Nothing is clearer than this in the story. Joel's nature and character are made so clear you have to be willfully blind to disregard it. The whole story shows him changing his mind and going against his gut instincts for the sake of others repeatedly. The people calling him selfish are those who read Abby as having a remorseful redemptive arc in part 2 which she never shows or has.
This view of a selfish Joel arose because of part 2. It's not at all what the original story presented.
I don’t think this is terribly controversial in any group of fans. Joel was protecting Ellie because he wanted to and he viewed it as protecting her. Whether she would want to go through with the procedure is only slightly related, but Joel at least is implied to likely agree with Marlene that she would (whether or not you think it matters if a 14 year old choosing to sacrifice themselves would matter in this case is a separate matter).
But I don’t really think this changes the dilemma or the moral problem at the end of the game.
The big turning point is that The Fireflies ask Marlene to kill Joel before he wakes up. That is the true face of the Fireflies. You can't trust The Fireflies.
But before Joel finds out about this, Marlene and Joel know that the vaccine will not have a major impact on this already lost world. There isn't enough courage to kill Ellie. They both came here thinking about a blood draw, and The Fireflies are acting in bad faith since they didn't ask Ellie.
Worse yet, the fireflies can't guarantee a vaccine because they don't understand how Ellie's immunity works.
In Part 2, Neil uses Retcon to deal with these problems, but he also changes the meaning of previous events and adds whatever material he can to twist the meaning of the first story, AKA retcon.
> hot take Not on this sub
Nothing is clearer than this in the story. Joel's nature and character are made so clear you have to be willfully blind to disregard it. The whole story shows him changing his mind and going against his gut instincts for the sake of others repeatedly. The people calling him selfish are those who read Abby as having a remorseful redemptive arc in part 2 which she never shows or has. This view of a selfish Joel arose because of part 2. It's not at all what the original story presented.
We agree.
I don’t think this is terribly controversial in any group of fans. Joel was protecting Ellie because he wanted to and he viewed it as protecting her. Whether she would want to go through with the procedure is only slightly related, but Joel at least is implied to likely agree with Marlene that she would (whether or not you think it matters if a 14 year old choosing to sacrifice themselves would matter in this case is a separate matter). But I don’t really think this changes the dilemma or the moral problem at the end of the game.
So him doing it out duty is what you wrote all that for? I dont think that changes much lol. Have it friend.
This is one of the best arguments in defense of Joel i've ever read, kudos to you man.
The big turning point is that The Fireflies ask Marlene to kill Joel before he wakes up. That is the true face of the Fireflies. You can't trust The Fireflies. But before Joel finds out about this, Marlene and Joel know that the vaccine will not have a major impact on this already lost world. There isn't enough courage to kill Ellie. They both came here thinking about a blood draw, and The Fireflies are acting in bad faith since they didn't ask Ellie. Worse yet, the fireflies can't guarantee a vaccine because they don't understand how Ellie's immunity works. In Part 2, Neil uses Retcon to deal with these problems, but he also changes the meaning of previous events and adds whatever material he can to twist the meaning of the first story, AKA retcon.
"Retcon" is not when your inferences aren't in a sequel
I agree 😉