Jump to content

Mistborn's Dialectic


Borio Singaldi

Recommended Posts

Mistborn’s Dialectic

 

Spoilers for Mistborn Eras 1 and 2

In my critical theory of literature class, we were discussing the topic of Marxism in its original form (not going into too much detail about that), which led to the introduction of a phenomena known as Hegel’s Dialectic.

To give you a crash course overview, it’s founded upon the principle of there being a thesis, an idea or concept or practice in action that is enforced as a natural “law” or way of living or doing things, so to speak. And with it comes an antithesis, a challenge and an opposition to the thesis that arises naturally. And they clash with one another until reaching a point of compromise in which aspects are taken from both the thesis and the antithesis to combine what is known as a synthesis, a new way of things working that incorporates opposing aspects to become something new completely. (You may understand where I’m going with this.) But as there is an opposition to all thing, an antithesis verily shows up in contrast to the existing synthesis, leading to it becoming another thesis on its own. Eventually, they meet this compromise once again and become something new and different. This cycle continues in which a synthesis is found that eventually become a thesis to a new antithesis, or a new form of opposition, constantly reaching a better compromise with each step up until the point that a truly perfect synthesis is formed that can have no contrast to it. You can look up how it pertains to Marxism if you so desire, but I won’t go into detail about that now, as it is not my main focus.

You may wonder what this has to do with Mistborn, so now onto that! I’ve noticed that this series is very prevalent in its usage of such a dialectic, even if not intentionally. To my knowledge, Brandon Sanderson has not stated any direct intention of representing it in the books, but a theme can exist without an author intending to, as dictated by readers and whatnot. Anyway, pedantic thoughts aside, I noticed a very clear Shardic example of the dialectic in Mistborn right as I learned about the concept of it. So on Scadrial, we have what I would consider a thesis: Preservation, a representation of stability, stasis, keeping things as they are. This is countered by a directly opposing antithesis: Ruin, a representation of change, destruction, dynamics. (You can pedant about which of them is a thesis and which is an antithesis if you so desire, but that’s a different discussion.)

At the end of Hero of Ages, Ruin and Preservation are finally brought together, despite their great oppositions, to form into one different entity, becoming something new and more. A perfect balance of stasis and change, a synthesis of opposing laws that have become something better than either of the two were alone, one step closer to perfection in that the synthesis is somewhat better than what came before.

And here’s where I get to the clincher of the dialectic comparison: In Era 2 (and this will most likely be prevalent in Era 3 as well), there is a new supernal entity known as Trell coming around and messing with things. A being opposed to Harmony. I believe Trell is the Shard of Autonomy in some shape or form, but since there is no way of telling for sure, I will simply avoid specific Autonomy talk (I’ll get more into that stuff at a later date) and focus on the nature of Trell we know of and can assume/speculate enough about.

Anyway, we have this synthesis, Harmony, acting as this perfect combination of Ruin and Preservation, which of course may lead us to wonder what could go wrong after that after a perfect balance has been found. And then Trell comes along and throws things out of whack. We get a hint at Trell’s goals, specifically with Paalm and her objective. And the Set, due to their willingness to work with her and their own devotion to Trell. It seems to me that Trell is going against Harmony in an attempt to free the world from Harmony’s control, because, well… Sazed isn’t doing such a great job of letting people go their own way, as his Path dictates (ahem, hypocrite). He even admits to the mistake of interfering with human affairs too much, leaving them to fall behind in progression. He has helped people toddle along, giving them all they need to survive, stunting the growth of society basically crippling advancement of civilization. He has interfered so much with humanity (Waxillium as a case in point) that it almost seems reasonable that one would want to fight this and free people from Harmony’s controlling hand.

So we have our original synthesis of Harmony, who now represents not only a balance of change and stasis but more importantly a representation of controlling the affairs of people to great extents, challenged by this new antithesis of Trell, or in other words, an antithesis representing an endeavor to free people from control of a Shard and truly let them live as they would and should live, progressing on their own separate from Harmony’s interference.

In the first trilogy, we dealt with the opposing natures of protection and destruction as an overall subject of the series, with the main conflict revolving around the destruction of the world, and now with Eras 2 and 3, we are dealing with the opposing natures of control and freedom instead as a result of the formation of a new synthesis inviting the presence of a brand new form of antithesis, in which the main conflict is one of freedom on a deific level. Who knows how such a solution could be solved? We will just have to RAFO about what possible synthesis could be made out of the Harmony/Trell struggle, what kind of compromise could be made between controlling people and leaving them free from Shardic influence. And if some solution is found, which I can assume is so, since we’ll get a futuristic Era 4, I am left to wonder what new antithesis will rise up against whatever new (syn)thesis that we will be provided with during Era 4 as a final conflict before a possible synthesis into… what? A final state of perfection, a synthesis that cannot be countered at the end of the cosmere? We’ll have to RAFO.

I just wanted to bring up this topic for the sake of discussion and because I wanted to get this off my chest. Thoughts? Any further examples you can think of regarding Hegel’s Dialectic and Mistborn that are more specific than Shard-level conflicts? I can think of a couple already to use as continual examples of how prevalent the dialectic can be used in Mistborn, but I’ve ranted long enough, and I want to see your conclusions and thoughts on the matter.

P.S.: I am sorry if my phrasing bored you all to tears; I tend to be a very wordy person. I also wish I could have made a visual representation of the dialectic, but I don’t have a current means of doing so. Oh, well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Late response, but thanks, Ink.

If only more people would pay attention to this and contribute to it. I didn't mean for it to be a one-post thread. I'm hoping others will expand upon this, because it's something to go super in-depth into! If you read this, please do! This is one of the reasons I often feel ignored on the Shard. Because I often really am.

I'll throw this out to start discussion: how does this Hegel's Dialectic apply to Elend in the first trilogy, for example?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*sympathetic pat for @Firerust* We've all got our niche fascinations that no one else seems to want to discuss. T^T

So this made me immediately think of Star Wars and "finding balance in the Force."  Also in the DC Universe how some people in world blame the superheroes for "creating" all the super villains, as they didn't appear until the forces of good were too strong.

How would  Hegel’s Dialectic work in a closed system? Or if there were no antithesis strong enough to actually undermine/clash with a thesis?  Would the thesis itself eventually splinter?  For example, could Harmony break back into Preservation/Ruin if no opposition arose to create a synthesis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zellyia said:

How would  Hegel’s Dialectic work in a closed system? Or if there were no antithesis strong enough to actually undermine/clash with a thesis?  Would the thesis itself eventually splinter?  For example, could Harmony break back into Preservation/Ruin if no opposition arose to create a synthesis?

I think that if nothing arose to oppose it, meaning that if there was no further antithesis, then what we had would be the final synthesis that reigns unopposed, the achievement of perfection. Both in the case of dialectics in general and regarding your Harmony question.

1 hour ago, Zellyia said:

So this made me immediately think of Star Wars and "finding balance in the Force."  Also in the DC Universe how some people in world blame the superheroes for "creating" all the super villains, as they didn't appear until the forces of good were too strong.

Brilliant connections! I hadn't thought of that. Maybe this thread will have to be moved beyond the Mistborn section.

1 hour ago, Zellyia said:

* We've all got our niche fascinations that no one else seems to want to discuss. T^T

It would appear so. Thanks for the pat. *pat back*

The story with Elend I wanted to use as an example.

Final Empire: Thesis: Elend the bookworm nobleman vs Antithesis: the advent of the skaa rebellion = Synthesis: Elend the king of the new kingdom with little experience

Well of Ascension: (Syn)Thesis: Elend the king of the new kingdom with little experience vs Antithesis: opposition of enemy kingdoms and his own kingdom = Synthesis: Elend the Final Emperor trying to unite the world

Hero of Ages: (Syn)Thesis: Elend the Final Emperor trying to unite the world vs Antithesis: becoming a controlling tyrant like the Lord Ruler = True Synthesis: Elend the Final Emperor who makes the honorable choices while still helping to save the world

Perhaps a new antithesis and synthesis would have been possible for Elend -- had he not died. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I actually was looking for something just like this and had to join in and make a new account! That means I cant post links tho :(. I think I have 2 interesting things to add to the context of this discussion and to Hegel's philosophical ideas.

First, Sanderson has taken some history of philosophy classes (as you can see if you search philosophy in his blog) most likely including Hegel; similar to your critical theory class, Firerust. I think this is evidence Brandon knows about Hegel and likely Marx as well.

Second, in Hegelian philosophy, there is a concept of a geist, (or ghost in English) which is used as a metaphor by Hegel to understand history. He uses the terms zeitgeist to refer to "the spirit of the age" and Weltgeist to refer to "the world spirit". I think that a single shard on a world could be thought of as a Weltgeist, and maybe Ruin and Preservation are zeitgeists as part of the dialectic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Chaos locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...