The Walking Dead, Tap Out, and The Naïveté of Self-Sacrifice

*There are spoilers for both Tap Out and the series finale of Season Four of The Walking Dead in this post*  Proceed at your own risk.

I had a conversation about Tap Out, post-finale of this season’s Walking Dead that I’ve had before. Except this time, because of Rick’s actions, the conversation took on a different context.

Person: But Tony killed. He murdered those people.

Me: But he would have been killed. What’s your point?

Person. One, we don’t know that. Two, I could no longer relate to him after that.

Me: *trying very hard to keep calm about that first comment because, author* So if someone is pushed to the limit, essentially put in duress, they can’t save themselves?

Person: No. They can save themselves, but they can’t kill others in the process.

Me: So, then what Rick did, biting Joe’s neck like that, to save himself, Carl, and most likely Daryl and Michonne, that wasn’t okay?

Person: But that’s different. That’s post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi and not contemporary fiction.

This is where my brain kind of collapsed on itself. Because even though Sci-Fi is not my thing, I understand that the parallels of the stories often run against those of our contemporary lives. So to dismiss that genre as such is foolish. However, what struck me the most was the naïveté expressed. Somehow, in this person’s world, the notion of self-sacrifice is only viewed as noble. While I’m not going to say the notion isn’t noble, I believe what matters is context. And in Tony’s and Rick’s cases, self-sacrifice would have proved no benefit.

Tony, forced by Cameron to pour the gas and light the fire that burns down the warehouse, is not responsible for those deaths. That’s on Cameron. Yes, in a purely black and white logical sense, Tony’s a murderer. I understand that. But what in Tap Out is black and white? Nothing. That’s the point.

People force others into inescapable situations and then we look at the victim and say, “How dare you protect yourself. Surely there was another way.” No, there wasn’t. In the context of that novel, Cameron would most certainly have killed Tony, and most likely on the spot. And what good would that have served?

Tony did what he had to in order to survive. I’m not suggesting we applaud his actions, but to denounce them in light of ALL THE THINGS that are done to him…please!

Same holds true for Rick. Say what you want about the push pull of Farmer Rick and Monster Rick, but when push came to shove and his son’s life was on the line, along with his own, Rick let the monster out. And good for him. I see nothing wrong with him doing what he needed to do, albeit in a very gory manner. But the very act of biting Joe’s neck like he did was so symbolic. What else in that world bites to kill? Exactly. Rick is willing to be as ruthless as he needs to in order to protect Carl. He cannot do that if he is dead. Therefore, he must do whatever it takes to stay alive.

And survival is a very powerfully ingrained instinct. Both Tony and Rick went through the ringer before getting pushed to the brink. I think it is a testament to the spirit that each does not given up.

Not that giving up is easy, not when your life is on the line, but neither is it inherently noble. Not if evil wins because of this sacrifice. Because there is real evil in this world. And Walking Dead comments on that. Who is really to be feared, now? Not the zombies, but the humans. And what is Tony to fear? Repercussions for his actions? No, the evil of Cameron and the biker gang, set on making him a pawn.

Both do what I hope we all would do if brought to our knees––fight.

And win.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s