I don't really view the ideology between Tyreese and Morgan as the same. Morgan obviously believes that anyone can be saved and be turned "good" based on his past experience by whoever taught him. We can probably guess that there was a confrontation between them and that Morgan could have been easily killed by the person but was spared and made better from that relationship. He now wants to do the same with whoever he encounters. But he still makes it clear that he more than capable of killing he just chooses not to. As for Tyreese, I don't think he had anything close to an "all life is precious" ideology and he wasn't looking to save anyone. There was no motive behind his actions at all and he fully recognized that the bad people he encountered deserved and needed to be killed. His problem was just that he physically couldn't do it anymore. The best example I can give is that if Morgan and Rick came across a truly bad person Morgan would do everything he could to prevent Rick from killing him. If Tyrese and Rick came across a truly bad person, Tyreese would do everything he could to get rick to kill him so he wouldn't have to.

 

While I don't agree with Morgan, I like his character and see no problem with him not wanting to kill people. However, it is important to recognize that it's not always his call and he should bring someone else in the mix to make that decision.

I still like his character. However, if he continues to be stubborn instead of realizing logic and knowing that sometimes you have to kill it will start to get annoying eventually. I do think he is a good voice of reason and Rick is too far on the other spectrum. Something 50% in between Rick and Morgan would be the perfect balance of killing vs not killing.

I think we will have to wait for the all important moment as to why Morgan became this way in order to decide if he's currently a good character.

 

I touched myself to this post.

 

The writers are destroying a beloved, enigmatic character by making him into a paradoxical fool. Someone can be given an adversarial point-of-view (between two allies) without making them into an irrational fanatic. That's what Morgan is displaying now based on how they're shaping him.

They've made Morgan's "mantra" sound pristine, like he values humanity more than everyone else. This is supposed to justify his actions to some degree, but instead is frustrating and "annoying" is because Morgan's logic eats itself and makes him look stupid. In other words, he cannot protect precious life while also protecting those that seek its destruction. It can't be done. It's hypothetically the same as letting Hitler go free and then trying to save the masses killed, even though you set him free. Or using the "all life is precious" excuse by refusing to kill an armed intruder in your house who then kills your family. You can't have it both ways.

By refusing to define others in any degree of good and bad, it inherently diminishes the value and safety of the relatively-good and increases the value and/or power of the relatively-bad. An adult choosing to see the world like an infant will always end up dying and getting others killed. This is the new Morgan.

RIP Red poncho guy, and the other people those two wolves killed.

 

I would be less annoyed if he wasn't spewing his pacifist viewpoint in defense of people who literally just broke into innocent people's homes and hacked them to pieces. There is a time and place to show mercy, and Morgan is doing it wrong.

 

If Morgan deceives the group and says the Wolves Leader is dead when he is alive, I'll be pretty darn disappoint. JSS will stand for "Jump Shark Show".

 

"his position not kill other people unless overwhelming necessity to do so"

H5N1: Wait. That is not his position. Morgan, thus far at least, is quite literally saying that it's not okay, despite overwhelming necessity. Unless of course, butchering and happily hacking away at your friends/neighbors somehow doesn't fulfill your definition of that (necessity).

Hence, why Morgan's position is instead fanatical, to the point where he lets a group of them go (again) and not surprisingly, one of them feels empowered enough to grab a gun for the next go round.

 

Beautifully executed, Stacey.

 

You touch yourself all the time ...why should now be any different?

 

the real answer to the thread is that a lot of us have grown to really love this group and seeing them have their lives put at risk because of somebody's unwillingness to kill maniacs that have no right to live drives us utterly insane

 

I am not stating that their ideologies, moral stances, etc., are the same; I thoroughly understand how Morgan and Tyreese’s reasons not to kill differ. I mentioned Tyreese because he is an example of how the writers simultaneously exaggerate morally driven characters’ (in)actions but don’t truly explain their moral reasoning. It just so happens that Morgan’s moral arc is beginning in a way that is eerily similar to Tyreese’s, and I noted that observation.

Anyway, what angers me about Morgan’s moral arc is the presentation—or the lack thereof. Morgan not wanting to kill unless absolutely necessary is a beautiful and empowering stance that could greatly impact Rick's group and the Alexandrians for the better. But the writers aren’t presenting it as such. As it is, Morgan has been presented as the man who views all life is precious and won’t kill even when absolutely necessary.

The writers could have shown Morgan pleading with The Wolves to reconsider, reluctantly killing them when they refused, then performing some sort of ceremonial or spiritual gestures over their bodies. Another character, upon observing Morgan, could have asked him what he was doing and why, and Morgan could have explained that “all life is precious, and whenever I have to take a life to save a life, I pray about it…I think about it.” Depending on whether Morgan’s interlocutor is an Alexandrian, Aaron, or a member of Rick’s group, their conversation could then blossom into Morgan either advising said person about gaining the strength to kill when necessary, or reassuring said person that s/he is not a monster and that it’s okay to let one’s self feel all the negative affects that come with killing.

Morgan offers a unique perspective and opportunity for the show: he is a beloved outside/neutral character who can serve as a litmus test not only for Rick and company’s leadership and integrity, but also for the Alexandrians’. Morgan’s morality could be the lens that helps Rick and his group (and the audience) better understand and empathize with the Alexandrians and vice versa. Morgan could be the spark that really begins to unite both groups as a community of strong survivors.

 

Yes, I see no similarity between Tyreese and Morgan here. Tyreese was always that way from day one, Morgan has evolved since Clear. And all indications are that we're going to get a Morgan episode that will explain his change.

Also, he's clearly battling to retain "order" in his life. It's almost like an obsessive compulsive thing. It showed when he was clearing the walkers and stockpiling guns and supplies etc. It was also demonstrated in his bizarre question to Michonne about the protein bar.

He's kept his new code largely because he's been wandering the countryside and not part of a group where he has to make decisions, do things for the greater good and face larger challenges. Now that he's in a community it's going to be really tested.

Morgan seems more like a volcano that's about to explode. My guess is that since he had to kill one of the Wolves at the end of the last episode that it's going to lead to his facade crumbling down. He's going beat himself up over that and also question his new approach etc. Then in a couple of weeks or so I bet we get the Morgan episode so we'll have a full idea of what's happened to him.

I'm fine with that mystery until then.

 

I'm not annoyed with Morgan, but in the case of the Wolves it did seem a bit silly to let people go who were crazed killers on a killing spree. They were like rabid animals.

 

I am a huge fan of Morgan. He did kill the Wolf in the house. First, he apologized and then he made the signature downward thrust with his staff that he uses to kill walkers. Yes, I get what everyone says about the consequences of letting evil people freely roam the earth and how Morgan is lowering the group's survival odds, but he is still a fascinating character and I can believe that he could exist in the ZA. I am as fine with Morgan's not killing as I am with Eugene not being able to help much. At least Morgan can kill Wolves--and people when he knows he has to, even by his standards.

When Morgan first got back, he walked straight into danger to help the Alexandrians, armed with nothing more than his staff and his mojo. Maybe at the end of the episode he is walking straight back into the wild, but I hope he stays.

 

I think you said it yourself. People are projecting their disappointment over the handling of Tyreese and thinking here we go again.

 

I don't hate Morgan, just think he's really effing wrong about some stuff. Some people can be saved, but not everyone, and certainly crazy animal-like people that go around slashing everyone's stomachs open and paint Ws on their foreheads with blood. As crazy as Morgan might have been in "Clear", he was never on that level. Had he been like a wolf, the cheese man wouldn't have been able to "bring him back"

A lot of people were so worried that he would be like Tyreese, and I was so sure that he wouldn't be that stubborn and he would kill when necessary. JSS proves that he can't, or won't, and his actions and choice to spare crazy killers will have consequences. When that wolf grabbed that gun and left, that immediately means that they will return in some capacity. And if they shoot and kill an alexandrian, or dear god, a main character, that blood is on Morgan's hands. And I'm kinda hoping that happens, because hopefully Morgan will feel guilt for a few episodes, but then move on and become more like Rick and Carol.

I'm not pissed at Morgan, I'm glad he's flawed. After all, if he was a perfect, morally-grounded character, he would be a Gary Stults. He just has to come to terms that sometimes you gotta f*cking kill to save innocents. You just have to. In a way, Morgan is too extreme and Rick is too extreme in a different way. Last episode, Rick was expecting Carter and a bunch of people to fend for themselves against a group of zombies. Those people weren't ready and needed proper training first, with maybe a zombie or two, but if Morgan hadn't stepped in, those people would've died. Morgan was right. However, in this episode, he was wrong. Rick and Morgan are both flawed, they need to work on themselves and even each other out.

Its a good thing however, because this is 2 episodes in a 16-episode season. There's still character development and evolution to be had. Here we are in the zombie apocalypse, with one man holding on to the light way too much, and another that's too far in the darkness. My only hope is that the writers understand this.

 

I don't really have a problem with Morgan's perspective that he wants to avoid killing because all life precious. In the previous episode I thought he provided a nice counter to Rick's extremism. But when compelled to defend himself, Morgan could be far more effective and do much more damage to his opponent's with his staff. And that ability to be dangerous, without being deadly, would legitimize him as the moral conscious of the show - as that seems to be the direction the writers are heading with the character.

 

Well said. The dynamics between Morgan and Rick is supposed to be a main theme for this season.
It is good to have some character contrast. The show would be boring if everyone is a Rick or a Carol.

In next episode, the story seems to follow the group outside and so I do not think we will see much involving Morgan. But I think, maybe in 604, his character development will next begin with the captured Alpha Wolf.