Feb 11, 2025
"To abandon him would make me no different than my creator."
Why? Thus far, Radio's main feeling of apprehension came from him viewing his value to others, his purpose, as his only self-worth. His creator has made him with a goal, he has failed to fulfil his goal, therefore his creator, who had brought him into existence, decided to dispose of him. His entire modus vivendi seems to follow the doctrine that *he* must be purposeful, lest he lose his reason to live.
Now let's zoom into the situation at hand. From the get-go, Radio doesn't think about Noah in terms of useful or useless; he wants to save the kid. It's only after he loops back around to his 'defective' nature that he even ponders ditching Noah. But even then, there is no choice involved. He says it himself – ditching the kid would kill him.
From that moment on, the fact that Radio ends up saving Noah really loses its thematic weight. For one, saving him *is* what would help him achieve his purpose - he can't kill if he's dead. For two, the fact that he MUST do that, makes it so that whatever cogitation Radio goes through ring hollow. If that weren't enough, the comparison between Radio and his creator is quite incoherent. Radio didn't create Noah; Radio isn't responsible for Noah's predicament beyond the fact that he didn't hang up early enough; Radio remarks on Noah's purpose, even if that's only to keep Radio himself alive.
This scene would've worked far better if Radio actually had a choice in ditching/saving Noah or not. At some point, after there's no collar anymore, and he found out whatever Noah was a test subject fors. Like idk, maybe he found out Noah was chosen as a test subject because he was a weak, anaemic kid or that he had a personality matrix that was deemed 'detrimental to society'. If Noah were a 'defect' rather than just some kind of situational impediment.
