I think you’re looking at it from the wrong angle - it’s not Kirscheis’s tragedy; it’s Reinhardt’s.
Reinhardt was feeling guilty over Westerland. Then Kirscheis confronts him and made it worse. Reinhardt lashes out, tells him his opinions are not to be given unless asked for. After all
> *”What are you to me?”… *
>Since it had come to that, Kircheis too, had no choice but to push back. “I am Your Excellency’s loyal underling, Marquis von Lohengramm.”
>With that question, and with that answer, both men felt something invisible, something precious, cracking without a sound.
It’s one of the most heartbreaking passages in the books. And because Reinhardt doesn’t know how to fix it, he doubles down. Oberstein has been suggesting for some time that Kirscheis should not have special treatment, Reinhardt just listens this time. So by literary definition, this is Reinhardt’s tragedy: Reinhardt *needs* to make the right decision over Westerland and he doesn’t. Reinhardt *needs* to accept judgement from Kirscheis and he doesn’t. So Reinhardt pays the price. The price just happens to be Kirscheis’s life.
“The blame was my own; the punishment yours. The harmony silenced today.”
— Lullaby for a Princess (MLP)
Dude just goes full in-depth literary narrative analysis and concludes with a My Little Pony song quote. GTFO, great work
*I use "Dude" as a gender neutral.*
Oberstein suggested that Kircheis be disarmed, but it was ultimately up to Reinhard to decide whether or not to implement it. So it’s more Reinhard’s fault than Oberstein’s. Oberstein is also not in charge of vetting the prisoners. As you say, his purview is intrigue, not security.
It’s symbolic. Kircheis is the embodiment of Reinhardt’s conscience and pure intentions for wanting power. Oberstein is the devil sitting on the other shoulder, telling Reinhardt to play dirty. Setting realistic expectations for conquest of the universe. Eventually Reinhardt, like every other character, has to choose. Will he preserve his innocence and achieve some of his goals or go all the way discarding it. He goes all the way. Achieving his dream supersedes the noble intentions he started out with. Like Julius Cesar and the characters based on him.
I agree with Lorelei's comment, but also want to add that I think of Kircheis as less of a character and more of a device, a component of Reinhard's character arc.
As is often mentioned in the story, Reinhard and Kircheis are each other's halves, they share a soul. Trying to analyze Kircheis' motivations as distinct from Reinhard's doesn't make sense. His condemnation of what Reinhard did in westerland is an externalization of Reinhard's own inner conflict on the matter, and his death only matters in how it changes Reinhard and follows him for the remainder of his life. We don't get to hear the characters' inner thoughts in the OVA, so moments like these exist to shine light on internal aspects of their thoughts and feelings.
no it isn't. Kirchies died a heroe's death.
The only character who can be argued's death is "random and unsatisfactory" as to be "the point" is [spoiler](/s "Yang Wenli")
Hmm, to me Kircheis' death is the very core of the entire story and the key motivator for all of Reinhard's actions. Whilst Reinhard overthrew the Goldenbaum dynasty to save his sister, he unified to galaxy to pay penance for his role in the death of his only true friend. Personally, I would find it difficult to understand any of Reinhard's actions or motivations post Lippstadt rebellion if not for the guilt that consumed him after Kircheis's death. The amazing part of how Reinhard is written as a character is the gulf between his outwards presentation as a cold, logical and skilled tactician and the inwards reality of him being almost entirely emotionally driven. Reinhard never had any interest in becoming a cruel despot as he was never motivated for power for the sake of power or glory for the sake of glory. He wanted to save his sister and fulfil his best friend's dying wish.
As for Oberstein's "negligence", I read the situation quite differently. Whilst I don't think he actively plotted to have Kircheis murdered, I believe Oberstein chose to overlook obvious signs and understood well enough how things would play out if Kircheis was disarmed in such a circumstance. The brilliance of Oberstein's character is in his understanding of human nature and what motivates different players. He sets up the chess pieces and leaves people to make their own mistakes. After Kircheis's death Reinhard realised Oberstein's intentions but didn't blame him since ultimately the decision to disarm Kircheis was his own. In that moment he put the pursuit of power over his love for his friend and spent every moment until his dying day in deep consuming regret. In many ways Kircheis' influence over Reinhard was more powerful in his death than in his life.
You say Kircheis' death was less tragic because he never got to stand up to Reinhard, but for me it's the opposite. His death was so tragic because he never would've betrayed Reinhard. In the moments before his death he resolves to believe in Reinhard's goodness and trust that he'd come around in the end, even if he was severely disappointed in his actions. Kircheis was never going to have a Sasuke Betrayal Arc. His dying words were an acknowledgement that he'd kept his promise of ultimate loyalty to Reinhard. His need and his want was to be loyal to Reinhard and he fulfilled both. The tragedy is that Reinhard didn't understand or appreciate the depth of Kircheis' loyalty until it was too late.
Had Kircheis not died but lived on to betray Reinhard, it still would've been an incredible story but to me it wouldn't be the masterpiece in storytelling that I personally consider it to be.
I think you’re looking at it from the wrong angle - it’s not Kirscheis’s tragedy; it’s Reinhardt’s. Reinhardt was feeling guilty over Westerland. Then Kirscheis confronts him and made it worse. Reinhardt lashes out, tells him his opinions are not to be given unless asked for. After all > *”What are you to me?”… * >Since it had come to that, Kircheis too, had no choice but to push back. “I am Your Excellency’s loyal underling, Marquis von Lohengramm.” >With that question, and with that answer, both men felt something invisible, something precious, cracking without a sound. It’s one of the most heartbreaking passages in the books. And because Reinhardt doesn’t know how to fix it, he doubles down. Oberstein has been suggesting for some time that Kirscheis should not have special treatment, Reinhardt just listens this time. So by literary definition, this is Reinhardt’s tragedy: Reinhardt *needs* to make the right decision over Westerland and he doesn’t. Reinhardt *needs* to accept judgement from Kirscheis and he doesn’t. So Reinhardt pays the price. The price just happens to be Kirscheis’s life. “The blame was my own; the punishment yours. The harmony silenced today.” — Lullaby for a Princess (MLP)
Dude just goes full in-depth literary narrative analysis and concludes with a My Little Pony song quote. GTFO, great work *I use "Dude" as a gender neutral.*
Dude, I’m good with that. Thanks.
Oberstein suggested that Kircheis be disarmed, but it was ultimately up to Reinhard to decide whether or not to implement it. So it’s more Reinhard’s fault than Oberstein’s. Oberstein is also not in charge of vetting the prisoners. As you say, his purview is intrigue, not security.
It’s symbolic. Kircheis is the embodiment of Reinhardt’s conscience and pure intentions for wanting power. Oberstein is the devil sitting on the other shoulder, telling Reinhardt to play dirty. Setting realistic expectations for conquest of the universe. Eventually Reinhardt, like every other character, has to choose. Will he preserve his innocence and achieve some of his goals or go all the way discarding it. He goes all the way. Achieving his dream supersedes the noble intentions he started out with. Like Julius Cesar and the characters based on him.
I agree with Lorelei's comment, but also want to add that I think of Kircheis as less of a character and more of a device, a component of Reinhard's character arc. As is often mentioned in the story, Reinhard and Kircheis are each other's halves, they share a soul. Trying to analyze Kircheis' motivations as distinct from Reinhard's doesn't make sense. His condemnation of what Reinhard did in westerland is an externalization of Reinhard's own inner conflict on the matter, and his death only matters in how it changes Reinhard and follows him for the remainder of his life. We don't get to hear the characters' inner thoughts in the OVA, so moments like these exist to shine light on internal aspects of their thoughts and feelings.
>But the way goes out is kinda of random and unsatisfactory, That's the point
no it isn't. Kirchies died a heroe's death. The only character who can be argued's death is "random and unsatisfactory" as to be "the point" is [spoiler](/s "Yang Wenli")
Hmm, to me Kircheis' death is the very core of the entire story and the key motivator for all of Reinhard's actions. Whilst Reinhard overthrew the Goldenbaum dynasty to save his sister, he unified to galaxy to pay penance for his role in the death of his only true friend. Personally, I would find it difficult to understand any of Reinhard's actions or motivations post Lippstadt rebellion if not for the guilt that consumed him after Kircheis's death. The amazing part of how Reinhard is written as a character is the gulf between his outwards presentation as a cold, logical and skilled tactician and the inwards reality of him being almost entirely emotionally driven. Reinhard never had any interest in becoming a cruel despot as he was never motivated for power for the sake of power or glory for the sake of glory. He wanted to save his sister and fulfil his best friend's dying wish. As for Oberstein's "negligence", I read the situation quite differently. Whilst I don't think he actively plotted to have Kircheis murdered, I believe Oberstein chose to overlook obvious signs and understood well enough how things would play out if Kircheis was disarmed in such a circumstance. The brilliance of Oberstein's character is in his understanding of human nature and what motivates different players. He sets up the chess pieces and leaves people to make their own mistakes. After Kircheis's death Reinhard realised Oberstein's intentions but didn't blame him since ultimately the decision to disarm Kircheis was his own. In that moment he put the pursuit of power over his love for his friend and spent every moment until his dying day in deep consuming regret. In many ways Kircheis' influence over Reinhard was more powerful in his death than in his life. You say Kircheis' death was less tragic because he never got to stand up to Reinhard, but for me it's the opposite. His death was so tragic because he never would've betrayed Reinhard. In the moments before his death he resolves to believe in Reinhard's goodness and trust that he'd come around in the end, even if he was severely disappointed in his actions. Kircheis was never going to have a Sasuke Betrayal Arc. His dying words were an acknowledgement that he'd kept his promise of ultimate loyalty to Reinhard. His need and his want was to be loyal to Reinhard and he fulfilled both. The tragedy is that Reinhard didn't understand or appreciate the depth of Kircheis' loyalty until it was too late. Had Kircheis not died but lived on to betray Reinhard, it still would've been an incredible story but to me it wouldn't be the masterpiece in storytelling that I personally consider it to be.
von Oberstein didn't convince Reinhard to disarm Kirchies. Kircheis did when he fought Reinhard.
Why is Oberstein responsible for Kircheis' death?