I understand; I just don't think making Elaida a Darkfriend automatically or necessarily does that.

Almost no-one who does things that are judged to be evil views those things in that light, because, as Sheev Palpatine said to Anakin, "good is a point of view", and that truism would exist even in a world where Absolute Good and Absolute Evil exist in equal measure (at least in my opinion).

Genuine question time: would you mind giving me some examples? I think the degree to which this is true depends on what you think Jordan's thematic aims are/were (which is a subject I have no real position on given that I didn't like the WoT books that I've read).

Which, from my personal point of view, would be as equally valid a choice as the alternative and still offer avenues for exploring the overall thematic nature of the story. But, again, to each their own.

@Elder_Haman To each their own. I personally think that there's absolutely a world in which the 'Tower Schism' storyline could work and be compelling, nuanced, and thematically resonant with one side of it representing the Light and the other representing the Shadow.

@SinisterDeath @Elder_Haman Making all of the Sisters - including Elaida - who were directly involved in deposing and executing Siuan Darkfriends would be a narratively simplistic decision that alleviates the question of how the 3 Oaths apply (they wouldn't), gives a clearly delineated moral objectivity to those opposing Elaida's actions (even from afar), and makes it very simple for a character like Moiraine to at least temporarily step into any storylines that involve bringing Elaida down one way or another. I'm not necessarily explicitly saying that Rafe and his team did any of this, but don't think that it's entirely inconceivable that they could/might have.

I want to clarify that when I talked about every person who was complicit in Siuan's deposing and death being a Darkfriend, I was including Elaida.

Siuan was accused and convicted, but with only the most base air of legitimacy... hence my statements from earlier about how none of Elaida's actions in ascending to the Seat actually hold up under scrutiny and about why it's not inconceivable that every person who was complicit in Siuan's deposing and bore witness to/was present for her execution is a Darkfriend.

If Josha doesn't announce something at the Con he's appearing at this weekend in Europe, Amazon is holding its Upfronts presentation on May 12th, which would be, in my mind, the absolute latest we'd hear something one way or another.

Siuan's words might have momentarily rattled Elaida, but the key word there is 'momentarily'.

Perceived conflict resolution on Siuan's part, like I said. None of Elaida's actions in ascending to the Amrylin Seat would honestly pass intense scrutiny, which is entirely the point from a Meta perspective.

It is for me. It wouldn't be that outrageous of a thing to do - in terms of narrative simplicity - to make every person in the Hall at the time of Siuan's execution - including Elaida - Darkfriends. What's confusing about it? Siuan chose to view it as conflict resolution; Elaida didn't.

Mentioning something and then immediately moving away from discussing it further is the literal opposite of 'going down a rabbit hole'. Re: the Three Oaths, I'm of the opinion that trying to get extremely granular and precisely parse what does or doesn't count as a violation of any of them is just a waste of time. The fact that we've seen Aes Sedai do things with the One Power that seem like they shouldn't be able to do based on the Three Oaths is, for me, all the proof that is needed that said actions are not in fact a violation of said Oaths. Having just said all that, though, there is a very simple explanation to justify Alvieren being able to execute Siuan in the way that she did: she (Alvieren) is a Darkfriend herself.

When/if we get more seasons, Moiraine's death is still coming, and it's still most likely going to be permanent once it happens.

It's not my definition; it's the definition. So whether or not you agree with it is irrelevant.

@Walker012 The fact that you didn't like Siuan's death doesn't make it an example of the Fridging trope. Yes, Siuan's death serves as the catalyst that powers an element of Moiraine's storyline this season, but they did not kill her solely to motivate Moiraine. There's also the simple fact that Moiraine is not a man, and the trope of Fridging is literally dependent on a female character being harmed solely to motivate a male character.

As @Elder_Haman said, what happened we with Siuan does not in any way fall into the definition of Fridging. If one is looking to negatively label the decision to kill Siuan by lumping it into Trope territory, it could be construed as falling into the category of Bury Your Gays, although I don't have any interest in going down that particular rabbit hole because I don't think it's either appropriate or applicable to do so.

Picking 5 actually wasn't that hard. Sword Art Online Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood Sailor Moon Crystal Attack on Titan B: The Beginning Honorable mentions go to Robotech, Ronin Warriors, and Digimon (English seasons 1, 2, and 4 specifically) because they're the three Animes that I was first exposed to and fell in love with. And, yes, Robotech qualifies as an Anime by the Internationally-applied definition of that genre.

I'm surprised that nobody else has replied to this thread yet. I just finished watching the second episode, and it's rather unfortunate timing that this one aired less than 5 days after WoT did because of things that happen(ed) in both shows (IYKYK).

No, they didn't.

I disagree. I'm aware of one diehard book fan for whom Siuan's death is of significant impact relative to their understanding and comprehension of where the story is supposed to go (and who explicitly described Siuan as a "load-bearing" character), and am fully anticipating that at least one Show-Only viewer who is part of a podcast that I listen to is going to have a very strong (and possibly 'fandom-breaking') reaction to the character's death as well.

I have a feeling that because it keeps happening, this will always be an element of the show's writing that some people are going to dislike. I did think it was important, though, to define said element for what it actually is - Temporary Peril - rather than what it isn't, which is 'fakeout death'.

It really isn't. I'm not sure how familiar you might be with the old radio or TV Serial format, but one of the things that those programs almost always did was to repeatedly leave their characters in Temporary Peril cliffhanger situations that would pretty quickly be rectified/resolved by the next time audiences saw said characters. WoT having characters end up with life-threatening injuries that get quickly healed is in the spirit of the old Serial Cliffhanger storytelling, but it has also started becoming a crutch that is kind of detrimental to the believability of what they're trying to do due to the fact that WoT isn't formatted like an old Serial.

Putting characters in mortal danger and then quickly resolving that danger does not equal 'fakeout death'. Was it fair to pull back on Moiraine's death after 'Chechov's Gun'-ning it all season? That's debatable, but it did allow them to swerve us all with Siuan's death.

I didn't really want to talk about this earlier, but the show did give us a "Ned Stark moment", just with a character that nobody was expecting.