Griffith's Psychology in Berserk: The Dream That Consumed Everything

This article first appeared on Gamefa Gamefa: news, reviews, games, cinema, film and series at the link Griffith's Psychology in Berserk: The Dream That Consumed Everything. How did Griffith go from the beloved commander of the Band of the Hawk to the one who destroyed his companions? A look at the role of dream, attachment to Guts, and the desire for control in his fall. The post Griffith's Psychology in Berserk: The Dream That Consumed Everything first appeared on Gamefa: News,

Griffiths could not bear to leave one person before sacrificing the falconry. This point is one of the most important keys to knowing him. A commander who could change the course of a battle, win the trust of his comrades, and weave his way through complex power relations to the kingdom, was torn apart by Guts' decision to leave. Apparently, he had lost a valuable warrior; But what collapsed inside was far more personal than military calculations.

To understand this collapse, we must go back to Griffiths before the eclipse; To a man who could still be lovable. If we consider him from the beginning as a monster who only hides his true face, we lose an important part of the power of the story. Berzerk confronts us with a more disturbing possibility: someone can be brave, inspiring, and devoted to others, but at a defining moment in their lives sacrifice them for his own will.

Psychology helps us follow this path without giving a medical diagnosis to a fictional character. The problem is the relationship between dreams, pride, guilt and fear of losing control. We see these separately in many people; But in Griffiths, they are so intertwined that the purpose of his life gradually takes the place of life itself. For him, reaching his destination becomes more important than anything he might lose on the way.

At the center of Griffith's life is the image of a distant castle. The castle symbolizes his goal: to have a country to rule by himself. In Berzerk's classy world, such a wish is audacious for someone of his background. Power usually comes to those born in the right place; Griffiths wants to break this rule. He believes that he can determine his own position with talent, will and effort. This stubbornness, before revealing its dark side, is one of the reasons for its charm.

But having a great goal is different from staking all of your worth on it. There is a big difference between "I want to succeed" and "I only have value if I succeed". Jennifer Crocker and Connie Wolff have addressed this dependency in their research on "conditional self-esteem". When we tie our credibility to success in a field, failure in it can feel more than just a simple failure; It is as if we ourselves, with all our past and abilities, have been questioned.

Griffiths can be read from this angle. If he never achieves his goal of ruling a country, what will be left of him? Can he be a failed commander, a needy friend, or an ordinary human being and still value his life? His behavior shows how difficult it is to accept such a future. The kingdom must prove the correctness of all its previous choices. The dream gives him strength, but it also blinds him to other ways of life.

This dependence explains why withdrawal is not just a change of schedule for him. Stopping means facing the question that has been away for years: what is the meaning of my life if this dream does not come true? As it goes on, it becomes more difficult to answer. He has brought more people with him and paid more money. The future must be so glorious that it makes it possible to endure the past; Otherwise, the whole route will become a meaningless failure in his mind.

The trust of Griffith's companions should be taken seriously. He is not just a handsome man with great promise; He shows his ability on the battlefield. He measures the situation, makes a decision, takes a risk and wins. For people who live between war and instability, such a command can change the meaning of the future. Griffiths makes them feel that today's suffering is part of the way to a better tomorrow. His successes also turn hope from a distant fantasy into a shared experience.

However, the relationship is not equal from the start. The dream belongs to Griffiths and others devote part of their lives to it. Everyone has their own motivations and desires, but he determines the direction of the group. The important question is to what extent Griffiths can see his companions as having independent lives. Does he value them beyond their role in his future? The story does not give a uniform answer; Real attention and instrumental look are sometimes seen together.

The past that Kaska narrates shows that Griffiths was not indifferent to the human cost of war. The death of his companions weighs on him, and behind his confident appearance, pressure and guilt can be seen. These details are important, because they do not allow us to explain future betrayal only by the absence of any human feeling. It is possible that his attention was real and he sacrificed those people later. The ability to feel alone does not guarantee that one will make the right choice when conflicting between one's own will and the lives of others.

This is where one of the most dangerous twists of Griffith's mind is formed: maybe to compensate for the death of his companions, he must succeed anyway. This thought seems like loyalty on the surface, but it can become a trap. Hal Arches and Kathryn Blumer's classic research on “lost cost” shows that people are sometimes inclined to continue down a path simply because they have already paid for it. While past cost alone is not a good reason for future decision. Griffith's cost in the tragic scale of the story is human life.

If the goal is to make their death meaningful, each new victim seems to make it all the more necessary to continue. Stopping becomes like accepting the futility of the past and moving forward is the only way to save it. In such a narrative, instead of asking "what is the right thing to do from now on?", Griffiths gets caught up in justifying things that have happened. This is where the seeds of the terrible logic of the eclipse are planted: in order for previous sacrifices not to be in vain, other sacrifices must be made.

The arrival of Guts disrupts the order of Griffith's life. His importance goes beyond the value of a skilled swordsman. In their relationship, there is attention, trust and reactions that do not fit with the commander's usual calculation. Guts becomes someone whose presence can pull Griffiths out of his perpetual focus on the dream. For a man who wants to set the course for everything, such an attachment is both delightful and dangerous; Part of his peace is dependent on someone who has his own will.

Griffiths is used to others relying on him. Guts complicates this relationship because he himself becomes an emotional need for Griffiths. Accepting such a need is not easy, especially for someone whose self-image is tied to independence and dominance. He can keep Guts close without having to openly and honestly admit how much he needs his presence. As long as Guts doesn't intend to leave, this contradiction remains hidden.

Griffith's definition of friendship makes the story more bitter. He values ​​someone as an equal friend who has his own dream and is not just a follower of someone else. Guts takes this seriously. His departure is an attempt to find a personal purpose and reach the same place described by Griffiths. He wants to stand on his own two feet so he can be with Griffiths. But the independence that is praised in words is not acceptable when it leads to real separation.

Their duel reveals this contradiction. Griffiths tries to hold Guts with his sword and fails. The one who wants to stay by his side has made an independent decision and was able to implement it. Griffiths' charisma, status and power have not been enough to keep him from leaving. Guts exercises the same right that Griffiths claims for himself: to choose the future, even when the other disagrees. This similarity makes Griffith's reaction all the more painful.

His reaction can be seen as a combination of sadness, wounded pride and fear of losing control. We don't have to limit his feeling for Guts to a definite name to understand its depth. The problem is in the way he deals with this feeling. He cannot reconcile wanting Guts to be present with Guts' right to leave. Attachment becomes possessive: because it is important to me, you must stay where I want you to be. The desire of the other party disappears under the weight of his need.

This failure also reveals Griffith's need for Guts. A commander who draws others to himself is now faced with a feeling that he cannot quell with willpower alone. Maybe saying he didn't want to lose Guts would have brought him closer to a more equal relationship; But such a confession required an admission of vulnerability. Attempting to hold Guts by force still relies on the same commander-subordinate relationship. Griffiths chooses a way in which he does not have to express his need.

Mitja Beck's research on narcissistic traits differentiates between trying to gain admiration and hostile defense of the grandiose self-image. This distinction is useful for reading Griffiths. He can be attractive and confident as long as he is admired and determines the path; But Guts's independence threatens the image he has created of himself. This similarity helps to understand his behavior, although alone it is not enough to diagnose a personality disorder.

Guts does not intend to destroy Griffiths. His departure is not an attack on his dream and no one is obliged to devote his entire future to someone else so that he does not face the feeling of loss. Guts' departure reveals the crisis, but Griffiths makes the next decisions. If we blame Guts for his downfall, we have made one person's independence dependent on another's need. Tragedy intensifies when Griffiths cannot bear the loss and takes action to respond to it.

Griffiths going to Charlotte can be read along this confusion. Maybe he's looking for solace, maybe he wants to regain his sense of power, and maybe he wants to get closer to something that reminds him of his eternal purpose. Charlotte is both interested in him and belongs to the royal world; Therefore, emotional need and ambition can get mixed up in this decision. What is clear is the distance between his behavior and his usual calculation. A hasty decision turns his life and Sahin's group upside down.

Prison and torture strike a much deeper blow. Griffiths, who is saved, has lost the physical independence and commanding power of the past. He needs the care of those who used to rely on his strength. For someone whose identity is based on ability, mastery, and forward movement, this change is not just about physical pain. The gap between what it was and what it can do now is reminded every moment. The goal that gave meaning to his life no longer seems attainable.

Dependence on the care of others does not destroy the value of life; The problem with Griffiths is that he can hardly imagine a value outside of his previous position. His companions still care about him, but he may not be able to accept this affection without power.

From this angle, care can be mistaken for pity in his mind. A hand reaching out for help is a reminder of failure rather than comfort. What is a sign of loyalty for his friends, becomes for him a witness to the collapse of the image of the past.

The proximity of Guts and Kaska also complicates this experience. Their love lives no longer completely revolve around Griffiths. They still want to help him, but they have demands and a relationship that is not limited to him. He has lost the ability to lead and his previous position among the closest people in his life has changed. Here, jealousy can be seen as more than a romantic rivalry: the pain of withdrawing from the center of the world that his presence once gave direction to.

Neuroscience has a limited but enlightening point in this section. Acute stress was associated with a decrease in the activity related to working memory in a part of the brain; A feature that helps us keep information temporarily and work with them. Such an experiment does not explain Griffiths' experience of torture, but it does remind us that extreme pressure can affect the ability to think. A helpless person does not necessarily weigh the options in front of him with the usual calmness and flexibility.

However, suffering does not automatically lead to victimization of others. Griffiths' desire for control was seen before prison, and his addiction to dreams was present from the beginning. Torture puts these conflicts in a catastrophic situation. One can be afraid of what happened to him and at the same time see his responsibility in what he brings to others. Empathizing with someone's suffering does not obligate us to accept all of their choices.

An eclipse occurs in such a situation. Gad Hind offers Griffiths the possibility of reaching the dream again and makes his companions the price. The strength of this temptation lies in its harmony with his deepest desire. He is promised something that his whole life has been built around and now seems lost forever. This suggestion is both a way out of helplessness and a return to the image he had of himself: someone who is going to reach the goal, no matter how impossible the path.

At this moment, the past is also used against the living. If Griffiths never gets to rule, what is the meaning of the deaths of those who have come this far? His horrible logic could be that he must continue so that those deaths are not in vain. But this argument uses the future of living people to justify the past. The companions who risked their lives to save him suddenly become something that can be paid for in the dream.

Albert Bandura uses the concept of "moral rupture" for the ways in which people justify harming themselves. A person may see violence as serving a greater purpose, or may take the victim's suffering out of focus. Eclipse can be seen as the peak of this logic in the story. Griffith's dream becomes so important that the right to life of his companions is under its shadow. To reach his destination, he accepts the price that is paid by the lives of others.

The loyalty of the Shaheen group does not give him any right to such a decision. They have joined Griffiths with their hopes and motivations and accepted the dangers of war, but their lives have not been owned by the commander. Eclipse's betrayal is a breach of this very boundary: Griffiths gives his personal purpose permission to make decisions about other people's lives. The people who brought him out of helplessness become the price of his liberation; without having the right to choose in this transaction.

Supernatural forces and decision conditions should also be seen. Griffiths is not in a free and fair situation and Gad India pulls him towards a specific choice. However, the narrative emphasizes his acceptance of the victim. If we leave everything to fate, the moral significance of this moment will be diminished. Tragedy is formed from the collision of external pressure with internal desire. Temptation responds to something in Griffiths, and he accepts the lives of his companions as the price of its fulfillment.

The birth of Femto (Griffith's demonic identity after the eclipse and joining Gad Hind) can be seen as the ultimate form of the desire to be freed from weakness. Griffiths achieves a strength that overcomes the helplessness of the past, but this transition is made possible by the destruction of the relationships that bound him to others. Transformation in the world is supernatural; Its psychological meaning can be seen in the continuation of the same choice. The new power was gained by sacrificing those who trusted him.

Femto's attack on Casca shows the breaking of this trust in the most painful way. Casca believed in Griffith, had fought by his side and risked her life to save him. Now the same person who trusted him violates his authority over his body and his security. The issue for Casca is the assault and betrayal that directly harms him and the consequences remain for the rest of his life.

But why is Femto doing this in front of Guts' eyes? The scene is set in such a way that Guts's presence does not seem accidental: he is restrained and forced to watch Casca's suffering, and Femto is aware of his helplessness. Therefore, aggression is not only violence against Kaska; It also turns into Guts' torture. Femto injures someone Guts is attached to, forcing him to realize that he can neither protect Casca nor stop Femto.

Psychologically, the question of the right to choose returns in a terrifying way. Griffiths couldn't bear Guts leaving before; Now he has the power with which he can trample the will of others. The dimensions of these situations are not the same, but the continuation of the desire to dominate can be seen in this reading. This continuity connects Femto to Griffith's past despite the supernatural transformation. The new power has given the possibility of much greater violence to the same person who does not tolerate the independence of others.

The return of Griffiths and the formation of Falconia complicate the picture. He becomes a promising commander again and finally gets closer to his goal: to have a country under his command. People who seek refuge in a world full of danger, see security and order in front of them. Their experience is not the same as that of Guts and Kaska. For this reason, their support cannot be explained simply by naivety. Griffiths' charm works again, this time on a grander scale.

But the reader knows something that the people of Falconia do not. As they look to a safer future, we remember the faces of those who trusted Griffiths and never got the chance to see it. Behind the glory of the city, we see the empty place of the members of the Shahin group; People who fought, made friends, hoped and returned to save their commander. Griffiths has achieved his dream, but they are no longer there to even ask him what happened to their share of this future.

This distance makes his victory bitter. Building a magnificent city cannot erase the past, and people's admiration is not the answer to the suffering of the victims. A favorable outcome for a group of people does not destroy the right to life of another group. Falconia is both an image of Griffith's success and a reminder of the price he accepted for it. The reader cannot see that glory without remembering the eclipse; The memory of betrayal remains with the image of a fulfilled dream.

Griffith's ambition gradually becomes intertwined with the desire for control, and eventually leads to the victimization of others. He can be attached to someone and not accept his independence; suffer the death of his companions and lead them to danger again; Be a victim of violence and then inflict great suffering on others. These contradictions complicate his character, but they do not remove the responsibility of his choices. His downfall is complete when he measures the lives of his companions by the role they play in achieving his dream.