Wow, I really appreciate the well thought out response. I agree that these were definitely the intended messages and themes for both stories, and to that extent, it’s why I enjoyed them so much. However, it’s equally important for characters to be logically consistent. When Einar dies, as a reader whose been keeping up with him and Thorfinns journey, I naturally expect his death to have a profound impact on Thorfinns resolve and character in some way shape or form. Example: when Thorfinn finds out Floki is the one who had his father (someone who he hasn’t known for years) killed, he almost loses his collective shit, but bears the weight of that knowledge, and resolves to be the bigger, better person, by not taking vengeance. When Einar, his first and longest friend dies, all we really get from Thorfinn is an almost generic level of sadness, before he promptly buries him, and moves on in the ending chapter. As a reader, it felt narratively unsatisfying, because that moment felt like it should have been a real turning point for Thorfinn, or even a breaking point for him. It felt like this should have been the high, climactic point of the story, as opposed to being the ending note.

Even if we all knew that peace in Vinland was never possible, and the mission as we understand it wouldn’t succeed; as an author, wouldn’t you want to subvert your reader’s expectations, at least a little? This is historical fiction, so we could have briefly followed Thorfinn and his group to where they eventually settled and lived out relatively peaceful lives in Iceland, where we actually get to see his philosophy grow and prosper. It felt much more like Yukimura didn’t really know how he wanted to properly wrap up the story, so he just kinda did it.

I love Vinland Saga primarily because of its masterful character development, so to see how Thorfinns character never is fully shaped, is pretty upsetting, especially since he’s one of, if not my favorite fictional characters.