I ran into a new iteration of the “but who was the real bad guy of MW? Thief King had such good reasons!/he deserved to be in the last shot of the manga with everyone else/doesn’t he deserve a happy ending” argument and well. Argh.
Protip: seems to me a lot of what he…
I’m going to have to agree with this wholeheartedly and add my own two cents.
Thief King was insane. No arguing this. By the point he gets the Ring he has caused so much pain and destruction on his own there is no arguing he should burn in hell.
I don’t think he ever tried to convince himself he was the one really bringing justice. It was not about justice, it was about vengeance, and that’s all it mattered to him.
He never had morals to begin with, and from the moment Kul Elna happened, I’m pretty sure he went insane and would have grown up fucked up and twisted no matter what.
I still think what he had to suffer through was the most horrifying background story of all the series and it’s not fair, but even if in the end he was a pawn, he was an evil, corrupted pawn. He was not any more redeemable than Yami Bakura or Yami Malik. Or the normal Malik, because I’m not going to pretend the little fucker is redeemable at all either.
I agree but at the same time… I don’t think enough credit is given? To TKB or some fans? I usually read it as ‘TKB could’ve turned out better if the slaughter didn’t happen’ - and, sociology and criminology considered, this is pretty much fact. An orphaned kid facing poverty and starvation, with his background - I feel like tombrobbing was the logical next step for someone with his abilities. There wasn’t exactly career counseling back then!
Another thing - Diabound. In the manga, there’s an exposition about the different types and levels of ka. It came down to this - a sinner with a powerful ka would possess a ‘demon’ ka, and a righteous person would have a ‘god’ ka. Diabound, when he first came to the palace, was (to the shock of the priests) considered a ‘god ka’ - that meaning that there actually may be some evidence of him believing in his speech on justice - when he first says it. After, of course - well, the Ring has a greater toll on him than the priests and the Pharaoh, but I think that also has something to do with Zorc, the fact that he was finally challenging the royals after years of thinking about it, and he would’ve been in a very vulnerable emotional state because of that.
… There’s a part three now, apparently. XD; I also think there’s evidence that the Ring wasn’t the first time he was exposed to darkness. He knew about Zorc before coming to the palace and yes, he knew about the darkness in the items - but how, if the closest he’d ever gotten to them was when they were first made, and had never personally seen them in action since? Simple - he was told. And it should be pretty obvious who told him. So while I’m not saying that it makes him a hero, I think he could still fall under ‘hero who lost his path’ (admittedly, from a very early age).
Lastly, don’t forget this isn’t a story that takes place in a modern age - these are characters that existed in a time where ‘eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’ was considered acceptable justice and honour was everything, including proper burial of the dead. So in his mind, these citizens, who worship the living God on earth, basically fall under his rule in the end - so this is just him evening the score.
I think this is the time that I need to put a disclaimer that I still don’t condone his actions. 8D;;;; Empathize with him? Yes. And… want to give him a happy ending? … Probably, yeah.