SubJeff on 26/10/2007 at 09:56
Ok, now you may think this is a contrast to the Truart thread and you'd be right.
But I think this warrants serious exploration - Garrett is a THIEF. He is a criminal. Lordy lord I hate thieves in real life. They are scum.
In the Thief series Garrett is admittedly an anti-hero (we all agree on that I hope) but because he saves the City (world?) from, in order; an Evil God, a Religious Fanatic, an Insane Mutant, we consider him a hero. A bad guy brought in from the cold, redeemed by the greater acts.
But this is his fate, not his choice.
Given the choice Garrett would continue to be a Thief, working for petty criminals, not stealing from the rich to give to the poor in a Robin Hood style, committing the occasional murder in order to steal and so on.
If we consider GTA:VC as a counterpoint imho playing and immersing oneself as Garrett is much more amoral, because the evil in him is much more subtle. We accept it in a different way to the acceptance of Tommy as gangster. Tommy's criminality is in your face, and he is never redeemed - we accept that we are playing a gangster.
Garrett's world is less clearcut. We're given the impression that the nobles are corrupt and greedy, and that Garrett is part of an underclass of unfortunates who just so happens to have this special power that ultimately makes him a saviour. He and his criminal buddies are endeared to us. Even his "romantic" encounters are seedy (Cutty's sister does what as a job exactly, and just what is she offering in gratitude? If you really take this to it's logical conclusion it's pretty nasty) but presented to us in a slightly different, gentler, light.
In fact one could argue that in Thief 2 Truart's demonisation via his links to Karras and his unsavoury methods is there to soften the obvious fact that Garrett is a bad guy too! It's like Neo vs the police in The Matrix. He kills ALOT of innocent people just doing their job but it's ok because they are working for the Matrix, even though they don't know it.
Don't get me wrong - I like the character in and for the game, I enjoyed the games (DUH!), but I don't actually like Garrett, for he is filth.
Gingerbread Man on 26/10/2007 at 13:59
I agree with all of that. In fact, if anyone wants to get all up in arms about video games glorifying antisocial behaviour, the Thief games should be right up top of the list. Other games with more overtly violent or law-breaking player characters are pretty blatant about it, but Thief romanticises it all to the nth degree.
Which was probably part of the agenda, and I love it for that, but still... Garrett's an effing bad guy -- it doesn't really matter that no one in the gameworld is particularly decent, honest, or uncorrupted by greed either.
Mikael Grizzly on 26/10/2007 at 14:36
A propos Neo - I don't think he was killing people, rather deleting programmes.
A human is too unstable and unpredictable. As for the question why they aren't as sophisticated as the agents... compare Paint to Photoshop. There you have it.
SubJeff on 26/10/2007 at 15:09
No, Neo kills lots of cops and whatnot. They are humans. Even the agents he temporarily disables use humans as proxies and when the agent is shot and disabled they re-convert back into the human they acted through. A human that is now dead.
Jashin on 26/10/2007 at 15:21
I don't think you understand the role of the hero at all.
Let me quote you this review of DareDevil I saved from imdb.
Quote:
Right from the start we are drawn into the story by meeting a beaten up Daredevil. We then hear him say the immortal line "they say that when you are about to die you see your whole life flash before your eye's. That is also true of a blind man" And then of course we are taken to back to when the hero of the film was a normal boy growing up in a part of new york called hell's kitchen. An origin story that in my mind hasn't been implemented as well in any other movie. The film doesn't let up from that moment either, and if superhero's existed they would exist in the form of daredevil. The scene where Mat Murdock return's home after dispensing of a really nasty rapist is masterful. Beaten and bruised he steps in the shower, and as the water trickles over his battered body you can see the blood trickling down the drain, then cut to his face as he pinches a single tooth that comes away from his jaw then clunks to the bottom of the shower with a ching. Then after stepping out we see him go straight to the medicine cabinet and pop some painkillers into his mouth. Then after stepping into his sound proof coffin so that he wouldn't go mad from the high intensity sounds he is constantly hearing, he passes into something slightly less pleasurable than sleep. You know at this point that this is a super hero. There is no Aunt May or butler Alfred at home to pour him a nice cup of tea. He is completely alone. Doing what he does not to get thanks, but because he has the ability to do it. I don't even class this movie as a movie - this move is pure art, made and written by people that love the whole daredevil mythos. The man without fear. And to all those people that hated the movie, I am sorry. I am sorry that the film hasn't got the recognition that it deserves and i am sorry that everyone who hated the film so much hasn't really watched the film. Just remember as daredevil said in his own words. "I'm not the bad guy"
Rent the legendary Kurosawa film "7 Samurai" and watch it.
SubJeff on 26/10/2007 at 16:50
I didn't say he isn't a hero. I've seen 7 Samurai plenty thanks, and I don't see what that, or Daredevil (which I haven't seen) have to do with Garrett. Garrett is thief by trade, a criminal and possibly a murderer before we even meet him to control what he does (I played on Expert in T1 and 2 and never killed a human, but that doesn't mean the character didn't in his past).
jay pettitt on 26/10/2007 at 17:05
In fact, I much prefer self interested Garrett to Special Keeper Agent Garrett.
That said, there's that whole working class crime = bad Vs white collar crime = what crime? thing. If one stops for even the briefest moment to consider the corruption, fraud, wanton dishonesty and anti-social behavior at every level in society that we choose normally to be oblivious to, one has to consider Garrett just another brick in the wall. Garrett earns his cash as squarely as the next person; through skill, graft and daring-do, or he would if he wasn't just a made up character in a video game. Garrett isn't evil, he's socially unacceptable.
Quote Posted by SE
Questions, questions, questions
What are you up to?
sarasara on 26/10/2007 at 17:16
Garrett was a Robin Hood figure up until T3. It was then that a degree of immorality was introduced into the game. Of course it is a matter of choice whether you rob hard-working rich taxpayers whose taxes help keep the poor in medication and food and the choice to do so came with T3 where you moved from robbing robber-barons to robbing the public.
I remember feeling very bad about having robbed the money that the sea captain had left for widow Moira and dubious about Garrett robbing his landlord. I was not keen on killing the innocent rust mites and left the critters alone.
As to the guards, Hammerites and Pagans; if they are a threat I'll take them out.
Thief should have higher standards than games like Grandtheftauto which introduces young people to crime.
I deeply admire all those players who never injure or attack anyone in the game, I do take out the factions.
SubJeff on 26/10/2007 at 17:24
Garrett was never a Robin Hood figure. In T1 and 2 he just steals for his own gain. Where is the Robin Hood bit? Or is my memory failing me again?
demagogue on 26/10/2007 at 17:55
Yeah, not much debate that Garrett is a Byronic anti-hero ... it is a romanticized vision of basically a moody, anti-social brigand. He's like Bogart's characters in c. 1950s movies. And I think it's fair to say that he's only a heroic figure because fate makes him one; same with Bogart. Just because we rarely accept the role of fate in the real world anymore doesn't mean we should throw it out of literature.
He's not Robin Hood. But he does have an ethos, his own spin on a Keeper-inspired ethos in T1 (and T2 by extension): "the essence of balance is detachment" ... All the other groups are attached to some ideology and that makes them radical and imbalanced. By caring only about himself, but still associated to all these events, he actually romanticizes the idea that he is balanced, untainted by all the wild ideologies raging around him, so he's the one balanced guy to actually take care of the situation without the ideology corrupting him into supporting the bigger wrong thing.
It's because he's only doing it for the cash, or out of self-interest, that you can trust his motives aren't hidden or "corrupted" by the bad ideologies. His motive is "pure", purely profit or self-interest driven ... Sort of a cool, modern spin. One exception is the climax of T1 and T2, like Rick in Casablanca, he finally does the right thing just when the moment comes, it draws the hidden sliver of nobility out of him for a fleeting moment. But, you're right, it only makes sense as a romantic vision in the context of his fate. Without his fate putting him in a heroic situation, he's just anti-.
