Will Angel Ever Take Control of the Tower?

[Ra1th]

The right thing to do in those situations is determined by the world in which we live. Without living in a zombie apocalypse, we (as humans living safely in our quiet non-zombified world) can't say what is right or wrong. The entire purpose of a species is to thrive and survive. That instinct might become sharper and more aware once the world as we know it ends. Was Riley also wrong for shooting the zombie with an arrow outside of the Arena that was dragging that woman who died seconds later? I'd argue no she wasn't. She was trying to save a life.

Angel's decisions were book smart, not street smart. We can agree there is a difference between the two. Angel is a very book smart leader, Michael is a very street smart leader. Continuing with my logic above, Angel is prepared to lead in a world that no longer exists. Michael (though also prepared for the same world Angel is) also has enough experience to be able to riff off the knowledge he's gained to make decisions. Think of it like classical music vs. jazz music. Both Angel and Michael are wonderful trumpet players, but Angel (our classical player) sticks to the notes on the page, whereas Michael (the jazz man) takes that basic idea and improves on it because of his understanding of musicality and style.

Michael leads and is able to improvise using experience he’s gained from the old world, combined with the post apocalyptic world experience he’s gained. He used his oldworld expertise to gain a footing in the new world, and began leading a small group of people, as time went by he gained experience and the group slowly grew larger so he was eased into this role and gained the experience he needed to lead and improvise.

So what I’m saying now is that Angel has gained the field experience that Michael once had that angel lacked, but for him to lead he doesn’t get eased into the role like Michael did. If he is to step into the role, there will be 20-30 people depending on him at all times, so he needs more to become a great leader. (this is what the last war was on, charisma, fire, etc). I’d say angel has the ability to improvise in the field, what he needs to be able to do now, basically he applied his book smarts to the real world and gained the street smarts needed to navigate the post apocalyptic world. I’m saying he needs to do the same thing with leadership. When he does, I think he’ll make for an even greater leader than Michael.

So you're saying that Angel has the right to decide who lives and who dies by virtue of their perceived value? And Michael was already standing at the door when he shot the lock off. There was no getting to the door. He was already there. You say hail mary, I say calculated risk.

You say calculated risk, the show says acting without thinking. If you recall after that scene, Angel pulls Michael aside and yells at him for jeopardizing the safety of the entire tower to save one person. To which Michael responded,” what was I supposed to do? “let them die?”, and angel’s response was yes. Because had Michael failed, everyone would have died. After this saul intervenes, and he says, don’t listen to angel, he’s a prick. Michael takes a moment to calm down and thinks for a second then regretfully replies.” He was right, I put the entire tower at risk by opening that door” basically he admits he acted on instinct, to save someone because that’s his training as a soldier. Then saul gives his speech on hail mary passes. This is the difference between a soldier and an officer. As a soldier Michael’s job was to do everything to keep everyone alive, officers have to make difficult decisions on who lives and who dies. A friend of mine who’s training to be an officer in the marine corp told me, that officers are often kept apart from their soldiers because they don’t want them getting too attached to their men, because sometimes its necessary to send people to their deaths. Those are the difficult decisions that a leader has to make. Michael made a mistake that day plain and simple, and as you’ve said before, perspective perspective, we’ve seen the perspective where lizzy becomes a great asset to the tower, had she died then and there, her death would have been trivial at best, she would have been some girl that they couldn’t save. It’s the same story with burt, people are angry at the thought of angel not saving burt, had angel not saved burt, burt would have been a trivial character who died. No one would have cared, but we see from a perspective with burt, he’s important to us.


When you ask, if the leader has the right to decide who lives and who dies by the virtue of their perceived value”, I say yes, that is a leader’s choice, and that is the leader’s burden. This is something an officer in the military must deal with, sometimes the best choice means people die. Sometimes if it’s too much of an effort, some people must be left to suffer. A good leader must put the safety of his people first, if that means that some random old man who might already be dead not be saved because there is a serious lack of supplies, then so be it. It is the leader’s burden and his choice to decide who lives and who dies.

No, this is a valid argument. Without Burt's guns and ammo not only does the Tower fall, Angel dies two chapters earlier in the arena trying to escape. And if they get outside, they get swamped and are unable to leave because they can't fend off the zombies attacking the hummer. If you claim this is an invalid argument, so is your counter that they would have made ammunition a priority. That, too, is not supported by evidence.

ok I didn’t state things clearly there, what I meant to say was that, the story developed a certain way because of the events that happened. All I’m saying is that, there is more than one way to reach the same destination. We don’t know how the story would have turned out had burt and lizzy not been saved, but we cannot reach the conclusion that the tower would have died without burt/lizzy, because maybe burt being left behind and lizzy dying at the front door would have unlocked other possibilities, other roads to go down, other paths to follow. In short, its possible that if lizzy and burt weren’t there, maybe the tower wouldn’t have encountered the Mallers at all? Who knows? We sure as hell don’t, cause that’s not the path the story followed.

I'm wondering how the gentle easing and exchange of power will occur in a zombie apocalypse? The situation is always going to be dire (supplies are running short, other groups coming to attack etc etc). In Kc's universe, we've really only seen power taken in one way: abruptly. If Angel needs to be eased into it, he will continue to be the Riker to Michael's Picard unless Michael is incapacitated in some manner, Angel is incapacitated in some manner or the series ends.

As for how gentle the exchange of power will be, right now is a VERY bad time, because right now, the tower is in a state of crisis. Even when Michael wanted to stop being leader he did not stop being leader during the war with the Mallers or during the fire, because shit was going down, and a change of power was not possible at that time. He quit after the war, after things had cooled down, were things bad then? Yes there was a lot that had to be done, but it was a calmer situation than right now, Right now we are accelerating to a war, saul is on a warpath, the tower came this close to launching a full frontal assault on the Mallers. The situation is heightening fast, now is definitely not the time for a power switch, plus Michael is doing good, he’s fired up, he just got his job back, he wont be changing leadership for a while. but when that time does come, it has to be either AFTER a climax or during the lull between the climax and the next storyline climax, not right before or during a climax.. if that made any sense