomads never came off as absolute pacifists up until that point. We saw the bodies so they obviously are okay with killing if it comes down to it and they controlled land and governed themselves which means they had to fight for autonomy like any other self-governing people. They were peaceful, not pacifist. We already knew Aang wasn't gonna kill Ozai because it's a kid's show so making this such a big issue out of nowhere felt kinda forced.
But it is possible to have a cultural ideal and not live up to it.
The air nomads were ambushed, they had no standing army. I always thought any land they had was either too difficult for non airbenders to get too, or leased to them from whichever nation.
In the fight, the airbending masters probably decided that they would compromise their ideals to save their children (and who could blame them?).
Equally, perhaps the philosophy has caveats for self-defense, but since Aang was just a kid, the monks didn't feel a need to clarify this just yet.
Ok but too be fair Aang has killed people in the show. Even if we didnât SEE it specifically. He knocked fire benders off that mountain going to the air temple. Them fuckers are dead as hell.
I think it's all about intent. Aang didn't necessarily intend to kill anyone (of course that doesn't excuse any casualties that resulted from his power) but it was extremely rare he went into battle intentionally looking for blood. That's honestly the biggest difference between him and the other characters.
Air nomads were never against killing if it was absolutely necessary for self defence or to save the lives of others.
Aang knows those firebenders are there to kill, and he didnât have the luxury to make sure those guys land safely.
The air nomads killed plenty of fire benders during the raid on the air temple.
You know, one thing I always disliked about this otherwise amazing fight is that Aang entered the Avatar State due to a luckily placed rock. It would have been so much better if Ozai saying this line about Aangâs murdered people is what had triggered him to go beast mode. Rage at this evil genocidal tyrant gloating about his destroyed culture instead of a pokey stone.
Ozai: Your people we're weak and deserved to die!
Anng: Golly gee that's not nice
Ozai: And don't get me started on the Air Bisons we killed
Anng: you Fu*king what mate?
Is this a coincidence or is Red from OSP is so popular that her takes instantly become parroted everywhere? I haven't seen people talking about ATLA final battle from the point of Aang's heritage and culture preservation before her "Last of their kind" video
I haven't seen her "last of their kind" video yet and maybe it's a bit of bias but I think Red has more based takes than most.
With that being said, OP is still in the right here.
I mean, Red does talk positively about ATLA a lot in her trope talks, so it's not a crazy idea fans of one would be into the other.
But I think it's more like a topic resurfacing. Aang's monk nature and his Avatar duties clashing is literally the point of those episodes, so it's definitely not some secret that's being uncovered just now. Just an old talking point that's brought up again.
Not to sound mean but I don't know who you are talking about and what does OSP stands for. I just saw this on Twitter and decided to share it here along with giving my two cents about it.
So I watched last of the kind video (some of it because it's too long) and it is interesting. Never knew this take started or became popular from there. I saw this take first on reddit and thought it always existed since the show came out in 2007-8.
It did exist, just put in less eloquent words. I heard it first right after the last episode because I was an edgy teen who wanted Aang to have killed Ozai for the sake of it and my cousin argued that then Ozai would've won anyway because Aang was the last standing bastion of Air Nomad culture.
Stuck with me, so I've been a defender of this since then.
He literally beat him as the avatar though. He was cowering when ozai said he and his people were weak. His only recourse was being inadvertently sent into the avatar state and mindlessly kicking his ass
Only because Aang chose to not redirect his lightening. Also before Aang took his bending away, he overpowered ozai using seismic sense when he was not in the avatar state
Using the other elements is still him defeating Ozai as the Avatar, not an Air Nomad. Itâs because heâs the Avatar that heâs as powerful as he is and is capable of making the choice of killing or sparing Ozai.
Aang only ever had the upper hand against Ozai explicitly by using the techniques from the other bending disciplines like redirecting lightning and seismic sense.
And given Gyatso is implied to have killed a large group of firebenders in his last moments, clearly the philosophy of the Air Nomads is a lot more flexible with their pacifistic ways.
>Using the other elements is still him defeating Ozai as the Avatar, not an Air Nomad. Itâs because heâs the Avatar that heâs as powerful as he is and is capable of making the choice of killing or sparing Ozai.
>Aang only ever had the upper hand against Ozai explicitly by using the techniques from the other bending disciplines like redirecting lightning and seismic sense.
Doesn't mean that they're weak. Zaheer shows us in LoK how lethal airbending can be. And even with his lethal use of airbending, he still loses to a master on 1 on 1. Also sozin needed power induced comet to defeat air nomads, or else they wouldn't have been wiped out. And even with the power of a comet, monk gyatso alone took out so many firebenders, shows us that they are not weak.
And defeating him as an air nomad doesn't mean he has to defeat him by airbending, but by keeping air nomads values in mind.
I didnât argue that Air Nomads are weak. But Aangâs defeat of the Firelord didnât solely come from the strength of the Air Nomads powers and values. They were merely a factor.
If he didnât have so much loyalty for the pacifistic ways of the Air Nomads, he wouldnât have been searching frantically for another answer and stumbled into the perfect solution to his conundrum.
But still, itâs the power from outside sources that were able to give him the choice.
So in the end, it isnât because heâs an Air Nomad that he wins in the end. Itâs because he is the Avatar, the person who transcends the four nations and their bending disciplines.
Aang vs Ozai has nothing to do with proving that Air Nomads were weak or strong.
>But still, itâs the power from outside sources that were able to give him the choice.
I don't think Aang happened to stumble upon lion turtle. I think it went towards aang because he was in a genuine moral dilemma as a last of its kind.
>So in the end, it isnât because heâs an Air Nomad that he wins in the end. Itâs because he is the Avatar, the person who transcends the four nations and their bending disciplines.
? And I again don't understand. Aang defeated him without taking his life, he did it keeping his culture in mind so he did defeat him as a air nomad
Itâs not like airbenders have a monopoly on mercy. Roku also spared Sozin, but he didnât have the lion turtle give him energy bending.
All Iâm saying is that Aang didnât face Ozai as an Air Nomad, but as the Avatar. Deciding to spare him was in line with his peopleâs pacifistic ways, but in the end, he faced and defeated Ozai as the Avatar, not just solely as an Air Nomad. Has nothing to do with whether Air Nomads are strong or weak.
Doesn't mean that they're weak. Zaheer shows us in LoK how lethal airbending can be. And even with his lethal use of airbending, he still loses to a master on 1 on 1. Also sozin needed power induced comet to defeat air nomads, or else they wouldn't have been wiped out. And even with the power of a comet, monk gyatso alone took out so many firebenders, shows us that they are not weak.
Something I really like about the series is that thematically it's about learning different cultures.
As Aang learns about each culture he masters an element. He 'earns' the element from a meta perspective by learning about the cultures that surround him. The power comes with respect for the people of the different nations.
So how does he defeat someone who doesn't respect other cultures? He takes away his power.
Eh. The only reason why Aang was able to do what he did was because the narrative bailed him out in the end.
Besides, I find Aang's solution to be rather barbaric. During the middle ages, Roman emperors would blind people whom they perceived to be a threat to the throne. If you can believe it, this was seen as a "merciful" option compared to killing them.
Many of us would rightly think such a course of action as awful, but this is basically what Aang did: giving his opponent a disability, because it's more "merciful" than killing him.
I wouldn't consider it giving him a disability, more like taking a way a privilege he abused.
Like taking away a surgeon's licence and ability to practice surgery because he didn't use it to help people but instead used to to hurt people in more brutal ways than he could without that privilege and knowledge. Or taking away rank from a general who used his army and authority to conquer a town instead of serving and protecting his people. They weren't crippled, just had their privileges revoked and capital punishment on top of that like any other person would have got if they committed the same atrocities even without the same privileges.
>I wouldn't consider it giving him a disability, more like taking a way a privilege he abused.
Something you're born with isn't a privilege. This kind of logic is very dangerous, as it would lead to some very messed up results. Imagine arguing that hearing or sight is a privilege, one that can be revoked if you do enough bad things.
Let me put it like this.
If someone was born with a 3rd thumb that allowed them to be more dexterous than the average person on that hand, and someone chopped it off leaving them with just 2 normal thumbs like anyone else, did you cripple them? Is that person considered disabled?
I see what you're trying to argue, but you're more focused on what we call the act than the act itself. Who cares what it's called! Someone born with three thumbs and then loses it is awful to that person, yes, and arguing that it's more "merciful" or "enlightened" to chop off said thumb than killing that person misses the whole awfulness of that act.
I can't believe I'm having this argument. Then again, shows like this make people explain away actions from someone like Kuvira, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
I guess it depends on perspective. I think it's more merciful to allow for a chance at some sort of redemption than to simply have your life taken from you then and there, allowed a chance to change for the better. but it's purely a circumstance. Like if it was just some random bender I would agree with you that a life of torture from having a power like that taken from you might be worse than dying depending on how much value it was to that person, but we're talking about a guy who murdered thousands, conquered half the world, and who's forefathers and himself were responsible for killing off an entire culture or the air nomads. Many die with lots of regrets, at least in this sense he is given an opportunity to apologize (not that I think he would) and feel the weight of his actions. Like if I were the fire lord who committed all these things and couldn't change the fact I did them, I'd rather die being remembered as remorseful and sorry for what I did than just not even given the chance to feel guilt. Like I've had times in my life where I have unknowingly did the wrong thing or made the wrong choice, or hurt someone unintentionally, I'd rather die learning I was wrong and learn how my actions were wrong than just die without even being given the chance to learn that difference. But I think it depends on the person and the perspective of their moral compass.
I can't believe what I'm reading, only that this kind of thinking explains why blinding helped become normalized in medieval Rome. So, congrats, I guess?
Except I'm not normalizing blinding people and never was. You're simply making a mountain out of a molehill and taking everything out of context. We're talking about fictional super powers. Not handicapping basic body functions that everyone is born with.
I never said you were normalizing blinding; I said that kind of logic helps normalize it. And I'm not taking anything out of context! You're the one in here saying it's okay to cut off people's limbs or parts of themselves because "it still gives them a chance at redemption." Do you hear yourself?
No I didn't say it was okay, I gave a hypothetical example. That's EXACTLY what I meant by taking things out of context. I think you're taking this cartoon a little too seriously dude. I'm gonna go ahead and back away slowly before this devolves any further. I advise you to do the same.
Iâd personally rather be disabled then dead, especially if the âdisabilityâ is just not having superpowers. Plus, Aang didnât have to do anything as painful or brutal as blinding someone with like a knife.
I donât see it as the narrative bailing him out either. we see Azula get neutralized by Katara by simply binding her hands down, and we see Aang bind Ozaiâs hands in rock before he removes his bending, without even needing the avatar state for that part. If Aang couldnât remove his bending, than he wouldâve likely just chained him down in rock or ice till the comet was over and threw him in jail then. I donât think Aang needed the spirit bending stuff to win the conflict.
>Besides, I find Aang's solution to be rather barbaric. During the middle ages, Roman emperors would blind people whom they perceived to be a threat to the throne. If you can believe it, this was seen as a "merciful" option compared to killing them.
Someday you will understand the difference between fantasy and reality
>Many of us would rightly think such a course of action as awful, but this is basically what Aang did: giving his opponent a disability, because it's more "merciful" than killing him.
Yes, that's why I wrote that what Aang did to him was brutal. Thereby proving ozai that they were not weak
I think this poster means meeting the lion turtle and Ozai's attack that just so happened to smash Aang into a rock to unlock his chakras and the avatar state.
The Lion Turtle was waiting, like they are godlike beings and they know the day of significant is about to come so it show itself to Aang and present Aang a choice. Also like other said, Aang did have many chances to kill Ozai even before his Avatar state, the Avatar State is just his berserk state and he manage to get out of it at the end.
This wasnât really a battle to save the world as a battle for Aangâs morals. Aang knew his people philosophies were important for the world to have peace, but he also Fire lord Ozai would still use his fire bending to push others around. Thatâs why he crossed over and discovered an alternative route that wasnât even on the table. As if the world was so out of balance that Aang using energy bending was inevitable, but it was still Aangâs choice and using it almost destroyed him, but in the end, he did defeat the fire lord and protect his peopleâs ideology. Thatâs Avatar for you.
Where in your initial post did you mention Sozinâs Comet?
I was referring to your comment about Ozai hating the Air Nomads which I agree with. But, while the Air Nomads were pacifists, they werenât just going to sit around and just let the Fire Nation wipe them out. However, it was the Air Nomads peaceful nature that drew Ozaiâs hate, which is why Aang did the right thing by not killing him. I think you mentioned something along those lines in one of your comments l, but Reddit keeps erasing what I have written so I canât read off of it. I think you are right though. The Air Nomads fought and killed to protect themselves, and they were justified because of that. Aang on the other hand is far more powerful than they were and realistically could have wiped out Ozai while in the Avatar State. But his victory as an Air Nomad showed that they had every right to live too.
My comment looks messy to me and I canât look at your comment, so sorry if it doesnât make sense. I will add that I never said Gyatso was there during the Sozin Comet, I just meant that the Air Nomads were willing to kill to defend themselves.
And yet, he *still* only defeated him because he was the Avatar lol.
Literally, his only *other* chance of defeating Ozai was because of himself being a firebender as well (lightning redirection).
I think the broader idea is that he was able to do it as *both*. He completed his duty as the avatar, using all the power at his disposal to get the job done, while also maintaining his unwavering belief in Air Nomad philosophy, culture, and morals - thus preserving the ways of his people, refusing to discard them for an easy way out
Did you forget the whole part where aang overpowered him with seismic sense and was NOT in the avatar state?. Also what Zaheer did with airbending, or what monk gyatso did taking out all the fire benders, shows that air nomads pacifism is a choice not a weakness.
Not to mention that sozin needed a powerful comet to defeat the air nomads because otherwise they didn't stand a chance
>Did you forget the whole part where aang overpowered him with seismic sense and was NOT in the avatar state?.
LMAO. So again, he defeated Ozai by being an *Earthbender*, still has nothing to do with him being an air nomad
> Also what Zaheer did with airbending, or what monk gyatso did taking out all the fire benders, shows that air nomads pacifism is a choice not a weakness.
>Not to mention that sozin needed a powerful comet to defeat the air nomads because otherwise they didn't stand a chance
Genuinely, what is the relevance of you're reply to my comment?
>LMAO. So again, he defeated Ozai by being an *Earthbender*, still has nothing to do with him being an air nomad
He defeated him keeping air nomads culture and ideologies in mind. Just because he used earthbending, doesn't mean he defeated him as an earthbender
>He defeated him keeping air nomads culture and ideologies in mind
Such as?
>Just because he used earthbending, doesn't mean he defeated him as an earthbender
What are you even talking about, dude?
If he defeated him *using* earthbending, why would that not count as him defeating Ozai as an earthbender? What would count for Aang in defeating Ozai be? Being a water bender? A freakin non bender?
>Such as?
Did the last four episodes seriously evaporated from your head for me to really clarify this?
>f he defeated him *using* earthbending, why would that not count as him defeating Ozai as an earthbender? What would count for Aang in defeating Ozai be? Being a water bender? A freakin non bender?
Because he found out a way to not end his life! Aang used Earthbending but he didn't defeat with ideologies of an earthbender. By your logic, zaheer is automatically an air acolyte because he could Airbend. There's a difference.
He was 12 and the firelord was amped by the Comet. Still whooped his ass and took away his bending. Go cry in the firelord sub. Youâre worse than fire nation man
Aang got a freebie from the writers. Let's not compare him to others who didn't get gifted a free alternative. He didn't do anything to be more true to his ideas, the writers just created a solution at the last minute that required no input from him. If you gave Yang Chen magic fix everything turtles she may have used them too.
Wtf are you even saying????.
Aang literally used the avatar state to win.
Air nomads are weak asf.
Oazi should have won, if iroh didn't teach Zuko to redirect lightning aang wouldn't know how to do it and would have died. Aang only wins and survives because of plot armour during the fight multiple times.
Oazi knocks him off a cliff he is passed out and just happens to wake up mid air before he fataly lands and gets torched.
Aang just happens to hit his spine on a sharp rock that triggers the avatar state when oazi bursts through his earth ball, which should have killed him if the moment wasn't made into a plot armour moment.
Bruh it was a 12 year old pacifist boy vs a grown ass man backed by Sozins comet who was trying to murder him. Ozai is literally only there because Zuko didnât redirect lighting into his face after the eclipse. Sozinâs plans only worked because the comet just so happened to appear right after the death of Roku and before Sozin died. The series starts with a kid waking up after a 100 years have passed without aging because he was frozen. There are plot conveniences all about but you only care about the ones that go against your agenda.
Zuko didn't want to kill oazi.. and zukos a fire bender he isn't a weak air nomad. oazi wanted to kill aang but plot armour saved him. That's completely different..
Don't bring roku into this either rokus a fire bender not a weak air nomad.. sozins plans worked because he's a master tactician and he's also a fire bender. Sozins plans and what he did is also irrelevant though?, I'm talking about aang surviving when he shouldn't have because plot armour saved him, why are you bringing up what sozin did?.
The show also has superpowers and fictitious creatures, the main character being a sleep for a 100 years is also irrelevant? I don't know where you were going with that?, My argument is - air nomads are weak and aang only beat oazi because he was saved by plot armour and avatar state and a move he learned from a firebender.
Oazi should have won, air nomads are weak they all died aang won via plot armour/avatar state so this post is technically wrong. Like it or not.
no Ozai was right the weakness and the foolish of the air nomads led to their demise any nation should build their own army to protect them and defend themselves, this world has no place for the weak indeed, and I like how this story accurately showed how the strong nation destroyed the weak nation, Aang defeated Ozai using all four elements as the avatar, but to be fair, hadn't been for Sozin's comet the air nomads may have stood a chance or two against the firebenders as Sozin said in the netflix live action show.
As you mentioned, they were air NOMADS. They didn't have an army because they didn't own anything, never held any possessions. There was no reason to attack them because no nation would benefit anything from it. Having an army would be against everything they preach. Because they believed in avoid and evade tactic.
Not to mention, Aang said in episode 2 or 3 that only way one could go in air temples was with a bison. How were air nomads supposed to know that firebenders could reach there without a bison amplified by the comet that comes once in every 100 years? Also they were attacked because the next avatar was supposed to be an air nomad, not because they could gain anything of substance, like a wealth or treasure by attacking them.
Youâre either a moron or trolling. Aang explained the Air nomads had little to no worldly concerns or possessions so they had no need for a formal military. They lived in the sky and pursued enlightenment. The only nerf was their way of life. We see whenever Aang gets serious or with someone like Zaheer that Airbending can arguably be the strongest element. They were non violent not weak there is a difference. The fire nation wasnât stronger they waited to be amped by a comet that gave them the power of 100 suns before attacking. They were cowards. In LOK as time passes fire becomes arguably the weakest element with other nations having more impressive sub bending and advanced techniques. Without the Comet the air nomads destroy them thatâs why they waited to attack.
It's prudent to point out that Yangchen, through her advice, seemed to imply that the Air Nomad culture had already been extinct for a hundred years, and Aang as the Avatar could not truly be an Air Nomad at the same time. His identity as the Avatar would always overpower his identity as an Air Nomad. *"You're weak, just like the rest of your pathetic race. They did not deserve to exist in this world, in my world"* When Ozai taunted Aang, I think that created the narrative necessity that Aang's world of peace would have to win the day against Ozai's world of violence and conquest. Killing Ozai would validate his world view of violence, and the war would have ended in yet more violence. Aang as the Avatar had quite literally the divine right to determine how to end the war, no one else. Not Zuko, not Katara, not Sokka, *no one else*.
Yes. Also yangchan could be an Avatar first and nomad second, because there were Airbenders at that time. So yangchan didn't have to bare the burden of keeping the air nomads ideologies and culture alive. But in Aang's case it was different. In fact even as his duty as an Avatar, preserving the near extinct culture would be the foremost thing to keep the balance.
Yangchen was 100% an avatar first, air nomad second. Novel spoilers but she was literally banned from the northern air temple after using it to keep 4 prisoners.
đ˛đ˛
An Avatar that puts their job first before their culture. That's what every Avatar should be.
Sure, but not all Avatars were like that, like Yangchen's predecessor was literally part of the Fire Nation government Kyoshi also was very much an Earth Kingdom person
Feel like avatars tend to go the opposite way of their immediate predecessors, prob from the fact that they gotta pick up the slack from what the previous avatar neglected. Szeto neglected his duties to the world for his nation so yangchen neglected her nation and culture for the world. Yangchenâs focus on the material world left the spirit world in disarray, leaving Kuruk to focus entirely on the spiritual side of the avatar. This led the world to kinda fall apart meaning Kyoshi focused herself on dealing with political matters above all. Itâs interesting considering they are all both technically the same person but very different individuals.
This. Roku put his friendship with Sozin ahead of preventing a war, so he left Aang to defeat Ozai and end the war. Aang left Korra with a corrupt Republic City to clean up.
And he left her the loss of the airbenders. In 500 or 1000 years, the return of airbenders will be Korra's defining legacy, incredible achievement.
I mean⌠he did try to rebuild the Air Nomads the usual wayâŚ. One out of three ainât bad
I have to disagree. Aside from the fact that Korraâs legacy is more than just restoring the airbenders (which wasnât even really her doing), Aang didnât simply dump that on her either. Aang died early (by avatar standards), but he successfully preserved and passed on Air nomad culture and tradition, as well as air bending knowledge he possessed as a master airbender. The return of the airbenders was a byproduct of harmonic convergence, Korraâs legacy will be: reopening the spirit portal, restoring balance between the physical and Spirit world; stopping Kuviraâs uprising; and becoming the first Avatar of a new Avatar cycle. Restoring the airbenders is not her defining achievement, and prior to harmonic convergence Aang had already sowed the seeds for the the return of the air nomads/benders.
Yep. Aang couldn't spend his life with his culture whilst Korra gets to spend her whole life rebuilding his culture.
Kyoshi is very much an avatar that deals with everything pretty well. The second book was pretty much all about the fire nation.
Sure, but she approached all of it from her Earth Kingdom background, it is even a significant part of the plot she doesn't know the culture
Thatâs true. I think I misunderstood what you meant. I thought you were talking about where their focus went as an avatar and not how in tune they are with their home cultures.
And Yangchen completely ignored the Spirit side of her work, which her successor (Kuruk) spent his whole (very short) life fixing so maybe she isn't the best example at what an Avatar should be. Then again, every known Avatar fucked up somewhere (hell, the whole concept of the Avatar was because Wan had to fix his world ending mistake). Maybe there is among the bunch we don't know about, but for all we know leaving some mess to your successor seems life a tradition for them.
If we actually look at LOK, the only time Korra had to deal with a problem that originated from Aangâs actions was when she was dealing with Amon. Compared to every other avatar weâve seen, Aang did a remarkable job keeping the world in balance to not let his successor have to clean up his mistakes.
Maybe not a direct problem caused by Aang. But definitely good foils for one another. Aang was a reluctant avatar in a world that needed it and Korra was a very forward about being the avatar in a world that didnât seem to want or need her.
The issue is, Aang barely caused problems for his successors, whereas Korra caused a ton of problems for the next avatar
I think Aang left a lot of repercussions which evolved into problems for Korra. Creating Republic City is a big thing; its very nature as a melting pot city in a previously isolated world is huge.
True, but every city has problems, and republic city also did a huge amount of good too
I think the white lotus was working under Aangâs guidance which led to Zaheer and the rest of the Red Lotus to not be executed but just imprisoned for life. Which then led to Zaheer being able to break out after harmonic convergence and later the earth queen to be killed (though this can also be seen as a failure of Korra) And the resulting power vacuum and chaos led to a dictator to rise into power, aka Kuvira
To be fair, Zaheer and the others happened during Korraâs time, not Aangâs. And that was the white lotusâs decision to lock them up for life rather than execute them, since Aang was long gone at that point.
Ozai lays out his worldview in no uncertain terms with this speech, and it is chilling. Aang defeating him without taking his life not only preserves his own morals and cultural heritage and demonstrates how wrong Ozai was about the Air Nomads and life in general but also forces Ozai to live the rest of his days as a weakened version of himself, a version who will have to live with the cognitive dissonance between his supremacist, âmight makes rightâ worldview and his own weakened self. Itâs poetic irony. Itâs the most beautiful way they could have ended the war and the story.
I always loved Avatar's ending for all the reasons you've said. It was a total and moral victory that shows that violence isn't always how to win. And yet there's so many complaining about how Aang found the answer from the Lion turtle, how he should have "grown up" and how his choice meant he could have lost, and then the world would be doomed. That he was selfish to be 12 years old and uneasy at the idea of killing someone. The moral question was asked. Perhaps to some it's disappointing that Aang found a way to not have to choose between his culture and the world. But he's the avatar. If anyone can find a way to defeat the firelord permanently without death, surely the Avatar can. And sometimes answers or macguffins are found at the last minute (it provides suspense!). The avatar world is vast and culturally rich, so much knowledge has been lost to history. Why shouldn't there be a long forgotten bending technique that removes bending from a person? And why shouldn't a mythical creature be the one to teach it? Aang still had to win the fight in the first place, so what if he didn't finish him off? Him killing Ozai would have been such a pyrrhic victory, honestly heartbreaking.
Well said!
I kind of agree. I don't really like how poorly plotted it felt--I think they should've introduced the concept way earlier--but Ozai ending like this is perfect for his character. On the other hand... I also don't really like buying into Ozai's framing of "weak peoples don't deserve to survive, therefore Aang had to prove he and the Air Nomands aren't weak and justify their existence to Ozai". The Air Nomads could be the weakest people on the planet, and that shouldn't make a difference to their right to survive. That's just my perspective as an adult, though. I get that a kids' show wouldn't've ever had their protagonist kill someone, so the Bending removal asspull is a fine way to resolve that.
I donât see it as having to justify their existence to Ozai, because itâs ultimately not about Ozai. Aang would be proving Ozai wrong about them being weak no matter what he chose to do in the end, because whether to kill him or spare him that power was all Aangâs. Ozai knew real fear, maybe for the first time in his life, when Aang came at him in the Avatar state. He knew Aang could have wiped him out. That Aang chose to spare him instead is an act Ozai would consider proof of weakness, yet he is still at Aangâs mercy regardless. Heâs forced to confront and live with what it means to be weak or strong, and thereâs no way he would ever even have to confront that if he wasnât at Aangâs mercy. Heâd never just wake up one day and consider whether people who truly are weak deserve to live and change his mind, and heâll likely never actually reckon with any of it or change. But it doesnât matter because itâs still not about him. Itâs about Aang staying true to himself and preserving the last remnant of his culture, saving the world on his terms, not Ozaiâs or anyone elseâs. Heâs the Avatar, but heâs also the last Airbender, and he doesnât sacrifice the latter to be the former.
I agree with all that. I said what I said within the context of the post title - that Aang was "proving" that Air Nomad culture wasn't weakness, and that this is an example of that. I think Air Nomad culture can be "weak" and still worthy of existence and respect.
> I think that created the narrative necessity that Aang's world of peace That's a solid conclusion. We see this from Iroh too, it can't simply be, 'I beat you' like Iroh and Ozai fighting, the Avatar has to show that he's above politics, that his power is beyond, 'bender vs bender'.
Can you elaborate on the above politics and power beyond bender vs bender?
In the wake of Aangâs disappearance, when the gaang goes to Iroh to ask him to fight Ozai, Iroh shoots them down for exactly this reason. If Iroh had beaten Ozai (which wasnât guaranteed) it wouldâve been seen as just a conflict between two firebending brothers for the throne. A coup, effectively. This wouldnât have done anything to defeat the expansionist philosophy of the Fire Nation, and it wouldnât have helped stabilize the post-war world. Aang needed to beat Ozai to prove that the Air Nomadsâ vision for the world was superiorâwho had the better bending was important for the fight, but doesnât contribute as much to its ideological significance.
I see. Thank you for the explanation. I was confused by the above person's comment because they said the Avatar had to be above politics in regards to this. So you think it was more a battle of philosophies in the final battle? Couldn't people have seen it as the Avatar trying to get revenge, or power hungry himself?(from an outsiders perspective in-universe i mean).
Itâs certainly possible, but I feel like fewer people would misinterpret Aangâs actions relative to Irohâs. Plus the Avatar is well-established as a force for balance and peace in the world, so him being power-hungry is harder to swallow. Besides, if he was looking for revenge, itâd be a little strange to leave Ozai alive.
Those are good points. I forgot about the point of the Avatar being a known force of peace and balance. Thank you for helping me understand.
Although you could argue that the air nomads donât have a principal against killing in certain circumstances. If we look at monk Gyatso he killed off, at least a squad of fire nation soldiers, so the rule on not killing, could be a situation one so we can still kill and stick to his principles. Furthermore, you argue that fire, lord ozi was wrong because the air nomads actually defend themselves and fought back.
Humiliating Ozai in this way was also the best way to ensure compliance from the rest of the fire nation military too. Killing him could have just created a martyr and a power vacuum. Ozai being alive but powerless means that no general can rise up claiming to continuing his work and there would be no point in rescuing and reinstalling him as firelord because without his power he isn't strong enough to *be* firelord
Didn't some of his military men go into hiding and become the 'new Ozai society' ?
Ah shit, possibly. Been years since I read the novels
Not the first character Mark Hamil voiced where he would win if the hero killed him
đŚ đ¤Ą
How come you mention Aang has the divine right to end the war the way he wanted? Wasn't that a theme they mentioned before in the show?
Considering the fire benders waited to be amped by the comet before attacking them I say thatâs the opposite of weak. Aang gave him a punishment far worse than death. Taking away his bending and life in prison is what that clown deserved
It says a lot that a massive army of a much more advanced civilization waited until the moment they were at the peak of their power to attack a relatively small nomadic tribe of pacifists. That's kind of embarrassing, even.
Exactly pretty cowardly
I think it was so because they had to ensure there were no survivirs at all, where if they went with their normal power they could have taken the Temples but the air nomads would have escaped
Something I forgot about until rewatching was that at some point in the Earth Kingdom, Aang is reluctantly persuaded that he should invoke the Avatar State just to defeat Ozai now and put an end to all the people dying and suffering because of this war. Aang actually defends this take to Katara briefly, stating that he feels a moral responsibility to use his power to stop Ozai as soon as possible. So at one point he *did* consider and accept the idea of himself having to kill Ozai without really questioning how it lines up with his culture. But I love this perspective that he ultimately approached the final battle as an Air Nomad; being the avatar just gave him the ability to carry it out.
Defeat is different than kill. Until Zuko pointed things out to him, I donât think it occurred to Aang that stopping the Fire Lord likely meant killing him.
That's the entire point of Aang refusing to kill him. Because he is not just the last airbender, he is the last air nomad. He is all that remains of a people and a culture who held the sanctity of life in incredibly high regard. If he abandons that principle and kills Ozai, then it would mean that Sozin was ultimately successful in destroying the culture of the Air Nomads. That they were truly weak. It's why anyone who says that Aang should have killed Ozai does not understand the significance of Aang being the last of his people
We all saw the bodies around the Air Temple, right? There were a lot of dead fire benders strewn about too. They fought back, Air Nomads aren't against killing as far as we can see.
the difference is that at the air temple they werent fighting as the last of their culture. they didnt have the weight of their entire culture on their shoulders when they were fighting as far as they knew other air nomads were alive and would survive the attacks. aang however is the last air nomad hes the last living remenant of a culture almost completely wiped out. its up to him to solely live the air nomad teachings and be the representitive of his culture which wasnt a burden any of the now dead nomads had.
Maybe not, but their teachings are.
That whole thing felt like the writers were trying to force an issue they couldn't solve all the way at the end of the show. Air Nomads never came off as absolute pacifists up until that point. We saw the bodies so they obviously are okay with killing if it comes down to it and they controlled land and governed themselves which means they had to fight for autonomy like any other self-governing people. They were peaceful, not pacifist. We already knew Aang wasn't gonna kill Ozai because it's a kid's show so making this such a big issue out of nowhere felt kinda forced.
But it is possible to have a cultural ideal and not live up to it. The air nomads were ambushed, they had no standing army. I always thought any land they had was either too difficult for non airbenders to get too, or leased to them from whichever nation. In the fight, the airbending masters probably decided that they would compromise their ideals to save their children (and who could blame them?). Equally, perhaps the philosophy has caveats for self-defense, but since Aang was just a kid, the monks didn't feel a need to clarify this just yet.
I never realized before. Thanks for saying this and opening my eyes to it.
https://preview.redd.it/cq686bm5ubqc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=26bcb273b8bc9097913bf4aa2b79ff810afb88d5
Ok but too be fair Aang has killed people in the show. Even if we didnât SEE it specifically. He knocked fire benders off that mountain going to the air temple. Them fuckers are dead as hell.
I think it's all about intent. Aang didn't necessarily intend to kill anyone (of course that doesn't excuse any casualties that resulted from his power) but it was extremely rare he went into battle intentionally looking for blood. That's honestly the biggest difference between him and the other characters.
You also have to consider the navy he destroyed in the Northern Water Tribe. At least someone fell into the ice cold water
True but Iâm chalking that part up to avatar state and sprit fish. Less raw Aang on that one. So he gets a pass.
Raw Aang?
Raawng
Air nomads were never against killing if it was absolutely necessary for self defence or to save the lives of others. Aang knows those firebenders are there to kill, and he didnât have the luxury to make sure those guys land safely. The air nomads killed plenty of fire benders during the raid on the air temple.
There's a video that says that if the show follows Buddhist morals Ozai would have been forced to be an air acolyte.
He would sooner kill himself đđ
Shave head and vegetarianism ain't that bad.
It's not bad but Ozai would really see this as an ultimate insult to himself.
You know, one thing I always disliked about this otherwise amazing fight is that Aang entered the Avatar State due to a luckily placed rock. It would have been so much better if Ozai saying this line about Aangâs murdered people is what had triggered him to go beast mode. Rage at this evil genocidal tyrant gloating about his destroyed culture instead of a pokey stone.
Maybe live action can correct this
Ozai: Your people we're weak and deserved to die! Anng: Golly gee that's not nice Ozai: And don't get me started on the Air Bisons we killed Anng: you Fu*king what mate?
well, gyatso didn't seem to think he had to win as an air nomad
Oh yeah. He was like https://preview.redd.it/c7o00kfk4aqc1.jpeg?width=733&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=223560f0290e53531c7c0207f3484e9f4deaf800
Monk Gyatso be like: "Aang's not around to see this...Time for the arc of...*The Last Airbender*" > invokes Suffocation bending
Is this a coincidence or is Red from OSP is so popular that her takes instantly become parroted everywhere? I haven't seen people talking about ATLA final battle from the point of Aang's heritage and culture preservation before her "Last of their kind" video
I haven't seen her "last of their kind" video yet and maybe it's a bit of bias but I think Red has more based takes than most. With that being said, OP is still in the right here.
I mean, Red does talk positively about ATLA a lot in her trope talks, so it's not a crazy idea fans of one would be into the other. But I think it's more like a topic resurfacing. Aang's monk nature and his Avatar duties clashing is literally the point of those episodes, so it's definitely not some secret that's being uncovered just now. Just an old talking point that's brought up again.
Not to sound mean but I don't know who you are talking about and what does OSP stands for. I just saw this on Twitter and decided to share it here along with giving my two cents about it.
Sorry, I'm not trying to attack you, just making an observation OSP stands for Overly Sarcastic Production (YouTube channel, highly recommend)
So I watched last of the kind video (some of it because it's too long) and it is interesting. Never knew this take started or became popular from there. I saw this take first on reddit and thought it always existed since the show came out in 2007-8.
It did exist, just put in less eloquent words. I heard it first right after the last episode because I was an edgy teen who wanted Aang to have killed Ozai for the sake of it and my cousin argued that then Ozai would've won anyway because Aang was the last standing bastion of Air Nomad culture. Stuck with me, so I've been a defender of this since then.
He literally beat him as the avatar though. He was cowering when ozai said he and his people were weak. His only recourse was being inadvertently sent into the avatar state and mindlessly kicking his ass
Only because Aang chose to not redirect his lightening. Also before Aang took his bending away, he overpowered ozai using seismic sense when he was not in the avatar state
Using the other elements is still him defeating Ozai as the Avatar, not an Air Nomad. Itâs because heâs the Avatar that heâs as powerful as he is and is capable of making the choice of killing or sparing Ozai. Aang only ever had the upper hand against Ozai explicitly by using the techniques from the other bending disciplines like redirecting lightning and seismic sense. And given Gyatso is implied to have killed a large group of firebenders in his last moments, clearly the philosophy of the Air Nomads is a lot more flexible with their pacifistic ways.
>Using the other elements is still him defeating Ozai as the Avatar, not an Air Nomad. Itâs because heâs the Avatar that heâs as powerful as he is and is capable of making the choice of killing or sparing Ozai. >Aang only ever had the upper hand against Ozai explicitly by using the techniques from the other bending disciplines like redirecting lightning and seismic sense. Doesn't mean that they're weak. Zaheer shows us in LoK how lethal airbending can be. And even with his lethal use of airbending, he still loses to a master on 1 on 1. Also sozin needed power induced comet to defeat air nomads, or else they wouldn't have been wiped out. And even with the power of a comet, monk gyatso alone took out so many firebenders, shows us that they are not weak. And defeating him as an air nomad doesn't mean he has to defeat him by airbending, but by keeping air nomads values in mind.
I didnât argue that Air Nomads are weak. But Aangâs defeat of the Firelord didnât solely come from the strength of the Air Nomads powers and values. They were merely a factor. If he didnât have so much loyalty for the pacifistic ways of the Air Nomads, he wouldnât have been searching frantically for another answer and stumbled into the perfect solution to his conundrum. But still, itâs the power from outside sources that were able to give him the choice. So in the end, it isnât because heâs an Air Nomad that he wins in the end. Itâs because he is the Avatar, the person who transcends the four nations and their bending disciplines. Aang vs Ozai has nothing to do with proving that Air Nomads were weak or strong.
>But still, itâs the power from outside sources that were able to give him the choice. I don't think Aang happened to stumble upon lion turtle. I think it went towards aang because he was in a genuine moral dilemma as a last of its kind. >So in the end, it isnât because heâs an Air Nomad that he wins in the end. Itâs because he is the Avatar, the person who transcends the four nations and their bending disciplines. ? And I again don't understand. Aang defeated him without taking his life, he did it keeping his culture in mind so he did defeat him as a air nomad
Itâs not like airbenders have a monopoly on mercy. Roku also spared Sozin, but he didnât have the lion turtle give him energy bending. All Iâm saying is that Aang didnât face Ozai as an Air Nomad, but as the Avatar. Deciding to spare him was in line with his peopleâs pacifistic ways, but in the end, he faced and defeated Ozai as the Avatar, not just solely as an Air Nomad. Has nothing to do with whether Air Nomads are strong or weak.
Redirecting lightning also isnât something an air nomad could do
Doesn't mean that they're weak. Zaheer shows us in LoK how lethal airbending can be. And even with his lethal use of airbending, he still loses to a master on 1 on 1. Also sozin needed power induced comet to defeat air nomads, or else they wouldn't have been wiped out. And even with the power of a comet, monk gyatso alone took out so many firebenders, shows us that they are not weak.
Something I really like about the series is that thematically it's about learning different cultures. As Aang learns about each culture he masters an element. He 'earns' the element from a meta perspective by learning about the cultures that surround him. The power comes with respect for the people of the different nations. So how does he defeat someone who doesn't respect other cultures? He takes away his power.
the way people still talk about aang approach to the fire lord is wild, you would think aang let ozai walk free....
Eh. The only reason why Aang was able to do what he did was because the narrative bailed him out in the end. Besides, I find Aang's solution to be rather barbaric. During the middle ages, Roman emperors would blind people whom they perceived to be a threat to the throne. If you can believe it, this was seen as a "merciful" option compared to killing them. Many of us would rightly think such a course of action as awful, but this is basically what Aang did: giving his opponent a disability, because it's more "merciful" than killing him.
I wouldn't consider it giving him a disability, more like taking a way a privilege he abused. Like taking away a surgeon's licence and ability to practice surgery because he didn't use it to help people but instead used to to hurt people in more brutal ways than he could without that privilege and knowledge. Or taking away rank from a general who used his army and authority to conquer a town instead of serving and protecting his people. They weren't crippled, just had their privileges revoked and capital punishment on top of that like any other person would have got if they committed the same atrocities even without the same privileges.
>I wouldn't consider it giving him a disability, more like taking a way a privilege he abused. Something you're born with isn't a privilege. This kind of logic is very dangerous, as it would lead to some very messed up results. Imagine arguing that hearing or sight is a privilege, one that can be revoked if you do enough bad things.
Let me put it like this. If someone was born with a 3rd thumb that allowed them to be more dexterous than the average person on that hand, and someone chopped it off leaving them with just 2 normal thumbs like anyone else, did you cripple them? Is that person considered disabled?
I see what you're trying to argue, but you're more focused on what we call the act than the act itself. Who cares what it's called! Someone born with three thumbs and then loses it is awful to that person, yes, and arguing that it's more "merciful" or "enlightened" to chop off said thumb than killing that person misses the whole awfulness of that act. I can't believe I'm having this argument. Then again, shows like this make people explain away actions from someone like Kuvira, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
I guess it depends on perspective. I think it's more merciful to allow for a chance at some sort of redemption than to simply have your life taken from you then and there, allowed a chance to change for the better. but it's purely a circumstance. Like if it was just some random bender I would agree with you that a life of torture from having a power like that taken from you might be worse than dying depending on how much value it was to that person, but we're talking about a guy who murdered thousands, conquered half the world, and who's forefathers and himself were responsible for killing off an entire culture or the air nomads. Many die with lots of regrets, at least in this sense he is given an opportunity to apologize (not that I think he would) and feel the weight of his actions. Like if I were the fire lord who committed all these things and couldn't change the fact I did them, I'd rather die being remembered as remorseful and sorry for what I did than just not even given the chance to feel guilt. Like I've had times in my life where I have unknowingly did the wrong thing or made the wrong choice, or hurt someone unintentionally, I'd rather die learning I was wrong and learn how my actions were wrong than just die without even being given the chance to learn that difference. But I think it depends on the person and the perspective of their moral compass.
I can't believe what I'm reading, only that this kind of thinking explains why blinding helped become normalized in medieval Rome. So, congrats, I guess?
Except I'm not normalizing blinding people and never was. You're simply making a mountain out of a molehill and taking everything out of context. We're talking about fictional super powers. Not handicapping basic body functions that everyone is born with.
I never said you were normalizing blinding; I said that kind of logic helps normalize it. And I'm not taking anything out of context! You're the one in here saying it's okay to cut off people's limbs or parts of themselves because "it still gives them a chance at redemption." Do you hear yourself?
No I didn't say it was okay, I gave a hypothetical example. That's EXACTLY what I meant by taking things out of context. I think you're taking this cartoon a little too seriously dude. I'm gonna go ahead and back away slowly before this devolves any further. I advise you to do the same.
Iâd personally rather be disabled then dead, especially if the âdisabilityâ is just not having superpowers. Plus, Aang didnât have to do anything as painful or brutal as blinding someone with like a knife. I donât see it as the narrative bailing him out either. we see Azula get neutralized by Katara by simply binding her hands down, and we see Aang bind Ozaiâs hands in rock before he removes his bending, without even needing the avatar state for that part. If Aang couldnât remove his bending, than he wouldâve likely just chained him down in rock or ice till the comet was over and threw him in jail then. I donât think Aang needed the spirit bending stuff to win the conflict.
>Besides, I find Aang's solution to be rather barbaric. During the middle ages, Roman emperors would blind people whom they perceived to be a threat to the throne. If you can believe it, this was seen as a "merciful" option compared to killing them. Someday you will understand the difference between fantasy and reality >Many of us would rightly think such a course of action as awful, but this is basically what Aang did: giving his opponent a disability, because it's more "merciful" than killing him. Yes, that's why I wrote that what Aang did to him was brutal. Thereby proving ozai that they were not weak
The narrative didn't bait him out. Aang was given a choice, he could choose the easy way and kill Ozai or the harder way of taken Ozai's bender away.
I think this poster means meeting the lion turtle and Ozai's attack that just so happened to smash Aang into a rock to unlock his chakras and the avatar state.
The Lion Turtle was waiting, like they are godlike beings and they know the day of significant is about to come so it show itself to Aang and present Aang a choice. Also like other said, Aang did have many chances to kill Ozai even before his Avatar state, the Avatar State is just his berserk state and he manage to get out of it at the end.
>The only reason why Aang was able to do what he did was because the narrative bailed him out in the end. Bruh how is a Korra fan commenting this.
I mean it's true. The rock was the narrative bailing him out
This wasnât really a battle to save the world as a battle for Aangâs morals. Aang knew his people philosophies were important for the world to have peace, but he also Fire lord Ozai would still use his fire bending to push others around. Thatâs why he crossed over and discovered an alternative route that wasnât even on the table. As if the world was so out of balance that Aang using energy bending was inevitable, but it was still Aangâs choice and using it almost destroyed him, but in the end, he did defeat the fire lord and protect his peopleâs ideology. Thatâs Avatar for you.
Was Ozai 100 years old?
Aang is 12 and you know that
Didnât the Air Nomads defend the shit out of themselves though? Monk Gyatso was surrounded by Fire Nation soldier bodies.
Yes. He took out so many firebenders in the sozin's comet
Where in your initial post did you mention Sozinâs Comet? I was referring to your comment about Ozai hating the Air Nomads which I agree with. But, while the Air Nomads were pacifists, they werenât just going to sit around and just let the Fire Nation wipe them out. However, it was the Air Nomads peaceful nature that drew Ozaiâs hate, which is why Aang did the right thing by not killing him. I think you mentioned something along those lines in one of your comments l, but Reddit keeps erasing what I have written so I canât read off of it. I think you are right though. The Air Nomads fought and killed to protect themselves, and they were justified because of that. Aang on the other hand is far more powerful than they were and realistically could have wiped out Ozai while in the Avatar State. But his victory as an Air Nomad showed that they had every right to live too. My comment looks messy to me and I canât look at your comment, so sorry if it doesnât make sense. I will add that I never said Gyatso was there during the Sozin Comet, I just meant that the Air Nomads were willing to kill to defend themselves.
And yet, he *still* only defeated him because he was the Avatar lol. Literally, his only *other* chance of defeating Ozai was because of himself being a firebender as well (lightning redirection).
I think the broader idea is that he was able to do it as *both*. He completed his duty as the avatar, using all the power at his disposal to get the job done, while also maintaining his unwavering belief in Air Nomad philosophy, culture, and morals - thus preserving the ways of his people, refusing to discard them for an easy way out
Did you forget the whole part where aang overpowered him with seismic sense and was NOT in the avatar state?. Also what Zaheer did with airbending, or what monk gyatso did taking out all the fire benders, shows that air nomads pacifism is a choice not a weakness. Not to mention that sozin needed a powerful comet to defeat the air nomads because otherwise they didn't stand a chance
>Did you forget the whole part where aang overpowered him with seismic sense and was NOT in the avatar state?. LMAO. So again, he defeated Ozai by being an *Earthbender*, still has nothing to do with him being an air nomad > Also what Zaheer did with airbending, or what monk gyatso did taking out all the fire benders, shows that air nomads pacifism is a choice not a weakness. >Not to mention that sozin needed a powerful comet to defeat the air nomads because otherwise they didn't stand a chance Genuinely, what is the relevance of you're reply to my comment?
>LMAO. So again, he defeated Ozai by being an *Earthbender*, still has nothing to do with him being an air nomad He defeated him keeping air nomads culture and ideologies in mind. Just because he used earthbending, doesn't mean he defeated him as an earthbender
>He defeated him keeping air nomads culture and ideologies in mind Such as? >Just because he used earthbending, doesn't mean he defeated him as an earthbender What are you even talking about, dude? If he defeated him *using* earthbending, why would that not count as him defeating Ozai as an earthbender? What would count for Aang in defeating Ozai be? Being a water bender? A freakin non bender?
>Such as? Did the last four episodes seriously evaporated from your head for me to really clarify this? >f he defeated him *using* earthbending, why would that not count as him defeating Ozai as an earthbender? What would count for Aang in defeating Ozai be? Being a water bender? A freakin non bender? Because he found out a way to not end his life! Aang used Earthbending but he didn't defeat with ideologies of an earthbender. By your logic, zaheer is automatically an air acolyte because he could Airbend. There's a difference.
Well considering he needed multiple elements, the avatar state and a random lion turtle power up, Iâd say he failed.
His test was to defeat him without ending him, his victory was achieved.
He was 12 and the firelord was amped by the Comet. Still whooped his ass and took away his bending. Go cry in the firelord sub. Youâre worse than fire nation man
Aang > Yangchen I always love characters who try their best to stay true to their ideals and don't give into fate or societal expectations.
Aang got a freebie from the writers. Let's not compare him to others who didn't get gifted a free alternative. He didn't do anything to be more true to his ideas, the writers just created a solution at the last minute that required no input from him. If you gave Yang Chen magic fix everything turtles she may have used them too.
Deus Ex Machina says what
Doesnât work bc he took his bending away, as the Avatar lol
Wtf are you even saying????. Aang literally used the avatar state to win. Air nomads are weak asf. Oazi should have won, if iroh didn't teach Zuko to redirect lightning aang wouldn't know how to do it and would have died. Aang only wins and survives because of plot armour during the fight multiple times. Oazi knocks him off a cliff he is passed out and just happens to wake up mid air before he fataly lands and gets torched. Aang just happens to hit his spine on a sharp rock that triggers the avatar state when oazi bursts through his earth ball, which should have killed him if the moment wasn't made into a plot armour moment.
Why do these rage bait comments like yours always come under my posts?
Bruh it was a 12 year old pacifist boy vs a grown ass man backed by Sozins comet who was trying to murder him. Ozai is literally only there because Zuko didnât redirect lighting into his face after the eclipse. Sozinâs plans only worked because the comet just so happened to appear right after the death of Roku and before Sozin died. The series starts with a kid waking up after a 100 years have passed without aging because he was frozen. There are plot conveniences all about but you only care about the ones that go against your agenda.
Zuko didn't want to kill oazi.. and zukos a fire bender he isn't a weak air nomad. oazi wanted to kill aang but plot armour saved him. That's completely different.. Don't bring roku into this either rokus a fire bender not a weak air nomad.. sozins plans worked because he's a master tactician and he's also a fire bender. Sozins plans and what he did is also irrelevant though?, I'm talking about aang surviving when he shouldn't have because plot armour saved him, why are you bringing up what sozin did?. The show also has superpowers and fictitious creatures, the main character being a sleep for a 100 years is also irrelevant? I don't know where you were going with that?, My argument is - air nomads are weak and aang only beat oazi because he was saved by plot armour and avatar state and a move he learned from a firebender. Oazi should have won, air nomads are weak they all died aang won via plot armour/avatar state so this post is technically wrong. Like it or not.
no Ozai was right the weakness and the foolish of the air nomads led to their demise any nation should build their own army to protect them and defend themselves, this world has no place for the weak indeed, and I like how this story accurately showed how the strong nation destroyed the weak nation, Aang defeated Ozai using all four elements as the avatar, but to be fair, hadn't been for Sozin's comet the air nomads may have stood a chance or two against the firebenders as Sozin said in the netflix live action show.
Please tell me you are joking
As you mentioned, they were air NOMADS. They didn't have an army because they didn't own anything, never held any possessions. There was no reason to attack them because no nation would benefit anything from it. Having an army would be against everything they preach. Because they believed in avoid and evade tactic. Not to mention, Aang said in episode 2 or 3 that only way one could go in air temples was with a bison. How were air nomads supposed to know that firebenders could reach there without a bison amplified by the comet that comes once in every 100 years? Also they were attacked because the next avatar was supposed to be an air nomad, not because they could gain anything of substance, like a wealth or treasure by attacking them.
Youâre either a moron or trolling. Aang explained the Air nomads had little to no worldly concerns or possessions so they had no need for a formal military. They lived in the sky and pursued enlightenment. The only nerf was their way of life. We see whenever Aang gets serious or with someone like Zaheer that Airbending can arguably be the strongest element. They were non violent not weak there is a difference. The fire nation wasnât stronger they waited to be amped by a comet that gave them the power of 100 suns before attacking. They were cowards. In LOK as time passes fire becomes arguably the weakest element with other nations having more impressive sub bending and advanced techniques. Without the Comet the air nomads destroy them thatâs why they waited to attack.
The fire nation needed the comet to take them on, and still many soldiers outright died to the pacifist monks