Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Malevolent: Chapter 223 [POLL] (Patreon)

Published:
2024-07-25 11:00:09
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Poll

Malevolent: Chapter 223 [POLL]

  • Yes, He Deserves to Die 132
  • No, He Does Not Deserve to Die 294
  • 2024-07-22
  • 426 votes
{'title': 'Malevolent: Chapter 223 [POLL]', 'choices': [{'text': 'Yes, He Deserves to Die', 'votes': 132}, {'text': 'No, He Does Not Deserve to Die', 'votes': 294}], 'closes_at': None, 'created_at': datetime.datetime(2024, 7, 22, 21, 56, 45, tzinfo=datetime.timezone.utc), 'description': None, 'allow_multiple': False, 'total_votes': 426}

Comments

Amanda

im scared

Michaela

hey….im shaking in my boots deciding this poll

Benjamin Wigler

Honestly the kid could have had it coming, could be a demon child.

LCAO

This question isn't really as black and white as yes or no, I feel like whatever we say will be wrong 🤣😨😨

Marknado

Each poll getting more and more stressful, I just got back from vacation Harlan!

Broth Mirepoix

Deserving death doesn't necessitate death, if that makes any sense.

Marknado

Before Arthur has said he deserves to die for letting faroe die. Since then he has learned to forgive himself somewhat but idk if that changes his mind

Nebiha Guiga

Feeling like saying no runs less risk of Malam jut killing someone before whe know what the hell is going on, tbh.

Heather Bruce

I hate all of this. But I feel Arthur would still say yes. It's scary to say but that's where his heart is right now. He hasn't let go of that guilt. Not yet. Probably not ever. Larson deserved death for his children. Arthur isn't the only one with a checkered past. We should be honest.

Wyrm

the whole arc in season 3 was about how the answer is no

Nicky
>>144626136

Was it? Did Arthur internalize that? Would he consider that when answering this stranger?

Nicky
>>144626136

Also, Toinette made a good comment in Discord poll chat: “Does he deserve to die?” Is a different question from “Should he be killed?”

Laura A Moore

You vote No because you think this question is in reference to Arthur and Larson I vote Yes because I want to see if this guy bites our face off I am in the minority ;;

Amy

I’m voting no. Not just because I genuinely don’t think Arthur deserves to die, but because I firmly believe in the concept of redemption, growth, and change.

Siegfried
>>144634867

you may be in the minority but you made me laugh out loud so at least there's that :p

Jones

Why I'm voting for yes (it's a losing battle but I must try!): Every time that Arthur has been presented with this question in the past he's made his opinion abundantly clear: that someone who hurts a child deserves to die. This is such a core trait/flaw of Arthur's - it's his biggest trauma, and fundamental to his character. Because this is so foundational to so much of Arthur's character, if he’s going to change his mind on this, to me it would be much more satisfying if we got to see it happen, for example because of a back and forth conversation where someone is pushing back on him, than if he'd come to the conclusion quietly on his own. Especially because I'm not convinced that anything that's happened between when this topic last came up would have changed his opinion. In episode 36, when Oscar tells his story about how he attacked McKenna, the priest who abused his childhood friend, he snaps at John for suggesting Oscar could be in the wrong, and very firmly states that anyone who hurts a child deserves to be killed: ARTHUR (heated): Wrong? Killing someone who would do that to a child, are you kidding? JOHN: And that makes killing justified. ARTHUR (lashing out): Don’t! You don’t understand! Not about this. In episode 40, just 3 days ago to Arthur, he repeats the exact same sentiment as he chokes Larson: ARTHUR: You murderer! You monster! You villain! You… You… child-killer! You don’t deserve to live! JOHN: Arthur! ARTHUR: Faroe! (High-pitched.) Faroe…! These both take place after The Bedrock, where John confronts him about his suicidal tendencies, as well as after Scratch's nightmare where Arthur admits he has to let go of his guilt. Neither of these events were enough to make Arthur budge from his black and white mentality. I don't even think he'd say “no” as a lie to try to appease this stranger, because in Arthur's mind why would anyone want to hear no? To him it's very clear cut that of course the answer is yes. To be clear I'm NOT trying to say that “no” would be necessarily out of character. If it's an option in the vote then it's plausible for the character to say it. But if this weren’t a vote and instead I was just being asked what I’d think Arthur would say next, I would think he'd say yes. “Yes” definitely isn't the nicer answer, it's unforgiving and black and white and doesn't leave room for nuance. It's not what I'd say. But it's what I think Arthur would say, and has said with no hesitation previously. It feels much more true to his character to me, and because of that I also think it suits the story more.

Charlie Keen
>>144646012

But I mean, he's projecting his own self hatred onto those other killers. His actions show he believes he deserves to live

Sophie
>>144646012

This comment did cause me to change my vote from no to yes. I want to answer "no" because it feels, strategically, like the safer answer and is also what I personally feel, but you're right that all of Arthur's characterization so far indicates his answer is yes. That being said, if "no" wins I wonder if John will answer the question instead - the poll doesn't say that our answer will be what Arthur will say.

RoryMarkal

Arthur has repeatedly shown that people who kill children deserve to die, including himself. However, just because one deserves it, doesn't mean it's the justice the child deserves. A life for a life, that's just basic stuff, right? But. Sometimes having to live with your guilt, having to live on despite everything, sometimes that's worse. And sometimes, if it's the right person, it's the type of "punishment" that fits the crime. Not to say death isn't deserved, but it isn't always the justice that's advertised. Anyway, that's why I'm voting yes, however there is a big 'but' there.

RoryMarkal
>>144646012

Not necessarily. He's said in a previous chapter that he "must live on because she can't" but no where stated he 'deserves' it. He's also stated multiple times about his own selfishness and self-importance, and he's nuanced that he lives because of that. And because he didn't want to inflict the pain of the aftermath of suicide even on those he barely knows, because he knows how terrible that pain is. Which, by the way, also means he considered suicide. It's my strong opinion that as of now, he doesn't live because he thinks he deserves it in any way.

Dustin
>>144646012

My thoughts exactly, perfectly articulated. I was surprised the answer was so heavily in favor of “no” when it would be out of character for Arthur to disagree with it. Plus, he’s already died a few times, so he’s paid his due I suppose 😅

light4ghosts

voting as Arthur, the only correct answer I think is yes. He has repeatedly displayed that that's what he believes. However, the argument could be made that he knows deep down that they shouldn't die but I think he still believes that they *deserve* to

the_algid

If he says no, he will be lying. Arthur knows that people who kill children deserve to die, it's one of his core beliefs (supporting Oscar, making killing Larson a goal, his own feelings towards himself). The question is if he should lie or not, and Arthur isn't one to lie unless under extreme circumstances. Vote yes, we have a responsibility to be as in character as we can

the_algid
>>144700174

Also it's reasonable to wish death on child murderers, saying no sounds like tour justifing murder, and in my eyes saying No is a bigger threat then saying Yes. People don't want children killed, so the safe option is to say they do deserve death

Rook

Malam, buddy, you couldn't ask a less intense question? We just met. "What do you think the moral implications of infanticide are?" is a second date discussion at least. I'm voting yes just because it's how Arthur actually feels.

Queen
>>144646012

No isn’t out of character. No poll options are ever out of character or they wouldn’t be options.

Jones
>>144646012

Thats why I specified this: “To be clear I'm NOT trying to say that “no” would be necessarily out of character. If it's an option in the vote then it's plausible for the character to say it. But if this weren’t a vote and instead I was just being asked what I’d think Arthur would say next, I would think he'd say yes.” But I do still think that “yes” makes much more sense for Arthur's character. In the past there have been other choices that, while options, wouldn't have made as much sense for Arthur to pick. The one that comes to mind is the vote for what memory Arthur would lose. Dani(‘s) mom wrote a very beautiful comment back for that vote about how Arthur wouldn't choose to lose the memory of Faroe at the duck pond, and while it could have been in character as it was an option, I think that it would have consequently felt a bit odd in the story. I'm applying the same logic to this vote. Arthur has literally said out loud in the very recent past that his opinion is that people who hurt children should die, and I don't think anything has happened since then to change his mind.

Fisher

i’m throwing out my take for “no” because i know Arthur’s truly not forgiven himself. i don’t think he ever will be able to despite obviously making some kind of progress due to John. but “not forgiving himself” for Faroe’s death doesn’t equal Arthur thinking he deserves to die, still. isn’t there something he says about that at one point - how it’s his duty to carry his guilt with him and continue on because she can’t? season 3 was all about this. i feel like Arthur’s instinctual, emotionally driven response to this question would be “yes, of course!” hes said as much in season 4 with Oscar’s story and Larson. these were both two really intensely emotional moments, which makes complete sense. however, if given a moment to truly contemplate, i think he will think back to all that John said to him in 26. i believe at his core he has changed his mind but has not yet had a moment to express it openly.

Queen

Counterpoints to voting yes “Yes is not interesting to me personally.”/”Yes is the more interesting option to me.”/”Yes would make for a more interesting dynamic.” There’s nothing I can say to change your mind then. Bye! “Malam could find justification in killing or hurting Arthur for saying no.” Same with yes! He could just as easily think Arthur is a threat to him (maybe he killed a child? knows someone who did?) and go for the jugular. It is equally as likely because we know so little about Malam so far. Worrying about how he will react to the yes/no is fruitless imo. “Malam could be talking about himself and want us to say yes.” See above. Malam could also want us to say no because he wants forgiveness, he wants to be free of his guilt, or he knows someone who he wants to save/bring back. We know too little about Malam to worry about his response. “Arthur hasn’t forgiven himself for what happened to Faroe, so his answer would be yes.” If you believe he has not made any progress with regards to his feelings about Faroe's death, you could also say that he sees death as a release or escape from the heavy load of carrying her death with him. He is committed to carrying on and keeping that loss close in his heart "because she can't", direct quote from Part 18. I do not think death is the ultimate punishment and, especially after experiencing it himself now, I do not think Arthur does either. Arthur knows his responsibility to keep living for her involves continuing to hold the weight of his guilt and suffering. His desire to kill others for their crimes is a reflection of his anger at himself, not a reflection of what he wants for himself. “Arthur wanted Larson to die for killing and sacrificing his children.” Yes, because Larson willfully and knowingly scorned multiple opportunities to keep his children safe and alive, something Arthur would give anything to have back again. The desire and decision to kill Larson out of self-projection and vengeance had less to do with the fact that Larson killed a child, and more to do with the fact that Larson was a father who willfully and knowingly gave up what Arthur wishes he could have better protected. “Arthur defended Oscar in his justification for attacking that priest who killed a child.” Again, we're talking about willful harm to children, and abusive behavior toward children by completely cognizant adults. What happened to Faroe was a tragic accident and mistake. Arthur is responsible for negligence, not malice. There is a difference and significant nuance in Arthur's feelings toward adults who make the CHOICE to hurt children. Arthur didn't choose to let Faroe die, and he never would have. “It suits the story more.” Malevolent is and always has been about grief, loss, hope, renewal, and life. I disagree that a theme of hope or rebirth would not also fit here. Arthur has changed significantly, he has gone through deep lows, he has had to lean on John to pull himself back up from the depths right in front of us. He has learned. I think hearing arthur finally, FINALLY say "no" and remember that Faroe is the REASON to live- that she would not want him to die, she would not want him to be so anguished he couldn't carry on- would be so good here. Would carry hope into the final season of Malevolent. This story is about JOHN now, it's about HIS journey. Arthur has had several seasons to work things out. I want to give him narrative permission to move on so John can find his light. Nicky said: The question is about killing a child, not failing to protect a child / being debatably responsible for their death. I don’t think the question really centers around the situation of Arthur and Faroe To which I responded: The question asked is still filtered through what Arthur's mind is going to interpret it as. If he believes he killed Faroe, sees negligence as a murder weapon, then yes, I do think this could still relate to Arthur and Faroe. Of course, if this man were asking anyone other than Arthur I would literally agree that the objective answer is yes because a child drowning due to a distracted adult's wandering mind is not the same as killing a child the way Larson did. I am using the lens of Arthur and his journey to interpret the question because Arthur is the one being asked.

Marknado

Cmon guys let’s flip this we should really be saying YES to this

Pan

I'm copy pasting this from the discord poll chat but... This is more just wistful thinking on my part but I think to the people who say that they want John to be the one to talk Arthur into growth: John's whole choice in episode 43 was made without Arthur to fully guide him to it. And for that Arthur told him he was proud of him. The boys help each other respectively, yes, but Arthur should be allowed to make this pivotal change himself. And who's to say John won't say he's proud of Arthur afterwards? What this choice makes me think of (and this is just me applying things personally) is in mental health recovery a big part of it is that you have to be the one to make that choice yourself. Others can lead you close to that point but ultimately unless you make that decision yourself, to put it bluntly things won't ever fully change. And yes there can still be step backs along that way but that's all part of the healing process. And if there is any golden opportunity to really see Arthur make that decision of growing around his grief in a question he will more than likely take personally (BJ himself even says so) this is it

Harriet B

The stranger introduced the question with, "a man kills a child", not "a man murders a child". If a child runs out between two parked cars (ok, wagons in the 1300's), and a man driving by does not have time to brake before hitting the child. Does he deserve to die? A soldier throws a bomb (a trebuchet throws a large boulder) at an unseen enemy, and a child is killed. Does he deserve to die? Kill and murder can be different.