KnightsOfHonor

Members
  • Content count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

41 Crew Leader

About KnightsOfHonor

  1. I guess that is part of my point as well. All these characters who have similarities to Kelsier like the Lord Ruler or Taravangian end up as villains. Yet here is someone who has all the same attributes who does not. Making him even more of a hero because he beat the odds. Killing can be used for good and it can definitely be used for bad. The difference there is a nuanced one. Just because someone kills does not mean that they are bad. And it’s not a "well the killing was bad but it was for a good cause, so I guess the end justifies the means" kind of thing. It’s a "killing that person is a good thing because they deserved to die." The "good" that came from it was their death. Leaving the real world completely out of this and just looking at the Cosmere, there are a lot of people who should be killed. Who is deciding that and how they decide is the difference between a villain and a hero. They both might believe in what they are doing and think it is the right thing to do. The difference is the hero is right and the villain was wrong. For the villain, who they thought needed to die and why was warped or wrong in some way, thus they were the villain. Then along comes someone else who does basically the same thing and they are a hero. The difference is the hero got it right. Again, compare Miles Hundredlives to Kelsier. They are basically the same person, only Kelsier was right and miles was wrong (and Miles was involved in much more horrible things (like a breeding program for humans!) than what Kel ever was). We as somewhat of an omnipotent observer get to see more than we would if we were characters in the books. We can see that kelsier did good and others in similar situations did bad. We don’t have to guess or have a list of things that are always good and always bad because making exceptions is a very slippery slope and can lead to disaster. So, we set hard judgments on what is bad and what is good so villains do not arise. And anyone going against that therefore must be villous in nature. But we as informed readers can see the beginning from the end we can fast forward and rewind, we can get inside the heads of the characters and see their motivations and reasonings and see how things turned out. And doing all that, I see that kelsier was a hero. No asterisk needed. Now if I were to try and apply him to the real world, my conclusion would be much different. But within the context of the books and having extra knowledge that I would not have if he were a real person, I can see that he is a good guy. I don’t feel like you are trying to convince me. I think you are just bringing up good points to support the conclusion you have come to on Kelsier and having a very engaging conversation about it. But the thing is, everyone on the internet is explaining why Kelsier is a bad guy and because of that I think the pendulum has swung to far the other way and I am trying to counter that. I think people need to realize that the reputation kelsier is getting has swung further towards villain than what he actually is. He is not, and was not, a villain. Despite being a psychopath, he was a good guy. Now whether he remains as such is to be seen. Like you mention, some troubling things are developing that could indicate Kelsier has taken a turn (I don't believe it just yet), but going off of what we KNOW. He is still firmly a hero.
  2. If you told me someone was a thief and a murderer with no context, yeah that sounds bad. But if who they are stealing from was an oppressive government regime and who they were killing were people who would have had the death sentence in most any other setting…. Not so much. It would have been better if the government was not corrupt and it was not left up to vigilantes to dish out justice. If kelsier had the option to turn in the bad people so they could have a trial and all of that but instead chose to kill them anyway. Then yeah, even though they probably still deserved to die, other realistic options were available that he could and should have taken. And I feel like his reputation would be correct in that theoretical situation. But in the situation he was in, the only way to stop the bad people from doing bad things was to remove them from the picture. He was killing people who deserved to die (harsh reality) and he was stealing from people who had stolen (through the fruits of forced labor) that money to begin with. And he could have just lived his life as a thief in relative comfort (that’s when he was a bad person) but he chose to give that up for something more @Returned I agree with you on most every point. I think "ends justify the means" is a way for bad people to sleep at night. the stormlight character who believes that I think is definitely not a good person even though he is trying for a good outcome (in his own mind at least). The thing with kelsier is he is correct in thinking something needed to change. Just like a bad person doing good things does not make them a good person, neither does a good person doing bad things make them a bad person. Sometimes you do have to do not very nice things. Sometimes war is needed because the bad guys wont listen to reason. It would be better to not need that but the situation on scadrial was not that. At what point do bad things for a good reason make you a bad person…. Well there is a line somewhere, but I think Kel is still on the “good person” end of that spectrum. What he has been up to recently is… potentially problematic, but right now its just hear-say and rumors. And you are correct. I would still think he was a good person if his attempts did not work. Who is the better person, those who submit themselves and others to slavery willingly or those who fight even when the fight is hopeless? I can’t stand Lirin because of his answer to that question. Somethings are worth fighting for or against regardless of the price because there are things worse than death and murder. What was going on on Scadrial was one of those things. I guess I am just more horrified by what the nobles were doing then a lot of people. I think it was good that they got killed. And I think those good people who died as a result were eventually going to die anyway (of old age if nothing else) but the Final Empire was not. One generation suffered so the rest could be free. Where the line between “journey before destination” and “the ends justify the means” is, I don’t know. But Kelsier is on the correct side of that line. Others you can compare him to are not, but as of right now, he is.
  3. What was Kelsier supposed to do with the nobles he killed? Put them in jail? Hold them captive until the day that the law was less corrupt and then hold a trial? Try and brainwash them into taking orders from a Skaa? Killing them was really his only way to deal with them. What actions could he have taken to bring about the fall of the Final Empire that would not be considered “bad” from any point of view? And remember, the people he is killing are rapists, murderers, and slavers. If anyone deserves death it would be them. And I know not all of them are as bad as others but Kel doesn’t seem to be killing each and every noble he sees. He kills the ones that are the worst or the ones that are most strategic in bringing about his end goal (ending slavery). Its like in war, not every soldier is a bad person but unfortunately if they are fighting on the side that is supporting slavery…. @Returned Lots of good points here. And I agree that Kel has a lot of traits that villains do. That he COULD have been like the Lord Ruler, or he COULD have done this or that. But let’s look at what DID happen. He freed an entire population of people, toppled a horrible empire, and brought about improving the lives of almost everyone on a planet. I guess I don’t see how that makes him a bad guy. I get why he COULD be one, but I don’t see how what DID happen makes him one. I know a lot of what I am saying is just opinion (and a less that common one at that). But that’s what makes this so interesting. To see other people’s opinions and their points and counterpoints as we each try and give our thoughts.
  4. Good points but if I were a slave, waiting for the day I would be raped, or be killed because I displeased my masters or be killed because I was to weak or old to work, or (best case) "just" forced to work all day. I would be thankful someone showed up, killed my slavers and released all of us into the wild to fend for ourselves (aka freedom). I guess it comes down to what you think it means to be free vs a slave. So we will have to agree to disagree on that point. This and the quote you posted and things like it are exactly why Kelseir gets a bad rap. I think people have put too much into what has been said about him and have forgotten what he actually does. Unlike your boss, we can get inside kelsiers head and see what he is truly thinking. And from that we see he is not a bad guy. He does not enjoy suffering; he does not kick people who are already down or things of that sort. The only people he harms are people in positions they are abusing or, at best, in positions where they could help people but choose not to for selfish reasons. Kelsier could have had a very comfortable easy life but he gave that all up. Why? Well we don't have to guess. We know why. We see his thoughts and motivations in the books. It’s like @Kolten said, I think peoples opinion and perception of him are being shaped more by what people are saying about him and less about what he himself is actually doing and thinking. Although if @CognitiveShadow theory is true, maybe the two are not entirely separate. tldr; people are basically judging someone they know more off of what others have said about him and less off of first hand experience.
  5. "Sticky" is a good word for it. I guess that’s why I really like him. He is not your typical comic book hero who is virtuous in all his acts, thoughts, and methods. He is willing to get his hand dirty without going to far. He manages to stay good despite it all. He loves attention and praise, is not afraid to break the rules, and thinks he can do the impossible. That is a recipe for disaster! But he manages to use all of that for good when most anyone else would end up the villain in the story. And that is what I think Brandon is referring to when he says things about Kel. That he could, or would, be a bad guy. Or that when asked which of his characters would make for a villain, said Kelsier because he could easily see it with a personality and mindset like that (as could I). I just hope that he does not turn down that path. I hope he keeps being a hero despite it all. Edit: While I have not read every WoB I am fairly knowledgeable about things that have been said by Brandon about Kel (and other names he might go by). I don't really think there is much about him that I do not know (unless there is a big WoB I missed). But anything outside of the books (including WoB) is not canon and (stormlight Spoilers) So that's why I wanted to use the books as reference in this topic. And who knows, maybe he will turn out to be a monster after all (I certainly hope not). I just think as of right now, what we have seen from him, he does not deserve such a negative reputation.
  6. I guess I am confused on this point. Kelsier shows up, frees an entire plantation of slaves, and you use this as an example of him being a bad guy because they "might have died"? Well yeah, overthrowing your oppressors brings with it a lot of risks, but that does not make you a villain. Especially because it worked! The man is a hero. He channeled his potentially villainess personality traits to liberate and save instead of oppress and control.
  7. Is that why he did it? Or did he do it to help break the Skaa free of the "safety" of their plantation. Because they were too scared to leave the safety of the plantation even if that meant enduring rape, murder, and forced labor. He was saving them from a life worse than death. And I am pretty sure they did not die, they just thought they would. Hence the need for Kelsiers actions. The skaa had been brainwashed into thinking the mists would kill them or something else would get them and they would die without the "protection" and "services" from the nobles.
  8. All of them. What? I know he does not lose any sleep over killing people he sees as responsible for the horrible life of an entire group of people, but what makes you think he enjoys it? I am referring to any and all books Kelsier appears as a POV character. That's what is so great about books as a medium. We get to see inside the minds of people. I can see someone making the argument that Kalsier and Taravangian are similar in there approach to problems. But i think we can see from there inner most thoughts and motives that they are not that much alike at all. I think Brandon made the comparison that a Kelsier like character COULD make a villain in different circumstances and used Miles Hundredlives as an example of that. But to say that because someone with those character traits could make a villain does not mean that if you have those traits you are automatically a villain. For example, is lying a “bad” thing? Well it depends. Are you lying to your mom to get out of punishment or are you lying to not blow your cover as an undercover agent trying to bring down a corrupt organization? Action “A” does not automatically equal judgment “B”. Lying is not automatically a bad thing even though it is generally thought of as such. Kelsies actions would be bad IF he did them under different circumstances. But he didn’t. He did them in the time and under the circumstances he did. We cannot remove his actions from the circumstances that gave rise to them in the first place. And who knows, maybe it will be revealed that he has been off killing innocent nobles for sport this whole time even though the circumstances have changed proving that he really is evil. But somehow, I doubt it. For some reason I feel like he has been off doing what he seams to be always doing, trying to help people survive. Especially the underdog.
  9. "How did Odium splinter Honor?" With Cultivations help. Edit: to avoid double posting I will just edit this post. The reasoning is Cultivations intent is to help things grow. Being on a planet with an eternal war going on makes it hard to cultivate things. Not being able to stop Odium, her intent eventually pushed her to end the war anyway she could, so she helped Odium splinter Honor and wept because of it.
  10. ***disclamer*** I am basing this off what we see of him in the books. Kelsier to me seemed like someone who “would rather trust and be betrayed then never trust and never have friends at all”. He loves and cares for his team and has to be talked out of pushing himself too far to try and save people on several occasions. For example, when (forget his name) takes the army they were building and attacks, Kelsier was going to try and save them but gets told “you can’t save everyone kel” and he really takes that hard. He has no love for evil people and does not hesitate to eliminate them one way or another, but who thinks evil should not be eliminated? He is very ruthless in his methods at times, but he is living in a ruthless world. I think that is more of a commentary on just how bad things are on Scadrial and less on how bad Kelsier is. I guess I don’t really understand where all this “Kelsier is evil” or “Kelsier is a bad guy” comes from. The reputation he seems to have on this site is vastly different than what seems to be presented in the books. To me he seems like a man in a hard, rough world making hard, rough decisions. But despite all the hard things he has had to do, all the terrible things he has seen and had happen to him, he still choses to smile, to trust, and to love.
  11. Who or even if Brandon has inserted himself into the books as a written character can be talked about, and you bring up a lot of good points. But who he actually is in relationship to the books is the God Beyond. He created this universe out of nothing. Set its laws and limits. Breathed life into his characters. He knows the beginning from the end and ultimately decides the fate of all his characters. And nothing exists except he wills it to. If he were so inclined, he could turn Adonalsium into a lollypop. Whether or not God Beyond exists as a character within the books, Brandon has left that up to our personal interpretation, but the God Beyond certainly exists outside of the creation to which he gave life.
  12. I agree. I think he does a great job at that. I just want to know if he does anything specific to keep his books approachable for the casual fan (like they are now, like you pointed out). So whatever he does seems to be working. I was just wondering what "it" was.
  13. I’m sure this has been answered but if it has, I have not been able to find it. My question is, how does Brandon keep his writing in perspective. What I mean by that is, most of his interaction with fans are with the more “super fan” type. The kind that frequent these online forums and know the lore inside and out. But looking at the numbers, most of the people who read his books are not what I would call “super fans”. So how does he keep the level of worldbuilding, exposition, how hidden the foreshadowing is, etc. scaled appropriately for the average reader when most of his interactions are with people like us asking him hard core questions all the time. For example, (Stormlight spoiler) So, I would like to know what he does too keep things like that form happening again and how he keeps tabs on what an average reader would know and (more importantly) not know. I know there are a lot of ways to do this (even I can think of a few) but I would like to know if Brandon has said what HE does. TLDR ; The amount of foreshadowing and exposition needed for things to make sense to the average reader is much more than what would be needed for people who spend time on forums like this. But it is these forum going “super fans” he interacts with most. So how does Brandon keep a feel for what the average reader would know and not know so his writing does not get to hardcore and alienate the casual readers?
  14. I might have missed this so sorry if it has already been discussed, but how was it that the oathpact was formed in the first place? I was under the impression you needed a bondsmith. So how could the Stormfather (or Honor for that mater) make changes to it without a bondsmith? (I don't think he can.) So he was ether lying again, not really the Stormfather, or changes can be made to the oathpact without a bondsmith.
  15. I am definitely on the "not the real Stormfather" train at the moment.