Kelsier will NOT be a villain, Hoid will

[KaladinWorldsinger]

So after era 1, reading secret history, listening to shardcast episodes and a lot of WoB's, I was super sad to learn that Kelsier was going to be a villain. Some of the WoB's: 'If kelsier was in any other story, he would be the villain', 'kelsier is a psychopath' etc. Now I don't know much about what Brandon means by psychopath ( maybe he means Kelsier has a mild form of ASPD?) from what I understand of the word, i completely disagreed. Kelsier is just too affectionate, loving, and caring to be a psychopath, maybe that's my ignorance talking.The shardcasters seem to heavily agree in this direction And I don't know what the general consensus the fandom has on Kelsier, but i don't see a lot of people disagreeing, so i want to get a lot off my chest. And then a theory

First how I read Kel:( u can skip to the theory)

Spoiler

Kel is a crew man. He has friends that he really trusts. He loves his crew members. He is devastated when Dickson dies. He suffers when he sees spook sad. He cares about a stranger kid who has no relation to him, Vin. He sees her as a surrogate daughter. He loves Mare. We know he genuinely loved her because one of his biggest regrets is that Mare died thinking that Kel thought of her as a traitor. Kel SACRIFICED himself for a cause. None of this feels like a psychopath to me or 'def would be a villain in any other cosmere book'. Someone who does fit that description? Rayse or Sadeas. Is Kel as evil as them? Definitely not

 

But Kel seems to really enjoy Killing right? True. But to me, it felt like a symptom of being deeply, deeply hateful of the nobility. He enjoys killing them due to the satisfaction of vengeance, he seems to dehumanize them, which is understandable for what Kelsier went through. Kel does kill many guards, but hey Vin does that too and she holds Preservation in the future. It's not that he does not value human life, he does not value the life of anyone connected to nobility, like the soldiers. That is prejudice, not psychopathy.

 

He let's go of that hatred by saving Elend due to his love for Vin. He feels guilty about stabbing Elend later too.

 

But he endangers the skaa in his introduction right? Yes but that's because he wanted to force them to fight for their survival against TFE. Is it wrong? Maybe. Is it evil? No. And later when Kel is feeling guilty about this very act( since the rebellion seems like it would fail), the original skaa leader encourages him, saying it was the right thing to do.

 

Now secret History: This was an infuriating book, trying to make Kelsier seem more evil and insane than his clear charecterization in book one. Like preservation at one point days ' at this point sane people usually want to move on' to Kel after TLR passes to the Beyond. Oh really, Leras?? People usually try to live in any form. TLR was tired of living, like Vin and Elend. They are the exceptions here, not Kel. Kel wanted to live, but he sacrificed himself for a cause, of course he would use his second chance. Then the book says that Kel's primary motivation was to prove that he had not been beaten, to TLR. If so, why would he feel guilty about Mares death and the misunderstanding??? Vin then insinuates that he doesn't understand love, in a moment to parallel the very same scene of Kel teaching Vin that having friends means putting their needs over your own. Kel taught her about friendship, this was just disrespectful to Kel.

 

Kel is not a bad guy. Period.( Wanted to get that off my chest so bad)

The theory: Hoid is the villain of scadrial

I think Brandon is backtracking a little about this. A recent WoB said that thaidakar would moderate how mraize runs ghostbloods on Roshar, which makes sense to me. We cannot forget the scene where he accepts the command to 'not toy with the hearts of men' with a 'yes, my lord'. We later see him becoming the god of South scadrial, helping them survive when harmony has almost abandoned them. He is clearly pushing for scadrians to develop technologicaly by making the two sides meet, to protect scadrial as a whole from harmony's mistake of over fertilization of land.

Kel is the utilitarian protector of scadrial right now. His methods are questionable, but the intent is still good. He will protect Scadrial from Hoid.Why?

If you know only a little about the cosmere( there are multiple worlds and hoid is in every book) and then read only era one and secret history, hoid looks like the bad guy. He gives off literal bad vibes to Vin, he stole lerasium beads right when the planet and Leras were dying, he beats up Kelsier, khriss and nazh seem disturbed by his presence. In era two, the only thing he does do is help wax against Kelsier( with the coin). In the letters to hoid, while harmony is enthusiastic in fighting against odium, we never see a reply or them becoming allies. He is also the one hoid deliberately fools( with his disguising trick). It's far fetched, but i think hoid does not like harmony much or scadrial.

If you read only storm light archive, u would think hoid is a good guy. I made a theory about this too. He also used the name midius( from liar of partinal) to the heralds. He respects the heralds. He helps the protagonists a lot. He has a love interest there now. This is hoid at his best and most loveable. I have a theory that goes in depth. Also I think that Hoid will betray Roshar and have a redemption arc in second half but anyway..

Quote

https://www.17thshard.com/forum/topic/99894-hoid-will-betray-roshar-again/

We know the future cosmere conflict is prolly Scadrial vs Roshar. Earth tech vs magitech. Utilitarianism vs deontology. Rebels vs establishment( from a WoB). Survivorism vs whatever Dalinar's religion will be called( prolly). And hoid will side with Roshar

Not only because he may have emotional ties, but because of its heavy magic, fight against odium and dawnshards.

It's hoid vs Kelsier round two. Hoid- the villain of scadrial and the hero of Roshar.

 

[EmulatonStromenkiin]

Each is a good guy in their own story, or at least not the worst person (hoid might have some image issues, I can see that). Kelsier strikes me as the type who is a little to arrogant for his own good, and with his interactions with the Cosmere, he's a little to arrogant for anyone's good. Hoid is an enigma wrapped in flannel wrapped in a question mark wrapped in instant noodles. I can't safely theorize more w/o more knowledge, though he always seems to act for his own purposes..

[+Oltux72]

 

3 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

The theory: Hoid is the villain of scadrial

I think Brandon is backtracking a little about this. A recent WoB said that thaidakar would moderate how mraize runs ghostbloods on Roshar, which makes sense to me. We cannot forget the scene where he accepts the command to 'not toy with the hearts of men' with a 'yes, my lord'.

I see him keeping that promise. But what does it really mean? Kelsier will treat you as a partner. Mind you, not as an equal partner, he is clearly in charge. But he will order you around, not manipulating into doing what he wants you to do. He contrasts most starkly with Harmony on that.

3 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

Kel is the utilitarian protector of scadrial right now. His methods are questionable, but the intent is still good. He will protect Scadrial from Hoid.Why?

Is he utiltarian? I would not see it as that. He is simply nationalist. He will protect Scadrial. The rest of the Cosmere does not matter all that much to him.

3 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

If you know only a little about the cosmere( there are multiple worlds and hoid is in every book) and then read only era one and secret history, hoid looks like the bad guy. He gives off literal bad vibes to Vin, he stole lerasium beads right when the planet and Leras were dying, he beats up Kelsier, khriss and nazh seem disturbed by his presence. In era two, the only thing he does do is help wax against Kelsier( with the coin). In the letters to hoid, while harmony is enthusiastic in fighting against odium, we never see a reply or them becoming allies. He is also the one hoid deliberately fools( with his disguising trick). It's far fetched, but i think hoid does not like harmony much or scadrial.

If you read only storm light archive, u would think hoid is a good guy. I made a theory about this too. He also used the name midius( from liar of partinal) to the heralds. He respects the heralds. He helps the protagonists a lot. He has a love interest there now. This is hoid at his best and most loveable. I have a theory that goes in depth. Also I think that Hoid will betray Roshar and have a redemption arc in second half but anyway..

Well, no. Hoid has a clear interest in this. He fights Odium. That is not identical to defending Roshar. He straight up told Dalinar. Hoid is the ultimate utilitarian here. A whole world
 is a tool to him. And going by the numbers he is right. Sacrificing Roshar to save the rest of the Cosmere is the logical thing for an outsider to do.

3 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

We know the future cosmere conflict is prolly Scadrial vs Roshar. Earth tech vs magitech. Utilitarianism vs deontology. Rebels vs establishment( from a WoB). Survivorism vs whatever Dalinar's religion will be called( prolly). And hoid will side with Roshar

Not only because he may have emotional ties, but because of its heavy magic, fight against odium and dawnshards.

It's hoid vs Kelsier round two. Hoid- the villain of scadrial and the hero of Roshar.

 

The great thing about Brandon's books is that even the villains have sensible motives and the stories cannot be reduced to a simplistic good versus evil. It really shone in Oathbringer when Kaladin understood whom he had been fighting.

[Frustration]

5 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

So after era 1, reading secret history, listening to shardcast episodes and a lot of WoB's, I was super sad to learn that Kelsier was going to be a villain. Some of the WoB's: 'If kelsier was in any other story, he would be the villain', 'kelsier is a psychopath' etc. Now I don't know much about what Brandon means by psychopath ( maybe he means Kelsier has a mild form of ASPD?) from what I understand of the word, i completely disagreed. Kelsier is just too affectionate, loving, and caring to be a psychopath, maybe that's my ignorance talking.The shardcasters seem to heavily agree in this direction And I don't know what the general consensus the fandom has on Kelsier, but i don't see a lot of people disagreeing, so i want to get a lot off my chest. And then a theory

Kel is a neurological psycopath, more along the lines of some surgeons.

5 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

I think Brandon is backtracking a little about this. A recent WoB said that thaidakar would moderate how mraize runs ghostbloods on Roshar, which makes sense to me. We cannot forget the scene where he accepts the command to 'not toy with the hearts of men' with a 'yes, my lord'. We later see him becoming the god of South scadrial, helping them survive when harmony has almost abandoned them. He is clearly pushing for scadrians to develop technologicaly by making the two sides meet, to protect scadrial as a whole from harmony's mistake of over fertilization of land.

Kelsier gave the order to capture a herald. And was angery that they couldn't control the Oathgates.

6 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

If you know only a little about the cosmere( there are multiple worlds and hoid is in every book) and then read only era one and secret history, hoid looks like the bad guy. He gives off literal bad vibes to Vin,

That's entirely Kelsier's doing.

6 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

he stole lerasium beads right when the planet and Leras were dying,

Bead*

He left the one Elend would use because he knew it would be bad if he did.

Spoiler

Questioner

Why didn't Hoid take the second bead of lerasium?

Brandon Sanderson

Hoid knew that if he did so, bad things would happen.

Idaho Falls signing (Dec. 29, 2018)

 

6 hours ago, KaladinWorldsinger said:

He is also the one hoid deliberately fools( with his disguising trick)

He likes his privacy, is there anything wrong with that?

[+Oltux72]

Just now, Frustration said:

Kelsier gave the order to capture a herald. And was angery that they couldn't control the Oathgates.

Why is that bad? To be perfectly frank, aren't the Heralds imperialists taking away a planet from its natives? People who cooperated with a nonhuman force - a Shard - to put their own people into an endless cycle of wars?

[Frustration]

3 minutes ago, Oltux72 said:

Why is that bad? To be perfectly frank, aren't the Heralds imperialists taking away a planet from its natives?

We still don't know the full story on that, or even if they were involved. And what does that matter for Kel? He isn't even from that planet.

4 minutes ago, Oltux72 said:

People who cooperated with a nonhuman force - a Shard - to put their own people into an endless cycle of wars?

Who saved their people for seven thousand years. The fused existed before the Heralds, they didn't put their people in an endless cycle of war, they made times of peace in between wars.

[+Oltux72]

Just now, Frustration said:

We still don't know the full story on that, or even if they were involved. And what does that matter for Kel? He isn't even from that planet.

Well, that works both ways. If it does not matter, why not do to another planet's people what you need to do?

Just now, Frustration said:

Who saved their people for seven thousand years. The fused existed before the Heralds, they didn't put their people in an endless cycle of war, they made times of peace in between wars.

Who kept his personal enemy in a system to the detriment of the people in it.

[Frustration]

Just now, Oltux72 said:

Well, that works both ways. If it does not matter, why not do to another planet's people what you need to do?

It's still a kidnapping, and unintentional homicide.

1 minute ago, Oltux72 said:

Who kept his personal enemy in a system to the detriment of the people in it.

And prevented untold amounts of destruction elsewhere.

[TheCollector]

1 hour ago, Frustration said:

And prevented untold amounts of destruction elsewhere.

Agreed. Look at Threnody. 

[Frustration]

4 minutes ago, TheCollector said:

Agreed. Look at Threnody. 

Or Sel's Cognitive realm.

[Pathfinder]

I don't believe Kelsier is a villain. If he ends up being one, i believe its more due to his more problematic aspects (ego, narcissism, manipulative, and rationalizing to excuse his decision making). But that does not mean I think he is a bad guy. Just I think his actions and the fall out of those actions should be considered when discussing the kind of person he is. That and personally I would not want to follow the guy based on his track record. 

We also have WoB that that multiple people that really know him, don't approve of what he is doing and if Demoux really knew Kelsier, he would not idolize or get along with him.

So just saying, Kelsier does have a lot of faults. Doesn't make him evil persay, but those faults are considerable.

[LewsTherinTelescope]

13 hours ago, Frustration said:

And was angery that they couldn't control the Oathgates.

Something interesting here is that Iyatil and Mraize convinced him to accept it by explaining that letting the coalition keep the Oathgates would help Dalinar against Odium:

Quote

“Iyatil has reported to Master Thaidakar,” Mraize said, “and he has accepted—after some initial anger—that we will not be able to control the Oathgates. I explained that there at least is a calming wind in this, like the riddens of a storm. With Dalinar controlling the Oathgates, he can prosecute the war against Odium.”

“And that helps your cause?”

“We have no interest in seeing the enemy rule this world, Shallan. Master Thaidakar wishes only to secure a method for gathering and transporting Stormlight.” Mraize held his broam up again. Like a miniature sun beside the real one.

So while he certainly can be rather egotistical and think he knows best sometimes, he is willing to set aside his own goals in the face of something greater anyway, he's not focused only on his personal desires.

11 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

We also have WoB that that multiple people that really know him, don't approve of what he is doing and if Demoux really knew Kelsier, he would not idolize or get along with him.

Another thing probably relevant to the convo:

Quote

Brandon Sanderson (paraphrased)

Naming a child for Kelsier is not safe, but is also not a bad idea. If you're okay with Kell’s actions in TFE, you will probably be okay with them going forward. 

JordanCon 2021 (July 17, 2021)

As well as

Quote

Brandon Sanderson

No, they're not allowed to backstab each other. [too many people talking at once] [Ghostbloods have]? specific rules, because they need them to be very strong specific rules. If you have an organization of people who are drawn to the way Kelsier works you need some really strong rules. [Hosts laugh] When he is just with his crew, his force of personality, and the people he individually picks you're not gonna have that problem. 

I always imagine-you can relate it to Tor Books, they're all assassins. When Tor really functioned well, back in the 90s, it's because Tom Doherty could keep a close eye on everything. And he liked his editors being a little bit in competition with each other. And he structured his organization so that if you picked an author who did well, you got bonuses, based on how well the authors did which is just a way of working that could really lead to an unhealthy office environment, if you think about it. But if you have Tom there making sure that that doesn't become the case, and if you have Harriet watching and making it a good incentive, not a bad incentive, then it all works really well and you have one of the strongest sci-fi publishers that's ever existed, because everybody was incentivised to find really good stuff. But they were corralled by Tom Doherty and kept it from becoming toxic. But now that Tom retired I think they're changing a lot of that, because its grown too big for one person to watch over.

And it's the same thing with Kelsier, in an immediate organization of Kelsier's you're gonna find a well bonded crew of people hand picked who are going to work together as a team, and you aren't going to have to worry about too much about backstabbing - less than average for the type of organization that they are. But if his structure is outside of his direct manipulation, the type of people who would be attracted to the organization he makes...

Shardcast Interview (Jan. 23, 2021)

So while the Ghostbloods are often.... not the greatest... it seems like Kell himself is probably better than the Rosharan branch would make it appear, though of course presumably still flawed in many ways. Thing is, while Kell's a great broad picture guy and figurehead, and awesome at running a small tight-knit group, running an interplanetary crime organization kind of needs more structure than his usual "just pick someone you know and have faith in them and give them as much room as they need" strategy (which, to be clear, does not absolve him of all blame, but "is responsible because he didn't vet well and didn't keep an eye on things like he REALLY should have" is very different morally from "is responsible because he approves of these types of actions and thinks it is good to be that way", imo).

[elsoberanok]

kelsier is not a nationalist, he will always be on the side of the defenseless,he is not interesting in destroy otero World, meaby otero gods tes

[+Oltux72]

16 hours ago, Frustration said:

It's still a kidnapping, and unintentional homicide.

Now we probably need a discussion about politics in a fundamentally anarchic world and the core difference between a gang and a government. Such discussions are rarely fruitful.

Thaidakar himself would likely say something that could be paraphrased as: He chose to play the game. If you do that, you go all in.

16 hours ago, Frustration said:

And prevented untold amounts of destruction elsewhere.

If you donate part of your income to the protection of rainforests, you are a laudable human being.
If you donate the trust fund you hold for a minor child to that cause, you are a criminal.
OK, that turns the conundrum up to 11, but it is basically what Honor and Cultivation did. It was noble, but in a certain sense disloyal.

And it is what Harmony would do. For the same reason it is what Thaidakar would not do. Precisely because it is the ultilitarian thing to do.

14 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

So just saying, Kelsier does have a lot of faults. Doesn't make him evil persay, but those faults are considerable.

Yet he died for his people, while Hoid (to some extent) and Harmony (fully) trick others into doing the dirty work.

[redshadow310]

The fact that Kelsier is even around as Thaidakar speaks very poorly of him at this point. From his interaction at the end of book 3 with Spook, and his current description, he is alive as a cognitive shadow thanks to hemalurgy. Hundreds and probably thousands likely died in the research to bring him back to bring him back into the physical realm. 

[EmulatonStromenkiin]

2 hours ago, redshadow310 said:

The fact that Kelsier is even around as Thaidakar speaks very poorly of him at this point. From his interaction at the end of book 3 with Spook, and his current description, he is alive as a cognitive shadow thanks to hemalurgy. Hundreds and probably thousands likely died in the research to bring him back to bring him back into the physical realm. 

This could be further developed into the morals of Hemalurgy, though I have to say that the set made it sound like they discovered a way to make a hemalurgic spike without killing someone in Bands of Mourning. Also, remember Spooks book on Hemalurgy, if we can determine when in his life after the remaking he wrote it, we can determine somewhat what experiments he did.

[Pathfinder]

11 hours ago, LewsTherinTelescope said:

So while he certainly can be rather egotistical and think he knows best sometimes, he is willing to set aside his own goals in the face of something greater anyway, he's not focused only on his personal desires.

Being egotistical does not mean one only makes decisions solely based on ones own personal desires. It can be realizing something benefits not only ones self, but others over all. Now it could be said that too is ultimately self serving as it preserves the self on top of serving the narcissistic feeling of being the savior, but that is not the point I am trying to make. A person can be supremely egotistical, but still realize when something needs to be done that is harmful to themselves. People aren't robots that will always react with the same output if given the same input regardless the situation. Situation and circumstance does come into play. 

 

Quote

Another thing probably relevant to the convo:

There are quite a few problematic actions Kelsier took in TFE. Which is why I believe Brandon stated the caveat, that if you are ok with that, then you would be fine with the other actions. 

 

Quote

As well as

Welllllll, he does say not too much backstabbing lol. Also I would point out to the actions he has taken regarding his own crew mates that he loves so much, with manipulation being the least of them. 

 

Quote

So while the Ghostbloods are often.... not the greatest... it seems like Kell himself is probably better than the Rosharan branch would make it appear, though of course presumably still flawed in many ways. Thing is, while Kell's a great broad picture guy and figurehead, and awesome at running a small tight-knit group, running an interplanetary crime organization kind of needs more structure than his usual "just pick someone you know and have faith in them and give them as much room as they need" strategy (which, to be clear, does not absolve him of all blame, but "is responsible because he didn't vet well and didn't keep an eye on things like he REALLY should have" is very different morally from "is responsible because he approves of these types of actions and thinks it is good to be that way", imo).

So this is a discussion that was had on another thread that kind of devolved, so I think it is best just to leave this portion as agree to disagree.

 

10 hours ago, elsoberanok said:

kelsier is not a nationalist, he will always be on the side of the defenseless,he is not interesting in destroy otero World, meaby otero gods tes

You are certainly entitled to believe as such, and I respect your opinion, but I believe it is conflating the character to say he is always on the side of the defenseless. We have seen numerous examples where he most certainly is not. Now the goals those actions were for could be defended, but Kelsier is very willing to kill, maim, or destroy regardless of background or individual. 

 

8 hours ago, Oltux72 said:

Thaidakar himself would likely say something that could be paraphrased as: He chose to play the game. If you do that, you go all in.

And that is perfectly fine for the character. When I present Kelsier's actions as they are, that is all I feel I am doing. Presenting them as they are. They have perfectly logical reasoning behind them, and can be seen as necessary depending on the circumstance, but it still does not change what he in fact did.

 

Quote

If you donate part of your income to the protection of rainforests, you are a laudable human being.
If you donate the trust fund you hold for a minor child to that cause, you are a criminal.
OK, that turns the conundrum up to 11, but it is basically what Honor and Cultivation did. It was noble, but in a certain sense disloyal.

The difference in the example you provide is in regards to ownership which really I do not see how it is applicable. It is the child's trust fund. By the statement of being criminal, then the assumption is you never had the legal right to use it in that matter. Now maybe if you asked the kid if they were ok with you donating it to the cause, and advise them how it would be beneficial, then oh look, you and the child are laudable. 

 

Quote

And it is what Harmony would do. For the same reason it is what Thaidakar would not do. Precisely because it is the ultilitarian thing to do.

Yeah I still really disagree with you on Kelsier not being utilitarian like from the other thread. Not only has Brandon himself said as much, but Kelsier has had no problem at all killing:

 

1. poor people/Skaa

2. fearful people

3. loved ones

 

Quote

Yet he died for his people, while Hoid (to some extent) and Harmony (fully) trick others into doing the dirty work.

So I do not recall saying I felt Hoid was any better or worst than Kelsier. But I will point out this, dying for a cause or belief does not automatically make that sacrifice noble, nor the cause/reason for it good. There are many examples across history of people dying for a belief where:

 

1. the belief itself was wrong/damaging/negative

2. the process of dying resulted in damage/pain/death of innocents and created more harm than good to all

3. the dying for the cause was actually for a selfish reason, not altruistic at all

 

So saying a person died for their people, does not automatically mean the person was good, nor that the intention and process was good. 

 

4 hours ago, EmulatonStromenkiin said:

This could be further developed into the morals of Hemalurgy, though I have to say that the set made it sound like they discovered a way to make a hemalurgic spike without killing someone in Bands of Mourning. Also, remember Spooks book on Hemalurgy, if we can determine when in his life after the remaking he wrote it, we can determine somewhat what experiments he did.

So this has come up a lot but, just because the person isn't dead, does not mean they are fine. First off Suit himself comments on how the individual they did that to was all screwed up after, but we also have multiple WoB saying the people it is taken from and given to are horrendously screwed up. Brandon has even called hemalurgy evil on three separate occasions. So I am of the belief a whole lot of fundamental understanding on the process has to change before it comes anywhere near ethical. And that is going on the premise that there is not a soul nor a Beyond. If going on the premise that such things did exist, it becomes even more problematic. 

 

 

 

Now after replying to everyone, I put this as an aside to hopefully clarify my points earlier in this post. I am not saying Kelsier is evil. I am also not saying that in certain situations his actions are not justified. Quite a few of them I agree with him. However, I do believe he does need to be called out for his actions. As in they should be presented as they are. Not sugar coated. Kelsier has:

 

1. Tried to kill a skaa who was just concerned about marching to his death. A concern Ham and Kelsier admitted was perfectly natural and understandable. Further the individual was not a spy, nor the worst "offender". Those were already jailed. Finally, the skaa had not acted on it till Kelsier flared his anger to push him to. The only reason the skaa survived the encounter was because Demoux refused and had to actively fight against Kelsier. Now I believe it was justified because Kelsier couldn't afford a rebellion in his own rebellion. He also couldn't afford letting information leak out and destroy the rebellion before it began. But just as much as Kelsier rioted the skaa, he could have soothed and been inspirational instead. But he didn't. He manipulated the situation to force the innocent skaa who was only scared that his life would be wasted, into a corner and intended to kill him to prove a point. If because Kelsier happened to think to himself "sorry buddy, but it has to be you, and it certainly can't be me", is Kelsier feeling guilty and means its ok, then that is certainly anyone else's prerogative. But for myself, though it does not make him evil, it certainly makes him cutthroat. 

2. used someone against their will to kill the loved one in front of someone he cares about. He grabbed Preservation's arm, and stabbed Elend right in front of Vin. He knows Preservation wouldn't do it himself. He knows Vin loves Elend and it would destroy her. He does that for that reason. Because in his own words he assumes she would be selfish like him, and go to heal Elend. Now again, makes sense in the moment. The bigger picture has Ruin trying to get free. He assumes Vin will just heal Elend. He even does the "sorry kid but I gotta" thought. But he still not only voluntarily, but purposefully manipulated not only Preservation but Vin as well. He knew she loved Elend, and used it against her to try and make her act differently. I love my wife dearly. Personally I would not feel comfortable following someone that would be so willing to sacrifice her against my wishes to accomplish a goal, regardless how altruistic the goal may be. And can the goal really be said to be altruistic for Kelsier, when in that moment he was not the one sacrificing anything? He was literally forcing Vin to take what he believed to be the right action. And let us not forget the total mental toll it takes to watch someone you love bleed out and die in front of you. But Kelsier was not only willing to do so, but he actively acted against multiple actors to accomplish that. 

 

Those are just two off the top of my head. So again, I am not saying Kelsier is evil. Just he has very very big faults that lead him to take actions that have very high costs. 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Pathfinder

[LewsTherinTelescope]

13 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

There are quite a few problematic actions Kelsier took in TFE. Which is why I believe Brandon stated the caveat, that if you are ok with that, then you would be fine with the other actions. 

Tbh I genuinely cannot think of one thing (in TFE specifically, not talking about other books) besides what happened with Bilg (which is a HUGE asterisk on that statement because yikes that was messed up) that felt much worse than light grey to me, but it's been a while since I read it.

31 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Also I would point out to the actions he has taken regarding his own crew mates that he loves so much, with manipulation being the least of them.

Wdym?

40 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

We have seen numerous examples where he most certainly is not.

Such as?

40 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Yeah I still really disagree with you on Kelsier not being utilitarian like from the other thread. Not only has Brandon himself said as much, but Kelsier has had no problem at all killing:

Agreed, I think his actions are generally laudable but they're certainly pretty utilitarian still.

40 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

But I will point out this, dying for a cause or belief does not automatically make that sacrifice noble, nor the cause/reason for it good.

Sure, but in this case the cause was overthrowing an oppressive empire that had been slaving, genociding, and murdering for a thousand years straight and was ruled by an immortal despot.

43 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

So I am of the belief a whole lot of fundamental understanding on the process has to change before it comes anywhere near ethical.

Definitely. Kelsier did hold the power of a Shard, so he may know a better way to do it, and due to that particular circumstance I'm willing to hold off on judgement until we actually know how it went down, but it's not a great sign and generally practice of it is pretty crap. (If he discovered how to make medallions prior to it, it's also possible the person was fully healed with Feruchemy, but there are multiple large ifs in that statement.)

42 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

And that is going on the premise that there is not a soul nor a Beyond. If going on the premise that such things did exist, it becomes even more problematic.

Depends on how you view it. Personally, if there's a Beyond and "true soul", I doubt it can be affected by anything in the Three Realms, but that's something we'll never know an answer to.

47 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

1. Tried to kill a skaa who was just concerned about marching to his death. A concern Ham and Kelsier admitted was perfectly natural and understandable. Further the individual was not a spy, nor the worst "offender". Those were already jailed. Finally, the skaa had not acted on it till Kelsier flared his anger to push him to. The only reason the skaa survived the encounter was because Demoux refused and had to actively fight against Kelsier. Now I believe it was justified because Kelsier couldn't afford a rebellion in his own rebellion. He also couldn't afford letting information leak out and destroy the rebellion before it began. But just as much as Kelsier rioted the skaa, he could have soothed and been inspirational instead. But he didn't. He manipulated the situation to force the innocent skaa who was only scared that his life would be wasted, into a corner and intended to kill him to prove a point. If because Kelsier happened to think to himself "sorry buddy, but it has to be you, and it certainly can't be me", is Kelsier feeling guilty and means its ok, then that is certainly anyone else's prerogative. But for myself, though it does not make him evil, it certainly makes him cutthroat. 

Agreed. The Bilg thing is the one major thing where I think Kelsier was genuinely doing something terrible, even if he has justifications in his head.

50 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

2. used someone against their will to kill the loved one in front of someone he cares about. He grabbed Preservation's arm, and stabbed Elend right in front of Vin. He knows Preservation wouldn't do it himself. He knows Vin loves Elend and it would destroy her. He does that for that reason. Because in his own words he assumes she would be selfish like him, and go to heal Elend. Now again, makes sense in the moment. The bigger picture has Ruin trying to get free. He assumes Vin will just heal Elend. He even does the "sorry kid but I gotta" thought. But he still not only voluntarily, but purposefully manipulated not only Preservation but Vin as well. He knew she loved Elend, and used it against her to try and make her act differently. I love my wife dearly. Personally I would not feel comfortable following someone that would be so willing to sacrifice her against my wishes to accomplish a goal, regardless how altruistic the goal may be. And can the goal really be said to be altruistic for Kelsier, when in that moment he was not the one sacrificing anything? He was literally forcing Vin to take what he believed to be the right action. And let us not forget the total mental toll it takes to watch someone you love bleed out and die in front of you. But Kelsier was not only willing to do so, but he actively acted against multiple actors to accomplish that. 

That's fair. To me the scene reads less as being fine with the decision and more as knowing he needed to act quickly and drastically to stop Ruin's escape even if he dislikes the option, but it's certainly not a nice thing to do to someone by any means.

[Frustration]

8 hours ago, redshadow310 said:

The fact that Kelsier is even around as Thaidakar speaks very poorly of him at this point. From his interaction at the end of book 3 with Spook, and his current description, he is alive as a cognitive shadow thanks to hemalurgy. Hundreds and probably thousands likely died in the research to bring him back to bring him back into the physical realm. 

Kelsier gained a lot of knowledge on Hemalurgy just by holding Preservation, it's likely he knew what to do without needing to experiment.

[Pathfinder]

1 hour ago, LewsTherinTelescope said:

Tbh I genuinely cannot think of one thing (in TFE specifically, not talking about other books) besides what happened with Bilg (which is a HUGE asterisk on that statement because yikes that was messed up) that felt much worse than light grey to me, but it's been a while since I read it.

So I would go into detail and present them the way I did the two at the end, but that would take a bit, so please do not take this list as painting Kelsier in an evil light, just writing it that way for brevity.

 

1. Abandoning the village while fully knowing the inquisitors would catch up and kill them (he muses this to himself)(that portion is only in the first book, but if we include the other three, then he also admits that he completely forgot them, and is completely surprised that they survived)

2. (Not to start a debate as this has been gone back and forth over before) Killing Skaa guards just doing their job. Just a slightly different sequence of events or time frame would have seen Ham in that place. 

 

Those are just off the top of my head. I am pretty sure there are more but I would have to reference the book. 

 

Quote

Wdym?

So the two examples at the end were what I was referring to. So manipulating Vin, Preservation and Elend. But he has also manipulated Vin, Dockson, Ham, Breeze, Marsh and most of all Spook. Again we can comment on how the results were ultimately beneficial, or necessary in the moment, but I feel it should be confronted that he did in fact manipulate them. They were not exempt from his machinations just because they were "friends". 

Quote

Such as?

Bilg was one example. Skaa guards another. The villagers for another. And that is purely contained to the first book. That is not counting his actions in secret history, nor the actions he took with the southern scadrians. My point is you are not "safe" depending on your societal standing, your relationship to Kelsier, or moral integrity. He has taken actions to hurt, or kill innocents, poor/rich, and loved ones in equal measure. That is also assuming you know for a fact that he considers you to fall within one of those categories. Yeden for instance ended up feeling like he was part of the crew and close to Kelsier. When in reality he was more a means to an end. All the other crew mates commented as such. 

Quote

Agreed, I think his actions are generally laudable but they're certainly pretty utilitarian still.

See I don't see it in terms of laudable or blamable. I think in certain situations I could see it as justified, or reasonable. But I think if we are going to look at his actions as "good" or "bad" there are going to be a lot of issues. He kills people rather cavalierly. Some would consider murder evil full stop unless in self defense. Kelsier has shown he has no compunction of just killing someone if it accomplishes a goal. So by that standing Kelsier would be evil. Some would consider manipulating people who trust you as evil. Kelsier has shown he has no compunction about manipulating people in and outside of his crew. So by that standing Kelsier would be evil. But by presenting it in that light, it removes the context. Could Kelsier have made better choices? Sure! But he made the choices he did, as the person he did. And I think that offers commentary on how he handles issues. But I do not think that reflects on him as being "good" or "evil"

Quote

Sure, but in this case the cause was overthrowing an oppressive empire that had been slaving, genociding, and murdering for a thousand years straight and was ruled by an immortal despot.

Like I said, it can be rationalized to be useful or for a good cause, but that is not how (in my opinion) Oltux presented it. The way I read it, was Oltux was saying that Kelsier because he was willing to die for his people, is a better person than Hoid. I don't think we can determine that based on that information. Also remember in the beginning everyone assumed Kelsier was doing that for an angle. For all we know he wanted revenge on the Lord Ruler, and was willing to die to accomplish it. I am not saying that is the case, just that understanding is also perfectly viable. So the assumption of dying for a cause denotes the integrity of the individual dying, I disagree with. Further, if it wasn't for Elend, his sacrifice would have resulted in a society in upheaval with people of all social strata dying. So although his death could be said to be with the noble goal of ending a horrible system, it does not necessarily mean the individual dying is noble themselves, nor speak to the rationale for doing it. 

Quote

Definitely. Kelsier did hold the power of a Shard, so he may know a better way to do it, and due to that particular circumstance I'm willing to hold off on judgement until we actually know how it went down, but it's not a great sign and generally practice of it is pretty crap. (If he discovered how to make medallions prior to it, it's also possible the person was fully healed with Feruchemy, but there are multiple large ifs in that statement.)

I fully acknowledge that there could be a "nice" way to conduct hemalurgy, but I will counter that if the knowledge of the shard is all that it would take to know, then why hasn't Harmony instituted it? He has both shards, so he would definitely have to know. We have confirmation that he doesn't like the way hemalurgy works enough that a species that works for him directly, cannot propagate due to its reliance on hemalurgy. He has actively tried to prevent the spread of hemalurgic knowledge due to its danger. He has also provided hints and info to help the development of Scadrial. So I think it is pretty conclusive that if holding a shard gave you the knowledge to do hemalurgy safely, then Harmony would know it. And if he knew of a way to do hemalurgy safely, then Scadrial would know of it. 

Quote

Depends on how you view it. Personally, if there's a Beyond and "true soul", I doubt it can be affected by anything in the Three Realms, but that's something we'll never know an answer to.

Well I don't know your personal religious leanings, but my assumption is if you believe in a soul and an afterlife, and you find out that hemalurgy rips off a piece of your "soul" to give someone power. And further you cannot confirm or find out in that afterlife whether or not it affects you, would you risk your everlasting soul and eternity for that?

Conversely if you are not religious, and there is no beyond, having confirmation that it messes you up prior to full "transition" at death, at least for myself, would give pause. 

Quote

Agreed. The Bilg thing is the one major thing where I think Kelsier was genuinely doing something terrible, even if he has justifications in his head.

And denoting it as something terrible is a personal moral judgement. I respect you see it that way. My goal was to say, Kelsier is willing to do this thing. However it may be justified in the moment, it was a decision he was willing to make and did in fact take. So that should be considered and seen for what it is when discussing the character and future choices. 

Quote

That's fair. To me the scene reads less as being fine with the decision and more as knowing he needed to act quickly and drastically to stop Ruin's escape even if he dislikes the option, but it's certainly not a nice thing to do to someone by any means.

And I respect that that is your reading of it. Again (not meaning to beat a dead horse, but respectfully respond to each point in turn), I feel it can be said Kelsier's action in that moment was justified, but that does not change what was done to accomplish that goal. He is willing, able, and has taken such actions. So as to whether he could be a villain in the future? Based on his actions so far, I could see him taking actions in the future that would be seen as evil/villainous by others. But he would feel he was perfectly justified in those actions, and the line he "wouldn't cross" is a distant one. 

Edited February 23, 2022 by Pathfinder

[LewsTherinTelescope]

21 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

So I would go into detail and present them the way I did the two at the end, but that would take a bit, so please do not take this list as painting Kelsier in an evil light, just writing it that way for brevity.

Yeah that's fair.

22 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

1. Abandoning the village while fully knowing the inquisitors would catch up and kill them (he muses this to himself)(that portion is only in the first book, but if we include the other three, then he also admits that he completely forgot them, and is completely surprised that they survived)

2. (Not to start a debate as this has been gone back and forth over before) Killing Skaa guards just doing their job. Just a slightly different sequence of events or time frame would have seen Ham in that place.

Valid. Personally, I see both of those as unfortunate circumstances but good and necessary within them, but I can understand why others would disagree.

23 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

So the two examples at the end were what I was referring to. So manipulating Vin, Preservation and Elend. But he has also manipulated Vin, Dockson, Ham, Breeze, Marsh and most of all Spook. Again we can comment on how the results were ultimately beneficial, or necessary in the moment, but I feel it should be confronted that he did in fact manipulate them. They were not exempt from his machinations just because they were "friends". 

Fair enough.

24 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

But I do not think that reflects on him as being "good" or "evil"

It's certainly not objective or anything, but to me most (definitely not all, as I mentioned there are one or two things like the Bilg stuff where it's a lot more murky) of his actions are things where I am (personally, according to the way I judge things) pretty fine considering them as (again, in my opinion) decently far on the "good" side rather than the "not really sure" side.

28 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

I fully acknowledge that there could be a "nice" way to conduct hemalurgy, but I will counter that if the knowledge of the shard is all that it would take to know, then why hasn't Harmony instituted it?

Good point. So if there is a way it's probably not something immediately clear from holding the power, you're right.

29 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

if you believe in a soul and an afterlife, and you find out that hemalurgy rips off a piece of your "soul" to give someone power. And further you cannot confirm or find out in that afterlife whether or not it affects you, would you risk your everlasting soul and eternity for that?

The spiritweb hangs around in the Spiritual Realm even after aspect separation, so if there is a true soul and afterlife (setting aside the question of if there is and assuming it because the line I was initially quoting was about that hypothetical) I don't think the spiritweb would be what goes there, because it's still here instead.

32 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Conversely if you are not religious, and there is no beyond, having confirmation that it messes you up prior to full "transition" at death, at least for myself, would give pause. 

Oh yeah, at least by default it screws you up real good. I wasn't contesting that part, just that imo the existence of the Beyond would probably not make it even worse.

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Bilg was one example

Fair.

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Skaa guards another

Wouldn't really describe them as "the defenseless", they're literally the military (or security forces, etc).

34 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

The villagers for another

Eh, what he did was dangerous, but I wouldn't say he's not on their side, just reckless and impulsive and that this can endanger people.

37 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

That is not counting his actions in secret history

Which of his actions in SH were him not trying to fight for those who needed it? (Setting aside the question of his methods, just talking about his goals, aka his "side".)

38 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

nor the actions he took with the southern scadrians

Didn't he save them all from dying out?

(Now, to be clear, I agree his recklessness and ruthlessness can endanger those he is trying to help, sometimes greatly, I'm solely contesting the point that any of these were the result of him joining on the side of anyone besides the people who needed aid.)

41 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

My goal was to say, Kelsier is willing to do this thing. However it may be justified in the moment, it was a decision he was willing to make and did in fact take. So that should be considered and seen for what it is when discussing the character and future choices. 

In that case, I agree, yeah.

42 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Like I said, it can be rationalized to be useful or for a good cause, but that is not how (in my opinion) Oltux presented it. The way I read it, was Oltux was saying that Kelsier because he was willing to die for his people, is a better person than Hoid. I don't think we can determine that based on that information.

Ah, I misunderstood you then. No argument here. Fwiw, I took Oltux's comment as contesting the argument that Kelsier's actions are fundamentally all selfish while others have more selfless ones (not saying you were making this argument, just that I've seen it before and the way I read Oltux's comment it seemed like that was how they took it), but obviously I can't speak for them on what their intentions actually were.

1 hour ago, Pathfinder said:

So as to whether he could be a villain in the future? Based on his actions so far, I could see him taking actions in the future that would be seen as evil/villainous by others. But he would feel he was perfectly justified in those actions, and the line he "wouldn't cross" is a distant one. 

Fair enough.

On the general topic, not a response to any one point or person: Yes, Kelsier is reckless, and yes, he's often ruthless. But I feel like it's hard to argue that he doesn't care nonetheless. When the army exposes himself, he runs sixteen hours straight with pewter, even expecting that the other garrison would probably already be there and finishing them off, for the slight chance he could help. And when he arrives, and can see that yep, the Valtroux Garrison has them horribly outnumbered and they're about to wipe them out, he still tries to join the fight because he hates the idea of abandoning them, even when his chances are hopeless and he would ruin any salvageable parts of his plan by doing so.

Quote

Maybe, Kelsier thought. The Valtroux Garrison is only three days’ march from Holstep. Even riding all night, a messenger couldn’t have gotten to Luthadel in under two days. By the time I get to the army…

Dockson could obviously read the worry in Kelsier’s eyes. “Either way, the army is useless to us now,” he said.

“I know,” Kelsier said. “This is just about saving those men’s lives. I’ll get word to you as soon as I can.”

...

“It’s a slaughter,” Kelsier said angrily. “The Valtroux Garrison must have orders to wipe out the entire group.” He stepped forward.

“Kelsier!” Vin said, grabbing his arm. “What are you doing?”

He turned back to her. “There are still men down there. My men.”

“What are you going to do—attack an entire army by yourself? For what purpose? Your rebels don’t have Allomancy—they won’t be able to run away on swift feet and escape. You can’t stop an entire army, Kelsier.”

He shook himself free of her grip; she didn’t have the strength to hold on. She stumbled, falling to the rough black dirt, throwing up a puff of ash. Kelsier began to stalk down the hill toward the battlefield.

...

Kelsier breathed out slowly, trying to find an outlet for his frustration and anger. He’d abandoned the men on the battlefield. He shook his head, ignoring what logic told him at the moment. His anger was still too fresh.

He also forces himself to watch the executions, and bluntly tells the crew that while what they are doing is the right thing, they need to acknowledge the consequences and do what they can. And in the end, he charges in to free them, trying to save any lives he can, and stays to fight the Inquisitor expecting to die and lose everything else, even before he knows the Lord Ruler will be there and he'll be able to make his mark.

Quote

The prisoner carts rolled toward him, entering a small courtyard square formed by the intersection of two streets. Each rectangular vehicle was lined with bars; each one was packed with people who were now distinctly familiar. Servants, soldiers, housekeepers—some were rebels, many were just regular people. None of them deserved death.

Too many skaa have died already, he thought, flaring his metals. Hundreds. Thousands. Hundreds of thousands.

Not today. No more.

...

Vin was right, Kelsier thought with frustration. Below, the Inquisitor watched him, trailing him with unnatural eyes. I shouldn’t have done this. Below, a group of soldiers rounded up the skaa that he had freed.

I should run—try to lose the Inquisitor. I’ve done it before.

But…he couldn’t. He wouldn’t, not this time. He had compromised too many times before. Even if it cost him everything else, he had to free those prisoners.

None of this is a man who does not actually care about the people he's fighting for, nor a man whose only goal is revenge or glory.

[Frustration]

2 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

I fully acknowledge that there could be a "nice" way to conduct hemalurgy, but I will counter that if the knowledge of the shard is all that it would take to know, then why hasn't Harmony instituted it? He has both shards, so he would definitely have to know. We have confirmation that he doesn't like the way hemalurgy works enough that a species that works for him directly, cannot propagate due to its reliance on hemalurgy. He has actively tried to prevent the spread of hemalurgic knowledge due to its danger. He has also provided hints and info to help the development of Scadrial. So I think it is pretty conclusive that if holding a shard gave you the knowledge to do hemalurgy safely, then Harmony would know it. And if he knew of a way to do hemalurgy safely, then Scadrial would know of it. 

Not that Hemalurgy would ever be "Nice" but that Kelsier wouldn't need to experiment to find out what he wants.

[Pathfinder]

 

Quote

The spiritweb hangs around in the Spiritual Realm even after aspect separation, so if there is a true soul and afterlife (setting aside the question of if there is and assuming it because the line I was initially quoting was about that hypothetical) I don't think the spiritweb would be what goes there, because it's still here instead.

So in that case, the reason why I mentioned your religious beliefs, is as a hypothetical. As in hypothetically if you lived on Scadrial, were religious, and were told hemalurgy rips off a part of your soul, then I do not think you would take the idea of a chunk of that getting ripped off lightly. I would imagine quite a few people would be concerned regarding the well being of their "immortal soul". 

 

Quote

Wouldn't really describe them as "the defenseless", they're literally the military (or security forces, etc).

The soldiers were an example of:

 

1. Skaa not being exempt from Kelsier killing and using them

2. The typical response of "well for all you know, that guard was a good man, forced into a situation to keep little Timmy and Janey with food and off the street". Hence the comparison to Ham (and Clubs too) who was a soldier (and friends with quite a few of those men), and who had a family in hiding for that reason. So the idea it was ok to kill the guards because they worked for the system, although is rational and justified from Kelsier's point of view, still shows Kelsier is able to rationalize killing people regardless their social standing/cultural connection. 

 

Quote

Eh, what he did was dangerous, but I wouldn't say he's not on their side, just reckless and impulsive and that this can endanger people.

So an example of philosophical discourse.

 

If I change the path of a river, knowing it will flood a city and possibly kill the inhabitants, but do it anyway, do I bear responsibility for the potential fall out of that action? Further, let us say I warn the city that they will be flooded because of the action I took, does that absolve me of that responsibility? Finally, do I have a right to step in, and alter the course of people's lives, requiring them to either ascribe to what I think is best for them, or they die?

 

For better or worst, altruistic or nefarious, these were Kelsier's actions, and those were the results. In hindsight we can say "Yay! They survived after all and it all worked out!". But that would be saying the ends justified the means yes? My point is not to convince, nor to paint Kelsier in a negative light. Just to realize the implications of such actions. 

 

Quote

Which of his actions in SH were him not trying to fight for those who needed it? (Setting aside the question of his methods, just talking about his goals, aka his "side".)

There are plenty of times where he manipulated individuals to his own gain. Preservation is the top of the list. There are also plenty of times he admits to himself he is doing it for the pride, the revenge. That does not negate what he has done for the people, nor say that is all he thinks. Just his ego definitely comes into play. 

 

Quote

Didn't he save them all from dying out?

There is a whole lot of assuming regarding Kelsier and the Southerners that I imagine will be answered in the Lost Metal. This is another discussion that has been had in the past, so I don't want this to digress, but there are quite a few things that Kelsier has done regarding the Southerners that can be called into question. Again, to stress, I am not saying this to negate the help he gave the Southerners. Just the actions he takes to get there can offer commentary on what he is willing to, and has done. 

 

Quote

(Now, to be clear, I agree his recklessness and ruthlessness can endanger those he is trying to help, sometimes greatly, I'm solely contesting the point that any of these were the result of him joining on the side of anyone besides the people who needed aid.)

My point was just because you needed aid, does not mean Kelsier will help you, or treat you any differently. He did help people that needed aid, but it doesn't make him the patron saint of those that need aid lol. Its the whole "all cats are mammals, but not all mammals are cats" concept. And Kelsier has acted in ways to further a goal he thought was necessary to the detriment of those who needed aid. Basically it is not a rule but an occasional feature. That help?

 

Quote

Ah, I misunderstood you then. No argument here. Fwiw, I took Oltux's comment as contesting the argument that Kelsier's actions are fundamentally all selfish while others have more selfless ones (not saying you were making this argument, just that I've seen it before and the way I read Oltux's comment it seemed like that was how they took it), but obviously I can't speak for them on what their intentions actually were.

Yeah, to be clear my points are not to negate the benefit that Kelsier's actions had. And as I said even his more extreme actions, in their context can be justified. But as I said something being justified is different than saying it is good or bad. Someone can kill an opponent, and then kill that opponent's entire family down to the children. It could be justified under the pretense of not leaving loose ends that can come to haunt you later. But I am sure many people would say killing children is abhorrent. That is why I am trying to speak on it without such connotations. For myself at least, I am not commenting in such extremes. Kelsier can be egotistical and narcissistic to believe he knows what is best, and take actions that he feels is justified, while still lamenting the pain that is caused to someone he cares about. The issue I have, is he is still willing to do it, and further, has done it on multiple occasions. So I am more focused on the actions Kelsier is willing to and has taken. 

 

Quote

On the general topic, not a response to any one point or person: Yes, Kelsier is reckless, and yes, he's often ruthless. But I feel like it's hard to argue that he doesn't care nonetheless. When the army exposes himself, he runs sixteen hours straight with pewter, even expecting that the other garrison would probably already be there and finishing them off, for the slight chance he could help. And when he arrives, and can see that yep, the Valtroux Garrison has them horribly outnumbered and they're about to wipe them out, he still tries to join the fight because he hates the idea of abandoning them, even when his chances are hopeless and he would ruin any salvageable parts of his plan by doing so.

He also forces himself to watch the executions, and bluntly tells the crew that while what they are doing is the right thing, they need to acknowledge the consequences and do what they can. And in the end, he charges in to free them, trying to save any lives he can, and stays to fight the Inquisitor expecting to die and lose everything else, even before he knows the Lord Ruler will be there and he'll be able to make his mark.

None of this is a man who does not actually care about the people he's fighting for, nor a man whose only goal is revenge or glory.

As that was never my point, I assume you are not referring to me, so I will not respond

Edited February 23, 2022 by Pathfinder

[EmulatonStromenkiin]

7 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

So this has come up a lot but, just because the person isn't dead, does not mean they are fine. First off Suit himself comments on how the individual they did that to was all screwed up after, but we also have multiple WoB saying the people it is taken from and given to are horrendously screwed up. Brandon has even called hemalurgy evil on three separate occasions. So I am of the belief a whole lot of fundamental understanding on the process has to change before it comes anywhere near ethical. And that is going on the premise that there is not a soul nor a Beyond. If going on the premise that such things did exist, it becomes even more problematic. 

Okay, I was just clarifying the stuff I remembered, it's been like 6 months since I read it, and didn't know anything about the WOB. I completely agree that Hemalurgy is evil, that is part of its essence and danger, especially if it gets to the rest of the cosmere

[DiePie]

6 hours ago, Pathfinder said:

So in that case, the reason why I mentioned your religious beliefs, is as a hypothetical. As in hypothetically if you lived on Scadrial, were religious, and were told hemalurgy rips off a part of your soul, then I do not think you would take the idea of a chunk of that getting ripped off lightly. I would imagine quite a few people would be concerned regarding the well being of their "immortal soul". 

do (northern) Scadrians even believe in an immortal soul?

I know we don't really know much about Scadrian theology (I blame the fact that the series focuses on the type of people who don't tend to be religious), but out of the major post-catecendre religions we know of (Pathian, Survivorism, and Sliverism are the ones that come to mind), none seem to focus much on the afterlife. Which, now that I think about it, is a weird thing to leave out.

I know it isn't particularly relevant to this debate, except to add that Kelsier probably doesn't believe in the afterlife, considering the way he reacted after dying.