Now that we've seen the last chapter of the HTTYD story, I want to expand upon a post a wrote way back comparing Hiccup, Valka, and Drago. This will be my attempt to analyze the mindset of each of these characters, especially in regard to the dragons that inhabit their world. This will contain spoilers, so please only read ahead if you've seen the third film!
First off, let's hit someone who I left out in the last time I posted about this topic: Stoick the Vast. In the first film, we Stoick as the first person Hiccup comes up against as a true opponent to his views of dragons (particularly Toothless). I believe Stoick sees dragons as pests... in fact, the voice over in the first film conveys that that is what the Vikings do see them as in one way or another. Now, they are very deadly pests who steal food, destroy homes, and on occasion kill. His job as chief is to find a way to be rid of them. He's not particularly bloodthirsty, he just wants to drive the beasts away. Now, that being said, it's not like he doesn't hold serious animosity against them. He has lost his wife to them, and when Hiccup throws his lot in with the dragons, it enrages Stoick and breaks his heart. However, at the end of the day, as both the third and first movie showed, Stoick would genuinely prefer just to end the fighting, not to eradicate the dragons. Hiccup changes his mind, but that was Stoick's original stance.
As I discussed before, Valka has a very deep understanding of dragons and their culture. In the second film, she has a low view of humanity, believing that no one is capable of change and that only people who are "born different" will ever bond with dragons. She sees being a dragon as being a superior form of life, a free life. In essence, I believe she sees dragons as being morally higher than humans. I doubt she would say that, but she is the very first one to run to Toothless's defense after he has killed Stoick. She notes that "bad people" make "good dragons" do wicked things. She sees dragons as good, moral beings. She's not completely wrong, but as Hiccup showed, she sells humanity short.
I doubt anyone missed you, Drago Bludvist. Drago, like Valka, has a much better understanding of dragon society than Stoick did in the first film. He also understood the Alpha system, a piece of knowledge that proved fatal when Hiccup confronted him. However, it seems very clear that Drago sees dragons as nothing more than tools. They are weapons, weapons of both physical violence and weapons of potent fear. He has a great understanding of how to make people react to dragons, and he uses that to keep his men in check. The reason Drago loses, in the end, is because he thinks that dragons are simple animals that he can use and control. He doesn't account for the emotional, thinking, moral side of the creatures, and this allows Toothless and Hiccup to eventually defeat him.
Then we get Hiccup. In the first film, Hiccup found friendship in a dragon. He was able to look into Toothless's eyes and see himself. He related to the beast, and this started a transformation in his thinking that would change everything. Hiccup believes dragons are equal to humans. He treats them fairly, and he cares about every life. He is not naive, he does know the dangers of dealing with them, but he feels it is worth the risk. He wants to bring the worlds of dragons and humans together. In the third film, he has to change his goal... but only for a time. In the end, he still believes humans can change. It may take time, but he's willing to guard the secret. He still sees hope in both species. He was willing to be one of the first people to embrace the dragons, and at the same time, he's one of the few people who still genuinely hold onto the hope that all humans and dragons can live in peace.
Finally, we have Grimmel, the darkest side of humanity. Grimmel has been analyzed in depth by many fellow fans on Tumblr, so many of the points I make here will be parroting what you may have already read. Grimmel sees dragons as equals, and that is what is so frightening. Unlike every other opponent, Hiccup has faced: there is nothing he can do to "show" Grimmel his way of thinking. People in the past have seen them as pests or tools, but Grimmel sees them as direct competition. Humans aren't superior, humans only have a foothold now because they have fought for it! If Hiccup's teaching goes unchallenged, Grimmel believes that dragons will take everything he and others have fought for... a world where humanity rules. He fears the dragons, not because he doesn't understand them, but because he does. He hates them because they are "other". He hates them because they are a threat beyond just stealing food and burning down houses. He accuses them of theft and murder. You don't do that to an animal. No, in Grimmel's mind, the ongoing fight between dragons and humans is an inevitable battle for survival between equals. He zealously fights for his side of this conflict, and he's willing to openly deny Hiccup's hopes for peace. He's the anti- Hiccup. Not Drago, not Viggo, not Dagur. Grimmel is what Hiccup could have become if he had killed a Night Fury. Hiccup and Grimmel are both incredibly smart. They both came to realize the equality of dragons, but one of them went down a dark path after feeling the praise and acceptance that followed killing a Night Fury. That is why Grimmel is dangerous. He may not have the deadliest weapons or the most powerful dragons (honestly, as far as force is concerned, Drago outgunned him in almost every way), but he does have the most deadly worldview. His way of thinking is why the dragons must go away... and until his worldview goes extinct, the Berkians will keep the dragons secret and hidden.
So, that's my spill. So many ways of viewing these amazing creatures! Pests, superiors, tools, equals, or competition. The way you look at something has a huge impact on this kind of conflict!
No comments:
Post a Comment