Billy Hargrove fandom I love you. You are the only safe space in this cursed fandom❤️

I completely agree with you regarding S&B. Alina’s character was wasted and I still have no idea why she was a main character when she ended up doing nothing important or really changing things in any meaningful way. I don’t know if you’ve already read it but I highly recommend reading Demon in the Woods. It’s the only story where we really see from Aleksander’s POV(until the trash duology)and it’s really heartbreaking what he does through as a child. If I’m not wrong the show planned to also adapt it but they didn’t for budget reasons but imagine if they had shown his traumatic childhood+creation of the Fold...

My whole thing is that I'm fine with Aleksander being a villain because how one wields is definitely important, regardless of what kind of trauma they've got going on in their history, but I am just absolutely baffled by the thematic intent of this series. It's entirely fair for Alina to be furious and upset about her enslavement, but for her to have absolutely no empathy for what drove him to where he is now or what's happened to the other Grisha and to stay that way over the course of her entire journey is just...well, it begs the question why is she the heroine? There's nothing really heroic or moral about her journey if she's going to wind up right back where she started, running away from power and responsibility. That can be a protagonist's journey, sure, but it's not a heroic one.

Saying "power makes monsters" is fine as a theme if the characters in question are people who have always wielded power in a society. It becomes a lot more complicated when you're dealing with an oppressed minority, and especially when you show repeatedly that they're still suffering state violence at both the hands of enemy countries and their own people. Having a fancy palace with nice clothes and food and military training is not a privilege that replaces your ability to move about a society safely or wield real political power, which they explicitly do not.

If she wanted to write a story warning women about falling for men with tragic backstories who have no intention of doing the work of improving what their trauma did to them, that's fine, but then you actually have to make her empathetic. The point of connection has to be her feelings of sympathy for what he's been through. Alina isn't empathetic. Her attraction to Aleksander in the book is based on power and mystery, and in the show it's based on emerging confidence and a boldness that he inspires in her. It's not wholly based on the tragedy of his heritage or a sympathetic connection nor do we see him actively playing on that much beyond the first scene where he claims to be the descendant. Moreover, after he's revealed to be the Black Heretic, he doesn't weaponize the pain and grief associated with that history, either, even though that would mirror a common abuse tactic and be an underhanded way to undermine her confidence and make her second-guess her own ethical intent. It doesn't work here because the writing is so focused on making her tough and independent, it doesn't let her be weak or make mistakes in a meaningful way that resonates with the reader.

(Want to see a villain who does this well to a woman? See Billy Russo in Season 1 of The Punisher. Also played by Ben Barnes, ironically enough!)

If she wanted to do a story about radicalization of victims of state violence, then she needed to go more ethically complicated in the narrative. Her protagonists needed to have real conversations with themselves and others about what the resolution of this problem with the Grisha is and how the current situation created a monster in the first place. There needed to be a real dialogue back and forth examining both sides of it, whether violence against the state is ever acceptable if the state persistently insists on actively attacking a minority or outright neglecting them. In this case, it's unsurprising an Israeli-American author doesn't want to ask the serious question, "Does every participant in a society hold responsibility for the atrocities of the powerful if they aren't actively fighting it?" Disappointing, but I'm not surprised, since that's a more direct moral interrogation than most people prefer for themselves.

Which leads into the other part that a story like that also requires a serious moral evolution on the part of the protagonist. They have to be changed by the villain, empathize with them, grow to have a sense of responsibility to changing what created the conditions that bred this evil in the first place. She can still have Alina struggle with the power high she gets from the amplifiers, but make it more complicated than hurr hurr lady bad for wanting power. Ask us to empathize with how Alina has felt in her past as a helpless victim of prejudice. Show us how power gave her the ability to change things she couldn't before.

In other words, it can't leave things at status quo. It acknowledges that status quo is what created the problem in the first place. The problem is that Alina's fate in the books doesn't do that. It actually reflects a moral cowardice to some extent if you want to be brutally honest about it.

(Want to see where this is done well? See Kilmonger in Black Panther. The Star Wars prequels, while less elegantly accomplished, are a good example of how to create a story where the moral decay of a society creates evil.)

Lastly...she could have done a story about the nature of heroism, about whether it's fair to ask one person to carry the burden of saving the world. That could have also been a thoughtful back and forth on the nature of power and whether it breeds responsibility along with it in terms of how its wielded. Does Alina have a right to walk away? Does she have the right to say, "I don't want this destiny?"

(Want to see this done well? See Peter Parker in the Spiderman films featuring Toby Maguire. Yes, even the last one, which is trash, but is still thematically and morally consistent with the other two films.)

Etc, etc. These are all three different moral journeys her protagonists could have on, but it feels like she tried to do variations on all three and just kind of hit a wall because they're all inconsistent with each other. "Power = bad" isn't really a meaningful theme, not when your story hinges on people needing power to create change and when your villain is somebody who had to claw his way to the top to get it after years of suffering genocide and prejudice.