Link being a silent protagonist definitely doesn't help, I imagine. While I haven't personally played a Zelda game since Ocarina of Time, I have kept up with the series via others' posts and YouTube playthroughs, and it bothers me that while the worldbuilding and lore in later games became more complex, Link essentially remained the same. I get that he's supposed to be a blank slate for the player to project onto, but that places him further and further out of touch with the actual events playing out around him, until he's more of a machine than a character, and I can't even begin to imagine what must be going on in that pretty little head of his.
And addressing your follow-up post here, too, the developers' choice to change Ganondorf from a blue pig-demon cursed into that form as a punishment for his greed (which already carries plenty of its own negative connoations) to a recognizably human character with darker skin than our heroes' whose motivations are more political in nature (as opposed to the generic bad-guy "I want everyone to suffer" motivation) set up an uncomfortable dichotomy that is simply reinforced with each iteration of his character. Just as Link is set up as the hero by default, Ganon is always assigned as the personification of evil, with no hope for change. "Light, good; dark, bad." It's a played-out trope that, even disregarding its relevance to real-world politics, undermines the move to more complex narratives and lore. It would be nice to see different, nuanced interactions between the three principal players in Zelda stories. (Hell, even Bowser got a chance to be a "good" guy in Super Mario RPG! I'm sure Ganondorf would welcome the chance to not be the designated punching bag for a change, as well.)
All of this to say that I definitely see where you're coming from, and that perhaps the most problematic aspect of the way the Link & Zelda & Ganondorf relationship has developed is others' refusal to see any problem with it at all.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2025-03-12 09:00 pm (UTC)And addressing your follow-up post here, too, the developers' choice to change Ganondorf from a blue pig-demon cursed into that form as a punishment for his greed (which already carries plenty of its own negative connoations) to a recognizably human character with darker skin than our heroes' whose motivations are more political in nature (as opposed to the generic bad-guy "I want everyone to suffer" motivation) set up an uncomfortable dichotomy that is simply reinforced with each iteration of his character. Just as Link is set up as the hero by default, Ganon is always assigned as the personification of evil, with no hope for change. "Light, good; dark, bad." It's a played-out trope that, even disregarding its relevance to real-world politics, undermines the move to more complex narratives and lore. It would be nice to see different, nuanced interactions between the three principal players in Zelda stories. (Hell, even Bowser got a chance to be a "good" guy in Super Mario RPG! I'm sure Ganondorf would welcome the chance to not be the designated punching bag for a change, as well.)
All of this to say that I definitely see where you're coming from, and that perhaps the most problematic aspect of the way the Link & Zelda & Ganondorf relationship has developed is others' refusal to see any problem with it at all.