So, Wandavision?

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Wanda wasn't the villain of this series. If you watched it and came to that conclusion, you watched it incorrectly. Hayward was a villain. He wanted to kill a grieving woman who was unconsciously acting out in her highly traumatic past, and her innocent family, because he wanted a super-bot that could give him whatever he wanted. Agatha Harkness was a villain. She was exploiting and gaslighting a grieving woman for her own selfish desire to have Wanda's power, and was willing to kill Wanda and her family in order to get what she wanted.

In this show, the real villains are the ones that want to harm/exploit Wanda. Wanda did mess up and caused a lot of trauma in her own grief, however, she did not try to or mean to do what she did. She doesn't need anyone else to try and force more punishments onto her for her actions, she has already received them. She lost her family. She gave up everything she ever wanted in exchange for the wellbeing of everyone she was imprisoning in the Hex. It doesn't matter that her family was created by her, they were real. They were conscious, independent entities that could feel all the emotions that any normal person could. They were real, and chose to give up their lives in exchange for the freedom of the people of Westview. That was heroic. What Wanda chose to do was heroic.

Furthermore, there really isn't anyone with the power to punish her, and trying to punish her for her actions would likely result in dire consequences for the rest of the world. That is not to say what she did was okay. It wasn't. She knows that, and doesn't need to have a "lesson" forced upon her. She knows what she did was wrong, forced herself into isolation in order to discover herself (in a way) and protect others from her powers, and based on what we saw in the show, she is not going to repeat the same mistake again.

As @Umbran said upthread, the justice system is intended to stop bad behavior from being repeated. Wanda won't repeat her bad behavior. She stopped the person that was trying to take control of her power and intentionally use it to do even more harm than Wanda did. As far as we know, no one else in the current MCU has the power to do what she did, so trying to "set an example" by punishing her would do no good (and as I mentioned above, it would likely do much more harm).

I'm certain some other superheroes are going to try and seek out Wanda. The most likely one (and probably the most qualified one) seems to be Doctor Strange, as we know that Wanda will appear in some capacity in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. He could become a sort of mentor to her, helping her control her powers and make sure she doesn't do something drastic with her powers, like, you know, destroy the world.

 

[BRayne]

I read that as her powers seem to be strongly linked to her emotions and subconscious. She had a momentary reaction of anger and rejection, like most anyone would, and that manifested before she could consciously control it.

Chaos Magic as a concept is also called "results-based magic" where you put out a desire into the world and it's fulfilled magically though not always in the way you want. So Wanda wants them to stop and her magic produces that result by choking them. The actual effects aren't in her control, only the completion of her desired outcome.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Chaos Magic as a concept is also called "results-based magic" where you put out a desire into the world and it's fulfilled magically though not always in the way you want. So Wanda wants them to stop and her magic produces that result by choking them. The actual effects aren't in her control, only the completion of her desired outcome.

So, basically an internal genie with infinite wishes and practically infinite power that are dependent on Wanda's mood. That's just . . . great for the rest of the heroes and the world they live in. She needs help fast.

 

[Eric V]

I don't argue that she should be immune. I argue that they are ineffective and pointless in such cases.

I'm going to keep this to the realm of psychology. I have no desire to get into the politics of punishment. In addition, we are talking about comic books, so I am not going to cite support for assertions like I would in a public policy piece. You're free to disagree. I'm not going to argue over their truth. I will merely present them.

"Consequences" as we normally talk about them, have pretty limited utility. We should establish a few things:

1) Consequences need to have a positive end result to be useful. If the basic reason for consequences is "They hurt me, so they deserve to be hurt," that is vengeance, and vengeance is not justice.

2) Outside of financial considerations, consequences do not generally help the victims. If one has been abused or assaulted, we generally want the perpetrator punished. However, this does not generally lead to better outcomes for the victim. There may be specific situations where it is relevant, but broadly, the idea of "closure"¹ in this sense is fundamentally flawed, as it does not help the victim process or resolve the issues they are left with. To put it colloquially, seeing the perpetrator go to jail does not typically lessen the time it takes to stop having the nightmares.

Consequences can sometimes be a teaching tool, but they are a poor one, at best. Humans don't respond to negative stimuli significantly differently from other mammals - swatting your dog after they pee in the house is an unreliable form of training a dog, and it isn't really all that more effective on humans. But, in cases of major psychological or emotional distress, the person can know the act was wrong, but do it anyway.

Consequences can sometimes act as a deterrent, but... we see how well that works. We have been levelling consequences on people for bad behavior for ages, but we still have crime. At best, consequences act in the cost-benefit analysis of an action. That doesn't apply when the person is not driven by cost/benefit analysis, like in cases great acute anger, psychological disturbance or trauma. When the behavior isn't rational, assessment of cost goes out the window.

There is a last form of consequence - removing the person from society as a protection for the rest of us. This is what happens to Agatha - locked away where she cannot hurt anyone.

But, Wanda seems to have removed herself from society. For another, it is not clear that any mortal force can imprison her. Killing her may be equally difficult. So, I'm not sure what consequences you think should be levelled at her that would make the situation better.



Our culture at large has a great many misunderstandings about grief. We may say that everyone has suffered something that has caused grief, but for purposes of this discussion, the issue isn't grief itself, so much as grief and loss that were not successfully processed that causes issues. Again, "consequences" would not help her process her grief.



That we like to see it does not mean it will actually help us. See (2) above.



Sure. But consequences (aka "punishment") won't make it better, either.



If you hadn't realized, Monica has her own unresolved issues around a death and recent events. She also remarks that she'd have done the same, if she'd had the power. This is to let the audience know that Wanda's failing is a very basic human one. Any human can have it. Many do have it. Wanda's not a villain for why she did what she did, but only because she had the power to do it. Or, alternatively, everyone is potentially a villain, so maybe we should be careful in our judgements.

The telling line, however, is the one that follows, from Wanda, "That wouldn't change what they think of me," tells us Wanda realizes something about it all. To the people of the town, Wanda's issues are not the point, and she recognizes that, and doesn't think ill of them for it. And that there's really nothing Wanda can do to make it better at this point.



I, at least, was not trying to tell you what to believe. Much like we don't tell you why you should care.

If you don't like it, that's fine. Continuing to gripe to folks who do like it does not seem to serve a useful purpose, though, so maybe you want to consider how you want to engage with this thread, if at all.




1. "Closure" does sometimes have an impact when the primary issue is about not knowing something - if a person has disappeared, learning finally that they are conclusively dead can help a mourner finally process the result.

So, I think Kant disagrees on your definition of revenge. What would be argued (though not by me in this case) is retribution, which has proportionality as a key feature that distinguishes it from revenge. That's not what I was arguing for, however. Not 2, 3 nor 4 either.

No, I mean the last one. She is not really removed from society; she's in a cabin learning to become more powerful. And still not getting therapy. As I mentioned before, ultimately it's her responsibility to get help and she's still not doing it. It's what she should be doing...ideally while wearing a power-dampening collar or something for when she gets really upset. She should be in a mental health institution, plain and simple, and not seeing anyone even suggest mental help is just nuts. It's dumb.

Sure, we are all susceptible to unprocessed grief...but society still needs to protect people from the destruction that can cause, whether it's terrorists bombing an embassy because they lost their family or the Scarlet Witch. I understand why it's happening, but ultimately, it's still on her; though I would argue her support system let her down as well in a big way.

I am fine with the idea that anyone can be a villain; when they do become one though, they need to be dealt with appropriately. That doesn't appear to be even on the radar for Wanda.

But hey, if I misunderstood the thread, and it's just supposed to be a "Isn't the show great?" kind of deal...fine.

 

[Tonguez]

I'm certain some other superheroes are going to try and seek out Wanda. The most likely one (and probably the most qualified one) seems to be Doctor Strange, as we know that Wanda will appear in some capacity in Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. He could become a sort of mentor to her, helping her control her powers and make sure she doesn't do something drastic with her powers, like, you know, destroy the world.

The Scarlet Witch defeated by the power of Mansplaining mwahahaha!
that would be hilarious, but can you imagine the internet response!!!

 

[Eric V]

Of course Wanda didn't mean to do anything bad...but, so?

A few years ago, some guys were drag-racing through a residential neighbourhood. One jumped the curb and killed two kids playing in the front yard. He kept saying over and over how it was an accident, how he didn't mean to kill those kids.

Good. I would hope it wasn't on purpose. Doesn't mean they aren't responsible.

Hayward and Agatha had bad intentions, and are cartoonishly typical bad guys. No doubts there.

But they didn't do nearly the damage to Westview residents as Wanda did. That's just the truth.

If someone lost their parents, and in their grief started drinking and as a result killed some people while driving drunk...we'd take away their license and force AA and counseling. We wouldn't be like "Well, he was sad." There may be jail-time in there, and maybe that's a good idea and maybe it isn't, but the other stuff? Completely reasonable.

Wanda should have had a talk with Uncle Ben. If you're that powerful and it's emotion-based...see a bloody therapist. It's the responsible thing to do.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The Scarlet Witch defeated by the power of Mansplaining mwahahaha!
that would be hilarious, but can you imagine the internet response!!!

If they handle it well, that won't be a major concern. Of course people will complain about there being an intelligent, arrogant man coming to clean up the mess an emotional woman made (which has been mentioned before in this thread), but the amount of backlash from it will really come from how they deal with it.

If they literally do the demeaning Captain Marvel-y "you women need to control your emotions" thing, that would obviously not be okay. However, if they do it more as an understanding, yet a bit snarky, mentor that just wants to help her guide through her powers and not try to control/demean her, I think the complaints about perceived misogyny would be very minor.

It would also be better if we got to see some of the flaws of Stephen Strange that they didn't really go into in the first Doctor Strange movie (which is one of the big flaws of the movie, IMO). His character has had a much easier life than Wanda, and the problems he has had in it have largely been his fault (we all know how he broke his hands and lost his job). Wanda, on the other hand, has been an innocent victim through most of her life, through the death of her parents and brother, manipulation by Hydra, imprisoned by the Sokovia Accords, the multiple deaths of Vision, and so on. This could make an interesting dynamic, if they do it well.

If they keep Doctor Strange as the "Tony Stark without the charm" type of his first movie and do the "man helps woman with her emotions" route, that would very likely be a mistake resulting in a lot of warranted criticism. They could do it better, though. This is the reason I have always preferred Marvel to DC. Marvel heroes/characters generally* are more relatable than DC ones.

* There are exceptions to this, of course. Batman and the Flash, IMO, are more relatable than Doctor Strange or Thor.

 

[Umbran]

Of course Wanda didn't mean to do anything bad...but, so?

A few years ago, some guys were drag-racing through a residential neighbourhood. One jumped the curb and killed two kids playing in the front yard. He kept saying over and over how it was an accident, how he didn't mean to kill those kids.

Good. I would hope it wasn't on purpose. Doesn't mean they aren't responsible.

Responsibility comes with choice. The drag racers didn't intend anything bad, but they did choose to take risky actions. They are responsible for the results of the choice.

It doesn't seem that Wanda made a choice to have her power. She was not, to start with, consciously aware that she'd set up the Hex, or done things to the people. She didn't choose to set it up in that way, and if given a conscious choice, would not have done so.

There are times when our culture deems a person not responsible for their actions.

It is possible to view her as a rabid dog, too dangerous and out of control to have around. But the dog is nor morally responsible for being rabid, either.

 

[Rune]

And really what did Wanda lose other than her own traumatic delusions? Hex-Vision and the twins were constructs of her mind which she imposed on the world, she gives up nothing but her own vanity.

If that were the case, Haward wouldn’t have been able to track construct-Vision’s vibranium from the outside. Vision (and presumably also the kids) were made manifest and real within the Hex. That the reality could only be sustained while the hex lasts presents the ultimate dilemma Wanda must face.

Downplaying the stakes of that dilemma not only does a disservice to Wanda’s character (and the storytelling that got us here), it also stands contrary to evidence that the show has previously given us.

 

[Eric V]

Responsibility comes with choice. The drag racers didn't intend anything bad, but they did choose to take risky actions. They are responsible for the results of the choice.

It doesn't seem that Wanda made a choice to have her power. She was not, to start with, consciously aware that she'd set up the Hex, or done things to the people. She didn't choose to set it up in that way, and if given a conscious choice, would not have done so.

There are times when our culture deems a person not responsible for their actions.

It is possible to view her as a rabid dog, too dangerous and out of control to have around. But the dog is nor morally responsible for being rabid, either.

I don't think this is one of those times. I think she has a responsibility to seek therapy considering her power set and the ties to her emotional state.

As well, she did make conscious choices in the hex when confronted with stuff she didn't like (Vision questioning, Monica, the guy emerging from the sewer). And she warned the military to back off and let her have her Westview playground. That was very consciously done. She may not have made the initial choice to make the hex, but she certainly made choices after that.