I remember reading something by JE Sawyer saying he found it interesting how many people had chosen to side with Joshua Graham after reading Clark's entries. I also found it strange.

I like HH because neither one of the choices sits perfectly well with me: fleeing Zion may just end up putting off them losing innocence which will probably eventually happen, fighting the White Legs destroys what innocence they had.

I think I was one of the few who ended up siding with Daniel, partly because I think the value of their souls and innocence is greater than Zion. But also due to Clark's entries. He is a man who has lived with death and killing for years and it has brought him no peace. However, with the children I believe he is able to eventually find some peace.

He does tell them to strike back if attacked, but I think their innocence mattered more to him, from his final entry:

"I wish them well. It's been a gift to me, at the end of it all, to behold innocence."

In a world wracked by war and fighting, perhaps some innocence is needed to stop it ever happening again.

Interesting post, after a review of his diaries, he also put that he told the Sorrows that he was giving them Zion as a gift. Abandoning it to the White Legs is a poor way to repay him, to me. I think the Sorrows have lost their innocence no matter what, purely through contact with the destructive aggression of the White Legs. It's then just a matter of to what degree they lose it.

I mean I think Clark wouldn't be happy with either Daniel or Joshua's solutions. Daniel for being too soft and Joshua for being too aggressive.

I just feel that Clark found some form of repentance in the children. I think following Joshua mirrors Clark in many ways, and I feel sending Joshua down the same path as Clark once was on is destructive.