Symbolism in Skyrim: Dragons

Okay, here goes. They're demons. Haha

Okay, dragons aren’t 100% the exact same thing as demons. But seeing the similarities between these two categories can help us understand this more symbolically.

Let’s just say dragons are chaotic, monstrous “earthly”, that is, fallen principalities. They are harbingers of the end times and manifestations of chaos. In Skyrim lore they’ve existed since the very conception of the world, and in ancient times (you might say, pagan times) they were worshipped by humans. It is said that even the Daedra fear Alduin, the World-Eater. But then the Nords (somewhat analogous to the Christians) and the Dragonborn (somewhat analogous to the Apostles & Saints) rebelled against the dragons for freedom, establishing Skyrim (Christendom) as we know it. (This analogy isn't 100% allegory. Obviously the Dragonborn can still be in the Thieves Guild and Dark Brotherhood for no good reason except fun, apparently...)

Anyway, according to the Song of the Dragonborn, the Skyrim theme song, it’s said that Alduin, the final Leviathan at the end of the world, will come when “brothers wage war”. Here’s the quote:

And the Scrolls have foretold, of black wings in the cold,

That when brothers wage war come unfurled!

Alduin, Bane of Kings, ancient shadow unbound,

With a hunger to swallow the world!

Obviously this is a reference to the civil war in Skyrim and the war and rumours of war before the End Times in Scripture. The civil war and the fall of Skyrim has two hands:

-On the one hand you have the corruption and weakness of the imperial empire. The Aldmeri Dominion the empire made itself subservient to, is entirely in favour of war and disorder in Skyrim and conspire to keep conflict and distraction going. They are a virus which corrupts the Nordic way of life, including their ban of the worship of Talos (like, telos?). As magical foreigners with ill intentions the Thalmor/elves are analogous to lesser demons - think of them as Machine Clockwork elves or the like.

This is feminine dissolution/rot from the inside, analogous to giving in to the passions for the sake of peace and convenience.

-On the other hand you have the reactionary Stormcloak Rebellion as the right-handed immune response to the corruption. But this rebellion forms part of the problem because it’s revolutionary and worsens division.

Ulfric Stormcloak is a sort of anti-Dragonborn. (And sure enough, it’s alongside him that your own journey as Dragonborn starts.) He is anti-Christ in the form of Barabbas. Think of the word “Stormcloak”. It’s reminiscent of the word “turncloak”. A storm is chaos in the heavens and the seas, much like dragons themselves. And “cloak”, aka the outside, the outer, tangible earthly covering. Rather than concern himself directly with the demonic principalities like the Dragonborn does, Ulfric takes a political/earthly stance.

While the corruption and “multiculturalism” of the establishment and dwindling of Nordic tradition is ever a problem, it’s the direct and revolutionary aspect of the Rebellion that turns brother against brother and results in the death of the High King and finally the appearance of the dragons as a symptom of a world in chaos.

It’s true that the demons strike when we fail to love our neighbours. If we understand the dragons as demonic monsters that arise through sin against our brothers, then think also about what it means for the Dragonborn to kill and absorb the souls of dragons… The Saints have dominion over the evil spirits by seeing their own sins. “Integrating your shadow” is an alternative expression. The Dragonborn is therefore an image of turning death against death. Using the power of the dragons against them. For all intents and purposes, in the context of this story, the Dragonborn is an image-bearer of Christ, who comes to save the world.

This theory also gives perspective over the How to Train Your Dragon franchise, which is ultimately also “anti-Dragonborn”/anti-Christ", but in the opposite way. In the first movie the dragons are wild beasts; savage and dangerous. Right, makes sense. But then the anti-Dragonborn enters. He is the complete opposite of our other anti-Dragonborn, Ulfric Stormcloak, who is the archetypal Nord: strong, fierce, proud, connected to his roots. Hiccup, as the name suggests, is rather the outcast who fails to be a proper “Nord” and falsely imitates the merciful aspect of Christ instead. He promises to tame dragons by integration. He represents the very lax multiculturalism that Ulfric Stormcloak fights against. Sure enough, in the second movie the dragons become pets… This is the difference between Skyrim and HTTYD. The dragons are never pets in Skyrim. Rogue principalities aren’t cute. And so by the third HTTYD movie it really becomes upside down, where the scales tip entirely and the dragons/demons win. Rather than being destroyed, they are falsely integrated. They deceive us to think they are fundamentally more wise and moral than we are. Hardly animals at all, but sweet and misunderstood. We don’t deserve them. And so the HTTYD franchise ends with humans giving dragons freedom and apparently that looks like “they all lived happily ever after”.

In Skyrim the only approximation to this is Paarthurnax, the “good dragon”. He reminds me of the Greek god Prometheus, who gave fire to mankind. But ultimately he is also a demon, maybe a dragon counterpart to the Dragonborn... A monstrous ghost of the ambiguity in the Dragonborn. Killing Paarthurnax is akin to the Dragonborn finally killing the dragon inside himself, the source of his own earthly powers. But that's just my theory. An alternative approach would suggest that Paarthurnax instead represents the potential good that even demons can achieve, perhaps despite themselves.