“Why Would We Want To Play as Zelda?” Part 1: Minor Characters of Legend

This is a guest article written by Matti-Pekka Nuorva and edited by Devin O’Neill. If you’d like to submit your own guest article, we encourage you to share it with us here, or email Devin at devin@gamnesia.com

Recently, a large body of Zelda fans have jumped the bandwagon and joined those that have demanded Zelda to be the player character of The Legend of Zelda. The reasons they give for this have included (but have not been limited to) feminism, a differentpoint-of-view, and renewal of the franchise. Yet ZeldaInformer has mostly kept quiet about the opposite opinion, and its arguments have generally been simplified to misogyny and the byword traditionalism. Therefore I give you “Why would we want to play as Zelda?” This is the first of three articles where I will not only illustrate the less-recognized reasons why some of us don’t want to see the fair maiden replacing Link, but also why people demanding a “stronger role” for Zelda have not only have missed a lot in the series they claim to be fans of, they are actively destroying it. I will also do some basic literal analysis on the phenomenon we call The Legend of Zelda, and thus explain why Zelda as a protagonist, or in role of increased importance, would not be a smart idea, to put it in words far more kindly than deserved.

Oh, and if you try to play the misogynism or sexist-card, this is the point where I’ll assume you stopped reading, and all evidence to the contrary will be considered to be either taken from other comments or lucky guesses.

Yes, I’m also trying to provoke trolls with that.

This first article shall not only regard what exactly Link’s part is in the grand scheme of things, but the parts of other characters as well, and will reveal certain things the majority of Zelda-fans have missed all these years that I don’t see anyone else voicing.

Quoting from the Facebook-page of the campaign:

‘”Stronger” can mean a lot of things. The character the Legend of Zelda series is named after is the ruler of a country with the Power of Wisdom and the Gods at her disposal, yet she’s often represented as a damsel in distress. While she’s had great moments as characters like Sheik and Tetra, she more often than not feels like a background character, overshadowed by the two other Triforce bearers, Link and Ganon. Nintendo, the fans, male and female, have wanted this for so long: please give Princess Zelda future roles more befitting of her actual attributes. And, if you see fit, make her a playable protagonist.’

That is easily the most ignorant, thoughtless comment I have ever heard anyone calling themselves a Zelda fan to utter about the franchise. Ever. They seriously claim that the de facto protagonist of almost every game, the character that causes everything, and around whose doings the whole franchise has insofar rotated, has been overshadowed by a humanoid tree and a rarely seen villain that’s so traditional it’s practically a cliché. Those are not the only flaws of the quote, but we can dissect more in later parts of the trilogy.

So, let’s first tackle the business about character, and start our argument with Link. What exactly is the role of each individual Link in the series? Let’s observe one of the most prominent stories of the franchise; I give you exhibit A: The summarized story of The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker:

Long ago in the Kingdom of Hyrule was hidden the treasure of Gods, the Triforce. One day Ganondorf tried to steal it for himself, and succeeded in conquering Hyrule and gaining the Triforce of Power. However, he was driven away by the Hero of Time, who vanished after the heroic deed, after he had hidden the pieces of the Triforce of Courage he was given. Later on Ganondorf returned, but since the Hero of Time didn’t return, the people prayed to the gods, who flooded the place and led the people to the mountaintops, which became islands in the Great Sea. Ganondorf suspected that the Triforce of Wisdom was held by Hyrule’s Princess Zelda, or her descendants, and searched for girls with long ears, and kidnapped them. He also struck against the guardian deities of the sea, and the sages who upheld the Powers of the Master Sword. However, the brother of one of the girls tried to release his sister from Ganon’s fortress, but was defeated. With the help of the king of Hyrule in form of a talking boat, the boy gathered the three pearls of goddesses, and gained the Master Sword, thus unlocking Ganon’s true powers. The boy stormed Ganon’s fortress, but was defeated again. Upon saving him, it was revealed that the pirate captain Tetra was Hyrule’s Princess Zelda, and that she had part of the Triforce of Wisdom. The boy restored the power of the Master Sword, and collected the pieces of the Triforce of Courage, but Ganon captured Zelda in front of his eyes. The boy stormed Ganon’s Tower, but Ganon gathered the Triforce. The King of Hyrule wished Hyrule to be flooded. The boy defeated Ganondorf with Zelda, and they floated to the surface from drowning Hyrule.

The parts where Link actually does something are in blue and bolded. What I am trying to emphasize is that Link affects less than half of the events in the story. Then there is the entire history of Ganon’s rise to power in Hyrule, known as Ocarina of Time, in which that particular Link plays no part at all. Almost everyone in the main cast has a bigger role than Link. Ganon wrecks another civilization and intends to do it again. The King of Red Lions tries to stop him. The story is not about Link, but rather of Hyrule being erased. Admittedly, TWW remains one of the games where Zelda has quite an insignificant part.

And the only way in which The Wind Waker is unique among Zeldas in terms of story is that Link’s part actually fills up more of the story than usual. In almost every other Zelda, Link comes in late and acts as a huge deus ex machina. The world is doomed to the hands of the Villain, and then a hero appears that just kills the guy.

But why does Zelda’s part, then, seem so insignificant? One reason is the psychological illusion caused by various Links being the PCs, that the series is somehow about the Links. A comparison: most Sherlock Holmes stories Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote had Doctor John Watson as the first-person narrator, but was he the protagonist? I don’t think so.

Another example of this. In Bioshock Infinite, the whole game is about the connection between one of the most, if not the most, celebrated female NPCs ever, Elizabeth, and Zachary Comstock. Yet the main character is Booker de Witt. It isn’t until the end of the game that Booker… Well, let’s just say Link’s significance to the story in any given Zelda is that he saves the day. The difference between Elizabeth and Zelda is that Zelda doesn’t have to go out into the battlefield because Link usually has already killed everything that can threaten her.

Let’s take a third one. Do you know why The Legend of Zelda isn’t “The Legend of Link”? That’s because naming it “The Legend of Link” would be like naming Snow White “Prince Charming” just because one popped up as a deus ex machina in the end.

I also suppose that a fourth reason is that she actually is a damsel in distress every once in a while: Yet in those games she is very active more often than not. The story of the series is

already pretty much about various Princess Zeldas, their decisions, and fixing their mistakes. With the exception of a few titles, pretty much every game somehow follows the story of the Triforce, in which Zeldas are the biggest actors. Out of the three recurring characters in most Zelda games, she is easily the most proactive one, while Ganon is usually the guy who terrorizes everything and Link the guy who responds to immediate physical threats.

Quoting from the Damsel in Distress page from TV Tropes:

“A character, usually female and nubile, is portrayed as helpless and in danger in order to put the cast in motion.”

Female, nubile, and in danger to be sure. But helpless? Certainly, Zelda seems to be the primus motor in most games, usually not by being in need of rescue, but by being in the middle of the events. Granted, occasionally the problems of the game are her doing, but so far that has only happened with the Zelda in Ocarina of Time, who can be held responsible for not just the events of one game, but also almost every game that follows in all branches of the timeline. Granted, at some point in almost every game Zelda is in a situation that matches this. But Zelda also has an active side: only in a handful of games in which she has been has she had a passive role of just being insignificant, in danger, and in need of saving (AoL, FS, MC and PH). Not to mention that just like the quote from the Facebook-page said: “”Stronger” can mean a lot of things.” Yet in this case, it seems that these people think stronger should mean the same thing it means in your average shounen-manga or -anime: a better warrior. They think Zelda is overshadowed by two brutes that, from the story’s standpoint, are mostly better at violence, while she is not able to physically hold her own.

The last reason is that not only she, but pretty much everyone in the entire cast, is insignificant. That is because Zelda is in many ways the gaming equivalent of the Lord of the Rings. It’s not as much about the actual characters as it is about the events of each game. Is it any wonder then, that Zeldas almost always look like background characters? Her character really isn’t that important, and I have hard times imagining that I would actually like watching her running around Skyview Temple as much as I would like playing through it as Link. Doing fun stuff, even if it’s insignificant to the plot. The perfect example of this is Zelda in Ocarina of Time: her role in the game is first to unleash the evil, and then to help Link vanquish it. Yet this sets in motion events that lasts far longer than she. Zelda caused Ganon to attain the Triforce of Power, and thus she caused every game in the timeline after Ocarina of Time that features Ganon and the Triforce. Oh, and Majora’s Mask too. Possibly Link’s Awakening as well.

The Legend of Zelda is a modern day saga, an epic tale of (fictional) history of a (fictional) land. Yet most of its fandom fail to notice this. And this includes the part of it hyped up about the story, the very part that every idea that is aimed at destroying the very foundations of the series, including this one, is based on.

Zelda remains a distant character, of whom we learn only her deeds, because everything that actually requires the player to do something happens with Link. She is of no interest to us. Why bother showing Zelda doing something when the PC (Link) won’t learn about it yet, if ever? And even if he did, he can do nothing about it yet. The main problem with those who think Zelda is being overshadowed is not that she is, but that they don’t realize they are playing one of the most gameplay-driven AAA-franchises in the gaming industry, not watching a movie. And in truth, some of the most story-oriented Zelda-fans actually seem to think that a movie is what they should be watching. Or at least playing a Final Fantasy-esque game.

Another reason is feminism, and its effects on our culture. Feminism has become the filter through which everything gender is examined. This gives us the schemas, internal models, and thus we seek signs of mishandlement and ignore evidence to the contrary. This leads us to spot “inequality,” strengthening the feministic schemas we already have. And this keeps us detecting how “weak” Zelda is, and ignoring evidence to the contrary.

The story driven nature of Zelda is also why we never learn Ganon’s motivations other than lust for power. He remains in the mold of archetypal, power-hungry villain just like Saruman and Sauron in Lord of the Rings, because that is the only part of him that is of any consequence to the story. Does this make the character look shallow? Unarguably. But it also manages to tell the story of events better than any character driven story I have ever seen. Unfortunately, modern literature seems to focus on characters with depth, but that’s unnecessary in a story like Zelda. But so many are unable to see this.

As for being overshadowed by Ganon: well, what did you expect would happen when a guy is the only character present in most games? Of course people make too big a fuss about him just sitting on his dark throne or whatever he does to kill time he waits for Link to come beat him. Again.

But you know, what’s funny. Peach gets hated by being a classical damsel in distress. Zelda gets hated by being Bilbo, Frodo, Elrond and Galadriel in the same time. In the end I would argue that Zelda already has the part befitting her attributes without marginalizing her: As a small, yet significant part of the grand scheme of things known as The Legend of Zelda.

So why not show Zelda as stronger? To understand this we must observe why she gets into trouble in the first place. And fairly quickly one notices that in nearly every game she carries importance other than the villain taking a “damsel in distress” for the sake of it because it’s in the Archvillain’s Handbook.

In the original game she split the Triforce of Wisdom to hide it from Ganon. Ganon captured her to squeeze the information out of her. In A Link to the Past she is one of the descendants needed to undo the Seven Sages’ Seal. In Ocarina of Time and The Wind Waker she has the Triforce of Wisdom. In Twilight Princess she is the ruler of a conquered country, making her a fine trophy and hostage for Zant. In Skyward Sword she is Hylia.

So a game where she doesn’t get into some sort of trouble is one where she is important? But those kinds of games have already been made, like Link’s Awakening and Majora’s Mask. Oh, but wait, she’s hardly present in them. Perhaps they mean a game where she helps Link more actively. Yet, that one is done too, such as Spirit Tracks. Maybe they mean one she is actively present in the tale, making her own decisions and shaping the story? Hm…ever played Skyward Sword?

It seems that the game these people want is one where she is present, but doesn’t get in the kind of trouble she needs a hero for, except for battling a villain that threatens the world. One where she is present a lot and is shown to be “strong,” whatever that’s supposed to mean in this context.

Or in other words: a game where her relevance to the story is in the villain getting whatever he/she wants from her, if anything, and leaving her to foil his/her plans, if he/she is aware of her existence. One where she is a large part of gameplay and/or cutscenes and is shown capable and (possibly) temperamental. Certainly not as someone who admits her incapability. Combine that with the last sentence of previous paragraph and you know what you have in a nuthshell: Link. No wonder these people want her to be the PC. Tackling that will be in

Part 2: Define Archetypes.

So, as for how this would be destroy the foundations of the franchise: a stronger role for the already strongest role in a story that mostly ignores characters anyway, and considers “The evil Villain threatens the world, [insert 20h of playtime collecting a number of whatchamacallthem here] and then came the hero and killed him,” a valid plot. From people that mostly think the story is all about the characters. Do I have to draw you a picture?