There’s an interesting little forum topic on SF about Ike at the moment, and shockingly it has nothing to do with his sexuality. To use the OP’s tl;dr:
Ike’s framing leads to him fulfilling both lesser symptoms or terrible cliches of ‘chosen one’ arcs, yet he supposedly is supposed to be a common merc who accomplishes greatness upon his own merit.
This isn’t a completely new thesis; maybe it’s just that FE15′s portrayal of Alm is giving some of us reason to re-examine the lord to whom he owes a portion of his new characterization. However, this line of discussion when coupled with my recent exposure to Jugdral canon left me wondering about FE’s series-wide political themes and how Tellius fits into them.
Whenever anyone praises Ike’s simplistic political stance (that he borrows from certain laguz cultures*, as someone later in that topic points out), my immediate rebuttal is to recall that Tellius is also the setting that gives us Ashnard, the self-made king who murdered his way to the throne and then proceeded to set off on a tour of worldwide conquest with no apparent plan of governance for his new (or even old) territory. That’s quite a powerful counterargument for the stance that Tellius advocates egalitarianism, much less democracy.
Ike, Ashnard, and the laguz royals remind me in many ways of Judral’s holy blood mechanic, how the cast of those games is divided into (mostly) noble or royal characters with holy blood and a bunch of nobodies without. You could probably even draw a parallel between the growth and weapon rank bonuses awarded by holy blood and FE4 and the laguz royals getting Formshift and unique classes and weapons that make them unquestionably superior to non-royal laguz on a gameplay level. Ike himself may still be the poster boy** for that sort of mentality whereby you can be and do anything purely by strength and hard work because he’s not nobility or even Branded (which is what holy blood in Jugdral effectively is) and rejects positions of leadership in the end to go roaming the world with his boyfriend, but the setting as a whole doesn’t actually support that kind of thing on any kind of large scale.
Basically I’m coming to see more and more that Ike is substantially more complicated on a narrative and thematic level than his characterization would suggest, and that he’s all too easy to reduce to one idea, whether that’s
- the OP badass of his games and supplementary material, beloved of SSB players with insecurities who enjoy bashing the other FE reps for being comparatively effete,
- the non-straight protagonist who still pisses off a not-insignificant portion of the fanbase because he’s not interested in sleeping with Elincia or some other woman,
- (I’m guilty of this one) or the disrespectful upstart who embodies the worst of Anglo-American ideology and who gets largely sheltered from the consequences of his lack of his tact by the narrative.
There’s just something about the guy that always seems to generate debate. I don’t know if I’ll ever write full-on Ike meta (what’s even left to talk about that someone hasn’t brought up?), but I’ve certainly come close enough a few times including this post to where it might be a consideration at some point.
*And for all that Ike is in love with laguz societies, it’s worth remembering too that they engage in their share of nepotism/hereditary rule as well. Skrimir, the nephew to the king of Gallia, is being groomed to be the next king, and both the heron and dragon laguz seem to have traditional hereditary monarchies. FE10′s Part 3 also takes some time to deconstruct the more primal aspects of Gallia’s political and military structure, as they’re placed at a disadvantage in their war against Begnion on account of their excessive aggression.
**Somewhat muted by the fact that Ike isn’t really a nobody. He’s the son of one of Daein’s Four Riders and the woman who was hand-picked by a heron princess to carry Tellius’s Fire Emblem because of her supernatural balance powers. That may not be a noble pedigree, but it’s undeniably special.