teknopathetic

[Full Spoilers] I love the book, but I cant bring myself to read it again. The ending disturbed me too much.

22 posts in this topic

Full Spoilers.

 

I found the ending of SoS to be very disturbing. Bleeder was mentally raped by the spike that was forcefully slid into her body. I'm not saying that she was a moral person, but mindraping someone is pretty horrific. Im not even saying that Sazed (and co)  had a better option, but i just dread approaching that scene again.

 

This scene has really split my mind on Sazed.I know his death would be a disaster for the cosmere, but I think it would be just from Bleeder's point of view. This exactly mimics the moral position of the Lord Ruler. He was awful for reasonable reasons. But still, he had to be taken out. Kelsier did horrid things to take him out, just like Bleeder. And to be fair, Bleeder and Kelsier had to die as well. 

 

Basically, I think Bleeder was right, even if it is bad for the cosmere.

 

 

 

Just a thought. 

 

 

 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her mind was totally functional the whole time though.

It's the same thing Vin and Elend did to literally thousands of koloss at a time for months.

Edited by natc
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Marsh had it the worst with Ruin.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Marsh had it the worst with Ruin.

 

image.jpg?w=817&c=1

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bleeder killed people slowly by stabbing spikes into them. She was going to do much, much worse if not stopped. Sazed was only taking control of her in response to this - to our knowledge, he hadn't directly controlled anyone who wasn't planning on murdering thousands before.

 

I'm not sold that Harmony was going to be taking her over in the way that Ruin did Marsh - imagine he succeeded, do you think he would have forced her to go around singing hymns about how she loves Harmony? I don't think he'd go that far as to torture her like that, but maybe you think differently?

 

Did Paalm have a point? I think there's something to her line of thinking, though the existence of Marsh doing things Harmony disagrees with would speak to her opinions being slightly irrational. But I can't say I disagree with Sazed in that particular instance, tragic as it is.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paalm was only partially paralyzed, to stop her from killing more people. I don't think a partial paralyzation it's enough to accuse Sazed if mind rape.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, Sazed mentions that they had a contract, and he's within his rights. I always throw in this caveat, but presumably she had the option not to join his contract, and she knew that if she violated the terms, a consequence would be a submission to his domination.

 

I have to confess, I have serious issue with the incredibly harsh and, I feel, totally inaccurate analogy being proposed in the OP here. I don't say this at all lightly; more than one woman in my family has suffered tragic assault of the nature the OP'er references. Saying that what happens in this book is basically that... well, I feel like it's cheapening actual violence against women. Sorry. Real life sexual assault is much, much worse that what's proposed in this novel, and it's just not comparable. I don't mean to diminish your outrage or disgust, and of course it's a good thing that you think anything done to a woman without her consent is terrible; I and, I assume, any rational human being feels exactly the same way you do on this subject. But this was a consequence she did not initially have to agree to, but did anyway, only invoked as a reaction to (and a prevention of) horrible, heinous crimes, not just killing people, but deforming their bodies and very souls into pain-driven monstrosities.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just reread this section last night and it was just as heartbreaking the 2nd time. There were no more choices by the time Harmony took over Bleeder, what she was before was gone and what she had become couldn't be allowed to continue as a free entity. What he did was akin to forcing a psychopath to take medicine that makes them sane. She couldn't tolerate that and choose to kill herself. 

 

That also means to me that regardless of how Wax feels, he didn't kill her twice, she choose that herself. I'm still not convinced that the first time was Harmony's doing. I think there is still something we don't know. I'm also very curious about the disaster that would have been if Wax had been told the truth earlier.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This scene has really split my mind on Sazed.I know his death would be a disaster for the cosmere, but I think it would be just from Bleeder's point of view. This exactly mimics the moral position of the Lord Ruler. He was awful for reasonable reasons. But still, he had to be taken out. Kelsier did horrid things to take him out, just like Bleeder. And to be fair, Bleeder and Kelsier had to die as well. 

 

Basically, I think Bleeder was right, even if it is bad for the cosmere. 

 

I mean... "from her point of view" is a misleading term, because she was insane. It doesn't exactly mimic the moral position of the Lord Ruler; if anything, she's more like the Lord Ruler than Harmony is. The Lord Ruler decided he knew what was best, and took upon himself the decision to inflict incalculable suffering out of arrogance. Remember, before he ever ascended, he was a sociopathic, genocidal, racist murderer. In the words of his own doting uncle.

 

Sure, he thought he was doing what needed to be done... but he was only accountable to himself, and his "himself" was a jerk. If someone with his mindset and worldview were given the powers of Harmony, Bleeder would have been right. He would have been an incalculable tyrant. He would have spiked every man woman and child at birth, and controlled literally all of them like puppets, directed every thought word deed and action, all in an unthinking assumption that he simply knew better than them, and why couldn't they stop fighting him and see that submission to his greater glory was the only logical step.

 

Bleeder was right... from her own point of view. Bleeder was insane. Goddess's analogy is perfect; a psychopathic murderer who lacks the capacity to feel empathy is also right, from his own point of view, because from his own point of view no one else's suffering matters. What happened to Bleeder might be tragic, but she absolutely had to be stopped at any cost, because allowing her to continue in any capacity would have inflicted order of magnitude more suffering on the world.

 

Someone being right "from their own point of view" is... meaningless, because everyone is right from their own point of view. Villains aren't people who think "what I'm doing is wrong, and I know that, and I wish I wasn't doing it, but I am." That's... no one. Every villain feels justified in their actions. Every man is the hero of his own story. Bleeder was insane. She believed Harmony guilty of crimes that he clearly did not commit. She was trying to cause untold suffering in a plan that wouldn't have worked to foil a conspiracy that didn't exist.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people keep saying she was insane? She HAD 2 spikes, the mystery spike and the elemantic spike, just not two Sazed could use.  Being wrong or even evil does not make her mad (and I do not think she was wrong), it makes her ruthless and driven, something that perfectly sane people have always been capable of, don't diminish what she chose to try to achieve, or the methods she used, for blaming them on mental illness.

Edited by ArchonTremaine
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people keep saying she was insane? She HAD 2 spikes, the mystery spike and the elemantic spike, just not two Sazed could use.  Being wrong or even evil does not make her mad (and I do not think she was wrong), it makes her ruthless and driven, something that perfectly sane people have always been capable of, don't diminish what she chose to try to achieve, or the methods she used, for blaming them on mental illness.

 

[sarcasm] Because Harmony forbid we diminish an attempt to sow chaos and anarchy in a densely-populated city.[/sarcasm]  

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why do people keep saying she was insane? She HAD 2 spikes, the mystery spike and the elemantic spike, just not two Sazed could use.  Being wrong or even evil does not make her mad (and I do not think she was wrong), it makes her ruthless and driven, something that perfectly sane people have always been capable of, don't diminish what she chose to try to achieve, or the methods she used, for blaming them on mental illness.

 

Do you actually have confirmation that she had 2 spikes?  The only time I'm aware of Brandon being asked he declined to answer until after the tour was over.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

insane is waesel word! are 1spiked kandra biolpar??? schizoprenic?? ocd?? autsitic? sayin some1 is ''crazy'' so they are alway lying is terrible thing to say and is why USA had loboto-mobiles because when you say '' some1 is crazy they have no rights '' thats what you get

-4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from how physically painful that was to even read (not the first time by now, man) as mean as it sounds if you try to convince me that the words of potentially delusional people should be trusted I'd be tempted to knock you out cold and stuff you somewhere if only to save you the trouble of making people facepalm with that logic.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

insane is waesel word! are 1spiked kandra biolpar??? schizoprenic?? ocd?? autsitic? sayin some1 is ''crazy'' so they are alway lying is terrible thing to say and is why USA had loboto-mobiles because when you say '' some1 is crazy they have no rights '' thats what you get

Seeing as how Kandra are different than humans, how can we even begin to guess as to what happens to them with only one spike. I guess, based on realmatics, they become slightly blocked from the cognitive realm and thus lose grip and who they see themselves as and who other people see them as.

Edit: I also think that taking someone with such mental loss as a one spike Kandra as someone who may not tell the truth isn't a bad judgement.

Edited by Blightsong
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't find what Harmony does at the end, to Bleeder, to be particularly bad.  I have a cousin who has diagnosed borderline personality disorder, and if he stops taking his meds he'll be back in jail soon for trying/succeeding in hurting people.  He's proven this multiple times.  While on his meds, he's able to function within a civil society.  He doesn't like the way the meds make him feel when he's on them.  The rights of others to live trumps his right to to kill/maim/destroy/hurt other people just because he doesn't want to take his meds.  And I don't feel bad at all for saying that.

 

The end, there?  That was Harmony force-feeding Bleeder her pills.  It's not something to be happy about.  Nor is it anything to be sad about.  It just is.  Now then, the thing that started it all?  That's hinted (but not confirmed) to be forcing her to die so that Wax would go back to Elendel?  That's where OP can make an argument--but it's just conjecture.  We don't know what Harmony did to force Bleeder to take an action that she didn't want to (that I'm aware of.)

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think shrugging off Bleeder as "insane" is not the proper way to approach this. Bleeder wasn't insane. In the novel it is stated over and over that Bleeder is too precise to be "insane". Sazed assumed Bleeder is insane for two reasons: Bleeder (should) have only one spike AND Bleeder's actions do not make rational sense to Harmony's intent. We discover that Bleeder has two spikes, and that she is of sound mind. She has decided that it is permissible to kill people to achieve her goals, but that isn't the same thing as being insane. Kelsier felt the same way, didn't he? Kelsier and Bleeder are virtually the same person, but this time around we are anti-kelsier; we are the law. 

 

Maybe it is just my interpretation, but I thought the point of the novel was to show that Bleeder wasn't insane. The whole cast assumed she was crazy, but then we discovered that Bleeder simply had a different 'intent'. We find out that Bleeder is actually someone we know, someone the audiance should care about, and someone who sis capable of deep emotional empathy and spiritual connection. She was a person, despite her famed reputation as being 'soulless' among the Kandra. 

 

And some argue that Sazed is moral because Sazed has a contract with the Kandra. Do we really accept that? When the Lord Ruler made the contract with the Kandra, TLR said "follow my contract or be mentally disabled zombies". Is that really a valid contract? Do you think the terms of that contract would hold up in modern courts? Do you think Sazed should be able to force that contract on a living creature? If I made you sign a contract at gun-point, you are not making that contract as a free agent. There is nothing 'just' about that. There is nothing 'autonomous' about that. 

Maybe yes? But it isn't a clear yes. And personally, if I was under such a contract, I would work to destroy it. Kelsier and the ska were under a similar social contract: work or die. Kelsier had no qualms killing those who worked for the lord ruler. We forgave him, didn't we? But not Bleeder? She killed those who worked for Preservation, or those who were indirectly agents of preservation. She took his eyes, his ears, and his mouth. How else can she fight?

Again, I am not saying that Kelsier or Bleeder were just. But neither were completely unjust or completely mad. They had different intents. 

Edited by teknopathetic
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't find what Harmony does at the end, to Bleeder, to be particularly bad. I have a cousin who has diagnosed borderline personality disorder, and if he stops taking his meds he'll be back in jail soon for trying/succeeding in hurting people. He's proven this multiple times. While on his meds, he's able to function within a civil society. He doesn't like the way the meds make him feel when he's on them. The rights of others to live trumps his right to to kill/maim/destroy/hurt other people just because he doesn't want to take his meds. And I don't feel bad at all for saying that.

The end, there? That was Harmony force-feeding Bleeder her pills. It's not something to be happy about. Nor is it anything to be sad about. It just is. Now then, the thing that started it all? That's hinted (but not confirmed) to be forcing her to die so that Wax would go back to Elendel? That's where OP can make an argument--but it's just conjecture. We don't know what Harmony did to force Bleeder to take an action that she didn't want to (that I'm aware of.)

Whilst we might know vaguely the events surrounding Wax's return to Elendel, apparently Harmony only sent Paalm as a bodyguard and it was her mindset from TLR's reign that made her immerse herself in the role completely, ergo she eventually got too close despite Harmony's reluctance/disapproval. So i get Paalm's anger at Harmony but by the time he needed Wax to return, she was in too deep (sorta through her own fault) so Harmony was justified in his action to restrain her, Paalm's suicide to me seemed more like a last attempt to spit in Harmony's eye than to fully accept the consequences of her actions.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think shrugging off Bleeder as "insane" is not the proper way to approach this. Bleeder wasn't insane. In the novel it is stated over and over that Bleeder is too precise to be "insane". Sazed assumed Bleeder is insane for two reasons: Bleeder (should) have only one spike AND Bleeder's actions do not make rational sense to Harmony's intent. We discover that Bleeder has two spikes, and that she is of sound mind. She has decided that it is permissible to kill people to achieve her goals, but that isn't the same thing as being insane. Kelsier felt the same way, didn't he? Kelsier and Bleeder are virtually the same person, but this time around we are anti-kelsier; we are the law. 

 

Maybe it is just my interpretation, but I thought the point of the novel was to show that Bleeder wasn't insane. The whole cast assumed she was crazy, but then we discovered that Bleeder simply had a different 'intent'. We find out that Bleeder is actually someone we know, someone the audiance should care about, and someone who sis capable of deep emotional empathy and spiritual connection. She was a person, despite her famed reputation as being 'soulless' among the Kandra. 

 

The insane are people, too, and can be capable of just as precise, methodical, approaches as anyone (or even more. ) one of the greatest mathematicians of our age was super crazy (John Nash, an incredible man with an incredible life.)

Bleeder was at least as insane as Kelsier... and he was a psychopath. The appropriate response to someone forcing your actions is not to burn a city to the ground with the help of known super evil people, with little regard for who gets hurt along the way as long as you also take out your targets. There is a little justification for such action when the god is literally living among you, but much less when they are a mostly hands free insubstantial being.

And remember that she allied with the Set. Any sympathy i might have otherwise had is strongly tempered by that fact alone.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ teknopathetic

Go re-read the original Mistborn novels. The purpose of the kandras' contracts were not to avoid being mistwraiths. It was to give them a purpose so that the Mistborn didn't hunt them down. Furthermore contracts were limited time jobs. We are told that Paalm was fanactically devoted to Harmony after TLR's death. So she sought out contracts because she didn't know who she was unless she was imitating someone else.

Then Wax comes along. She does her duty but later has huge regrets about it, which drives her into a depressive episode. Later, her depression gives way to anger and she seeks vengeance against Sazed for her suffering. This likely sets her up to be exploited by an agent of Autonomy. So she goes on a misguided attempt to free everyone from the benevolent nudges of Harmony which autonomy finds offensive (threatening?).

You see, attachment leads to fear of loss, and like Yoda said, "fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering" Paalm did a full Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader transformation (but with much better dialogue).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ teknopathetic

Go re-read the original Mistborn novels. The purpose of the kandras' contracts were not to avoid being mistwraiths. It was to give them a purpose so that the Mistborn didn't hunt them down. Furthermore contracts were limited time jobs. We are told that Paalm was fanactically devoted to Harmony after TLR's death. So she sought out contracts because she didn't know who she was unless she was imitating someone else.

Then Wax comes along. She does her duty but later has huge regrets about it, which drives her into a depressive episode. Later, her depression gives way to anger and she seeks vengeance against Sazed for her suffering. This likely sets her up to be exploited by an agent of Autonomy. So she goes on a misguided attempt to free everyone from the benevolent nudges of Harmony which autonomy finds offensive (threatening?).

You see, attachment leads to fear of loss, and like Yoda said, "fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, and hate leads to suffering" Paalm did a full Anakin Skywalker to Darth Vader transformation (but with much better dialogue).

 

 

have to say the EU does a better job of the jedi and sith, (mind defiling buggers that they both are) making it clearer and obvious how they are two sides of the same coin.  Which leads me to a 'fridge' moment: Autonomy and Harmony, could we be looking at two definitions of free will clashing?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Autonomy and Harmony, could we be looking at two definitions of free will clashing?

 

That's... really interesting to consider, actually.  And not obvious as "wrong," even after such consideration.  Maybe we can add it to the question file once Era 2's done with.    

Edited by Landis963
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.