I read an interview a while ago with JE Sawyer regarding Honest Hearts. He said he found it surprising that so many people sided with Joshua after reading Randall Clark's entries - saying it is likely down to video games, Fallout included, encouraging players to find a violent solution.

I also found it strange how the Survivaists entries swung some people towards Joshua. I can see the benefits of Joshua's solution, but the entries swayed me towards Daniel.

Randall Clark is a mirror of Joshua, a broken and beaten down man who comes to Zion and is reborn. He guards over a group of innocents who deify him to a certain extent. In the end, Clark is finally able to find peace - something which I feel is at the heart of HH.

Honest Hearts is not about land or location, but it is about the battle for someone's soul. It is a question of whether the Sorrows should be allowed to preserve their innocence and whether it is possible to save Joshua's soul. I can understand why people side with Joshua's solution for many other ways, but the survivalist diaries strongly support Daniel's viewpoint. Clark wanted the children to stay safe but at the same time, it was their innocence he wanted to protect most - a quality he had lost many years ago. Graham's solution goes beyond self-preservation and instead succumbs to wrath and leads the Sorrows to lose their innocence.

Reading about Clark's incredibly sad story I was not able to side with Joshua - because it was the only way to save Joshua from himself. If he continues down the path he succumbs to his old sins and faults, it is only by choosing the path of non-revenge that he can be saved.

(By the way, I know there is an option to stop Joshua killing Salt-Upon-Wounds, but that is a discussion based on knowledge of what the endings are. I am talking about decisions in the game before knowing their outcomes)

Oh damn, you opened my eyes. But...if you pass the speech check so that Joshua doesn't kill Salt-Upon-Wounds, won't he try to stop the ''heat'' between the Sorrows and Dead horses?

Apparently Randall Clark's diaries didn't affect my decisions in Honest Hearts one way or another.

I just read them as a tragic story from long ago, where the writer found some peace at the end.

To your specific point, I think Clark knew that the Sorrows couldn't stay innocent forever, he just bought them some extra time as innocents.

He wrote that he told them that if anyone attacked them, they should fight back in righteous anger, or words to that effect.