Moral Miscalculations of Mr. Sanderson in Oathbringer

[Ahriman]

We're all just repeating ourselves at this point, and it's clear that nothing is going to change. My final comment is that no matter how much you insist that the actions taken at the Rift are ignored or treated like they aren't a big deal, the fact remains that they are a big deal, unless I hallucinated the part where Dalinar had a complete breakdown when he remembered what happened. And as far as unpersuasive arguments go, I can't top claiming that Sanderson writing his story the way he wants is a bad thing.

[aneonfoxtribute]

8 minutes ago, Ahriman said:

We're all just repeating ourselves at this point, and it's clear that nothing is going to change. My final comment is that no matter how much you insist that the actions taken at the Rift are ignored or treated like they aren't a big deal, the fact remains that they are a big deal, unless I hallucinated the part where Dalinar had a complete breakdown when he remembered what happened. And as far as unpersuasive arguments go, I can't top claiming that Sanderson writing his story the way he wants is a bad thing.

Yeah. Dalinar causing the events at the Rift to happen is kind of how Odium tried to get Dalinar to become his champion. 

[Aon Tia]

1 hour ago, Parallax said:

There are several tiers to my argument:

1. I believe in redemption and forgiveness but not for every action, definitely not for the mass murder of tens of thousands of civilians.

2. Someone might disagree, they might say anyone can be redeemed. Which is a fine position to have but then the question is what did Dalinar do redeem himself? As I have said before the promise of a future public confession is not the same as redeeming yourself. 

3. It is something to forgive someone, it is an entirely another thing to have that person lead the forces of good.

4. On top of all that we have not even talked about who has to forgive Dalinar. 

We have discussed all of these points, this discussion is getting repetitive. 

@Ahriman I totally agree.

@Parallax 

you think that his crime is irredeemable and then you suggest that OB needs to be written again. I disagree, popular opinion also seems to disagree. 

No one said public confession was redemption, but only that D is not hiding what he did, BS has not swept the entire thing under the rug. 

D is not leading the forces of good, he is leading the forces of honor. 

I think D has to forgive himself, that is always the first step for any reformation or redemption and then next step could be atonement. 

Quote

 If that is not going to happen the next best option would be a confrontation based on Dalinar's crimes on screen. 

A confrontation in which you suggest that Dalinar should let himself be killed, so you do want him dead. That is the only way forward for Dalinar According to you. 

 

1 hour ago, Parallax said:

If this is treated so lightly why was I supposed to worry about Dalinar killing a single 6-year old boy??

Rathalas massacre was not treated lightly by Dalinar at all. It had a huge impact on his life. It completely broke him, incapacitated him for years. He literally had to go and basically get it removed from his head, in order to be able to even function normally. It was a turning point in his life. The alethi society has treated it lightly yes, they are a war mongering people and they have treated it as a normal war crime. And I am sure that dalinar’s next step towards atonement is going to be to try and create a society where such crimes are not ok. He clearly believes that we, as alethi society need to do better. Hence the book he has written is a first step towards that. 

Edited October 18, 2019 by The traveller

[Gilphon]

Yeah, um, 'no discussion of the crime' is demonstrably false. Like, even ignoring the way it forms the entire backbone of his arc and colours every action he takes and thought he has after he remembers, the note OB ends on is 'and then Dalinar wrote a book confessing his crimes to a world that already mistrusts him'. Like I honestly dunno how you got the idea that it's not gonna come up in the future.

Even ignoring the wider context, I can't imagine Adolin not having some strong feelings about the truth of his mother's death. He already gets weird and quiet whenever anyone mentions the Rift. 

[Calderis]

2 hours ago, Parallax said:

From my point of view the only proper fix is to rewrite Oathbringer so that Dalinar is not responsible for the burning down of the Rift. If that is not going to happen the next best option would be a confrontation based on Dalinar's crimes on screen. 

On the first possibility, I'm gonna have to say that the number of people who disagree with your perspective, and the sales and response to Oathbringer, and the vast number of people I've heard here and on Reddit who look to Dalinar's transformation as a person even after regaining his memories as inspiring means that that's just not going to happen. Most wouldn't want it too.

As to the other... You think Dalinar is going to confess everything to the world and everyone is going to turn a blind eye? I mean, I don't think it's going to be the confrontation you want, because Alethi society as a whole has considered Dalinar a hero and the "cover up" of the Rift didn't hide the fact that everyone was killed. They just changed the reason. Alethi society as a whole is ugly and makes a mockery of the concept of Honor. 

What I find confounding about your stated view, is that Dalinar is the person who has done the most to try and turn Alethkar into a place where people like he was wouldn't be worshipped as heroes. His influence as a leader is the most likely way to make sure that lives in the future are saved by preventing people from being allowed to be like him, and that... Means nothing to you without retribution.

The changes that Dalinar wants to see, the way he thinks that people should act and treat each other have the potential to make every life lost in the Rift be balanced against a prevented multitude of similar atrocities by changing what people deem acceptable... 

That's what's so disconcerting about a retribution based philosophy of justice to me. Past actions deemed negative outweigh current and future acts to the point that even those redeemed or punished are forever branded as demons. There is no allowance for change. Once a thief. Always a thief. Or murderer or whatever lesser or greater sin. It's... Destructive. It makes it so that people who through circumstance end up in places that force them into acts that even they disagree with are never allowed to truly leave those circumstances, and must fend for themselves among the predators and true monsters who are there by choice.

2 hours ago, Parallax said:

Whatever Dalinar had to do to atone for the Rift should have happened before he summoned Honor's Perpendicularity.

Why? Honor, as a Shard, is not the concept of honor as we typically use that word. No shards are good or evil. The shard has no inherent morality. The Skybreakers follow the letter of the law to the point of cruelty, even when they know the law is flawed, because it's not about morality. It's about keeping your word. 

Two Windrunners can disagree upo. Whether an action would break an oath or not, and for one they would be able to do it, and for the other they would kill their spren. Because it's not about what is objectively moral, it's about what they perceive as right and wrong. 

The first oath means different things not just to different orders, but to different individuals. 

Morality is subjective. In the event that it is truly objective, we are all just varying degrees of wrong, because you can chase that what is acceptable and considered moral down the lines of people through area, religion, whatever you deem the closest to "right" and you will find varience all the way down to specific households, if not specific individuals, on what is right or wrong. 

Which tells me, that if there is truly an objective morality, it has no care for us knowing what it is. 

 

[aneonfoxtribute]

I believe this topic is one book too early. We JUST learned that it happened last book. Distrust and condemnation from the events at the Rift will most assuredly play a part in the next book. Dalinar had a hard time being trusted when he was seen as just a war lord. After learning that he literally burned down a whole town and killed every person who lived there, that will absolutely make matters that much worse. You are claiming that there are no repercussions when Dalinar literally only learned what he did at the tail end of Oathbringer, when he was in the middle of a war with Odium, and has only just started writing a book detailing what happened. There was no TIME in the book for anybody's reactions to be seen, because so few people actually know about it. When it actually becomes public due to Dalinar writing the book, I am storming sure that that will change.

[Pathfinder]

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

There are several tiers to my argument:

1. I believe in redemption and forgiveness but not for every action, definitely not for the mass murder of tens of thousands of civilians.

And that is your opinion that you are perfectly entitled to. That action was too much for you. Clearly it is not for everyone. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

2. Someone might disagree, they might say anyone can be redeemed. Which is a fine position to have but then the question is what did Dalinar do redeem himself? As I have said before the promise of a future public confession is not the same as redeeming yourself. 

Again that is your opinion. You feel what Dalinar has done is not enough to redeem him because the action he took you feel is irredeemable. So it is hardly a discussion if you start from a position that your opinion on Dalinar's action is absolute. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

3. It is something to forgive someone, it is an entirely another thing to have that person lead the forces of good.

Many disagree.

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

4. On top of all that we have not even talked about who has to forgive Dalinar. 

We did. You acknowledged that if the silencing of the voices in Dalinar's head were in fact the spiritual aspect of Evi and the people of Rathalas, and if that spiritual aspect was aware enough to offer forgiveness, then the only people who should be able to forgive Dalinar, did in fact forgive Dalinar. It is not for you or me to forgive. It is the injured party. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

These are problems with Dalinar's arc which is deliberately constructed by the author. Now when you put that along the whole ambiguity regarding Dalinar killing the young Tanalan it really sticks out like a sore thumb. 

You not enjoying Dalinar's arc is your opinion that you are entitled to. It does not mean Brandon failed as a writer, or messed up Oathbringer. All it means is there is an aspect that is too much for you to personally enjoy it. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

Whatever Dalinar had to do to atone for the Rift should have happened before he summoned Honor's Perpendicularity. Right now Dalinar is the hero of Stormlight Archive and is leading the forces fighting Odium and at the same time he is responsible for the worst crime we have seen on screen in this series. 

What you feel Dalinar had to do to atone is different from what others think he had to do to atone. For them, and myself, he has. He did not open the perpendicularity till he received the forgiveness in his mind, and the screams ended. We can disagree on what that forgiveness means, and where it originated, and we can disagree if what was done to atone was enough on an individual basis, but that is a far leap from Brandon failing at writing the novel. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

I don't hope for Dalinar's death. From my point of view the only proper fix is to rewrite Oathbringer so that Dalinar is not responsible for the burning down of the Rift. If that is not going to happen the next best option would be a confrontation based on Dalinar's crimes on screen. 

Many feel that has already occurred. You disagree. To each their own. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

1. Within the story itself the victims are totally ignored. 

Many feel they have not been ignored. You disagree. To each their own. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

2. Sanderson is not wrong to create that suspense, the problem is what he does with the burning down of the Rift. What does withholding the fate of the 6-year old do? We worry that Dalinar actually killed him for the blade. That is also the author signalling that this would be something the reader ought to worry about. This is all great and I actually like that Dalinar's act of mercy actually means another revolt in the Rift. This is all great storytelling, the problem arises from Dalinar committing a crime many orders of magnitude worse than the original killing of the young Tanalan and there is no real discussion of it. If this is treated so lightly why was I supposed to worry about Dalinar killing a single 6-year old boy??

Many feel there was plenty of discussion with it. You disagree. To each their own. 

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

3.1. Dalinar being indispensable is entirely up to the author, he could do whatever he wants with him.

Exactly. The story is up to Brandon. If that story does not work for you, that is your prerogative.

12 hours ago, Parallax said:

3.2. I want to point out how unpersuasive this line of reasoning is. The author has a character that commits a horrible act, makes said character a hero and the leader of the forces of good with no resolution or even discussion of the crime. Responding to someone who points out the crime is being ignored with "He is the hero, he is indispensable!" doesn't work. This entire thing is a construct of the author and I am criticizing the author. 

And that is the crux of the problem with your argument. You are presenting your personal opinion, your own thoughts, and interpretations as fact. As an indisputable truth. That:

 

1. Dalinar's action is irredeemable. full stop

2. No action Dalinar could take could atone because the action he took is irredeemable. full stop

3. Therefore Brandon messed up

 

There is no discussion to be had with such a stance. You have already decided fully that the action is irredeemable and there is nothing Dalinar could do to move past it and be redeemed. That the book is so bad due to that, that it would have to be rewritten, which we know will not happen. So you have stated your thoughts very clearly. Where do we go from here?

[Guest Parallax]

On 10/17/2019 at 11:36 PM, Ahriman said:

We're all just repeating ourselves at this point, and it's clear that nothing is going to change. My final comment is that no matter how much you insist that the actions taken at the Rift are ignored or treated like they aren't a big deal, the fact remains that they are a big deal, unless I hallucinated the part where Dalinar had a complete breakdown when he remembered what happened. And as far as unpersuasive arguments go, I can't top claiming that Sanderson writing his story the way he wants is a bad thing.

1. The perpetrator drinking himself into oblivion doesn't count as dealing with the crime, particularly when he magically gets over his crime without doing anything to redeem himself. Looking forward by the end of Oathbringer Dalinar is pretty much over his atrocity as well. 

2. Sanderson can write his story however he wishes, I am pointing out problems and issues with internal inconsistency of his story. 

On 10/18/2019 at 1:14 AM, Calderis said:

Why? Honor, as a Shard, is not the concept of honor as we typically use that word. No shards are good or evil. The shard has no inherent morality. The Skybreakers follow the letter of the law to the point of cruelty, even when they know the law is flawed, because it's not about morality. It's about keeping your word. 

This is not about Honor specifically. Let me paraphrase: "Whatever Dalinar had to do to atone for the Rift should have happened before he summoned Honor's Perpendicularity. became the hero of the story and the leader of the forces of good."

On 10/18/2019 at 3:22 AM, aneonfoxtribute said:

I believe this topic is one book too early. We JUST learned that it happened last book. Distrust and condemnation from the events at the Rift will most assuredly play a part in the next book. Dalinar had a hard time being trusted when he was seen as just a war lord. After learning that he literally burned down a whole town and killed every person who lived there, that will absolutely make matters that much worse. You are claiming that there are no repercussions when Dalinar literally only learned what he did at the tail end of Oathbringer, when he was in the middle of a war with Odium, and has only just started writing a book detailing what happened. There was no TIME in the book for anybody's reactions to be seen, because so few people actually know about it. When it actually becomes public due to Dalinar writing the book, I am storming sure that that will change.

This is a valid point raised by @ChickenLiberty as well. However it still has the issue that the reader has to cheer for war criminal in the Battle of Thaylan Field.

On 10/18/2019 at 0:37 AM, Gilphon said:

Yeah, um, 'no discussion of the crime' is demonstrably false. Like, even ignoring the way it forms the entire backbone of his arc and colours every action he takes and thought he has after he remembers, the note OB ends on is 'and then Dalinar wrote a book confessing his crimes to a world that already mistrusts him'. Like I honestly dunno how you got the idea that it's not gonna come up in the future.

Even ignoring the wider context, I can't imagine Adolin not having some strong feelings about the truth of his mother's death. He already gets weird and quiet whenever anyone mentions the Rift. 

Dalinar thinking about his crime doesn't really count and Evi's unintentional murder is nothing compared to killing of an entire city full of people. 

On 10/18/2019 at 11:27 AM, Pathfinder said:

There is no discussion to be had with such a stance. You have already decided fully that the action is irredeemable and there is nothing Dalinar could do to move past it and be redeemed. That the book is so bad due to that, that it would have to be rewritten, which we know will not happen. So you have stated your thoughts very clearly. Where do we go from here?

You are misrepresenting my stance. 

[Calderis]

17 minutes ago, Parallax said:

You are misrepresenting my stance. 

I really don't think he is. 

You've made it clear that you find the action irredeemable, and that either the book should be rewritten, or Dalinar must face some form of retribution. 

You've made it clear that the man who Dalinar is currently cannot be a good man or lead a good force, despite being the same man as he was before you, or he, knew of his past crimes. 

Even the title of your thread is not a call for discussion, but an accusation. 

So, being that you're not getting agreement here, what do you want from this thread, and as @Pathfinder said... Where do we go from here? Because talking past each other is pointless. 

[Guest Parallax]

@Calderis @Pathfinder So just for the record I will repeat my stance:

1. I believe what Dalinar did is irredeemable, others might think differently which is a perfectly fine position to have. In the beginning of this thread I was even asked where I drew the line (redeemable vs. irredeemable) and I replied that this was inherently difficult and might be even arbitrary. This is not why I think the book needs to be fixed, it is a matter of personal opinion. 

2. So let's assume what Dalinar did is in fact redeemable. The question becomes what did he do to redeem himself? Nothing. We are supposed to cheer for a character who has committed the greatest onscreen crime without any actual accounting for that crime. This is the first problem.

3. Others have made the suggestion that Dalinar will redeem himself in the future. At the end of a redemption arc you have self-sacrifice or the creation of a hero. Having a hero and then having him go through a redemption arc doesn't work. This is the second problem.

4. We know there is a one year time jump at the beginning of Stormlight 4 and that Dalinar doesn't feature prominently in that book. Any reckoning for what happened in the Rift would be a major turning point for Dalinar so I can't imagine it appearing until Stormlight 5. So basically the reader has to set aside Dalinar's war crime for more than a book (the last part of Oathbringer all the way to Stormlight 5) not worrying about Dalinar's guilt.

5. In Oathbringer Brandon makes us worry about Dalinar's soul because we think he might have killed a 6-year old, later he does something far far worse and the reader is not supposed to question the hero and whatever happened to the worst crime he committed? This is the third and most serious problem. 

6. Those three problems are not my personal opinion, they are problems of how Brandon has structured his story. 

Edited October 20, 2019 by Parallax

[aneonfoxtribute]

3 minutes ago, Parallax said:

@Calderis @Pathfinder So just for the record I will repeat my stance:

1. I believe what Dalinar did is irredeemable, others might think differently which is q perfectly fine position to have. In the beginning of this thread I was even asked where I drew the line (redeemable vs. irredeemable) and I replied that this was inherently difficult and might be even arbitrary. This is not why I think the book needs to be fixed, it is a matter of personal opinion. 

2. So let's assume what Dalinar did is in fact redeemable. The question becomes what did he do to redeem himself? Nothing. We are supposed to cheer for a character who has committed the greatest onscreen crime without any actual accounting for that crime. This is the first problem.

3. Others have made the suggestion that Dalinar will redeem himself in the future. At the end of a redemption arc you have self-sacrifice or the creation of a hero. Having a hero and then having him go through a redemption arc doesn't work. This is the second problem.

4. We know there is a one year time jump at the beginning of Stormlight 4 and that Dalinar doesn't feature prominently in that book. Any reckoning for what happened in the Rift would be a major turning point for Dalinar so I can't imagine it appearing until Stormlight 5. So basically the reader has to set aside Dalinar's war crime for more than a book (the last part of Oathbringer all the way to Stormlight 5) not worrying about Dalinar's guilt.

5. In Oathbringer Brandon makes us worry about Dalinar's soul because we think he might have killed a 6-year old, later he does something far far worse and the reader is not supposed to question the hero and whatever happened to the worst crime he committed? This is the third and most serious problem. 

6. Those three problems are not my personal opinion, they are problems of how Brandon has structured his story. 

I don't believe the problem is in how Brandon wrote the book, and more in how you're LOOKING at it. Namely, in that we're supposed to be just fine with the fact that the Rift happened. That is absolutely not at all what is happening. We are not supposed to be just fine with it. We are still on Dalinar's side, however, because he has changed, he is not the man in the flashbacks and he hasn't been since before the whole series started. He is a changed man, and his change was directly instigated by that event. Dalinar has suffered the consequences of his actions and he has changed for the better as a result, and that is his "redemption" arc. We can still agree with Dalinar in spite of that happening because he will never again commit an act like that, and because he is actively fighting for the betterment of the world as the man leading the charge.

[Gilphon]

50 minutes ago, Parallax said:

Dalinar thinking about his crime doesn't really count and Evi's unintentional murder is nothing compared to killing of an entire city full of people. 

So. To be clear. You're saying that just 'it formed the entire backbone of the arc of one of the protagonists and facts coming to light about it will almost certainly fundamentally change the way he interacts with other major characters going forward' isn't enough for it to reach the lofty threshold of 'discussed'? Alright. That's certainly a sentence.

But, well, as for your three problems, or more specifically why the claim that they're not just personal opinion holds no water:

1. The idea that he has done nothing to redeem himself is purely your opinion.

2. The idea the a redemption arc can only follow the specific structure you just laid out is purely your opinion.

3. The idea the reader isn't supposed to question Dalinar is purely your opinion. And, if I may be completely honest, is a frankly absurd position. 

So, y'know, all of those things are your opinion, and not structural problems. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Gilphon

[Calderis]

17 minutes ago, Parallax said:

2. So let's assume what Dalinar did is in fact redeemable. The question becomes what did he do to redeem himself? Nothing. We are supposed to cheer for a character who has committed the greatest onscreen crime without any actual accounting for that crime. This is the first problem

This is a problem is your opinion. Dalinar has suffered. Dalinar has become a better man. Dalinar has worked to change what is acceptable in Alethkar in ways that will prevent actions like his in the past. He will continue to do so. The price for redemption need not be equal, or tangible, or obvious, or appealing. 

This is a problem in your opinion, not an objective narrative problem. 

17 minutes ago, Parallax said:

Others have made the suggestion that Dalinar will redeem himself in the future. At the end of a redemption arc you have self-sacrifice or the creation of a hero. Having a hero and then having him go through a redemption arc doesn't work. This is the second problem.

Dalinar was a hero in the narrative before he ever knew he had anything to require redemption, so this was never a redemption arc to begin with. Again, the idea that who he was in the past changes the man he's been for three books is not a problem with the narrative. It's your opinion. 

17 minutes ago, Parallax said:

In Oathbringer Brandon makes us worry about Dalinar's soul because we think he might have killed a 6-year old, later he does something far far worse and the reader is not supposed to question the hero and whatever happened to the worst crime he committed? This is the third and most serious problem

Brandon sets up a question to create tension as a cliffhanger. And then later let's us see how much of a monster he is, and then he is horrified by that fact and falls into a horrible depression and relapse in his drinking, and barely manages to pull himself back out and stand up because he's not the monster he was... But we're not supposed to question the magnitude of the atrocity committed? Again, your opinion, not a narrative issue. 

17 minutes ago, Parallax said:

Those three problems are not my personal opinion, they are problems of how Brandon has structured his story. 

So at this point, I hope you enjoy the direction the story goes in the future better than you enjoyed this book.

I don't see any reason to continue this discussion. 

Edited October 19, 2019 by Calderis

[Honorless]

Huh, I am genuinely surprised to see that this discussion has lasted as long as it has.

Parallax's fear seems to be that 'Oathbringer' seems almost to have made a declaration with Dalinar's Ideal at the climax of the book.

I understand where he's coming from. Brandon writes really well, is very affable and is one of the few authors who have admitted to problems with their writing (of representation of women, LGBTQ) and are genuinely trying to move past that. I think we can all agree that we've grown really attached to him and the worlds that he has created. Isn't it then perfectly understandable that the OP feels almost betrayed by Oathbringer's stance on morality? It's precisely because he likes Sanderson that he's felt the need to put forward this discussion and express his discontent.

Read the whole thing before jumping the guns here. Dalinar commits genocide, with all the inherent implications of that word. He orders the burning of an entire city. That's pretty irredeemable as far as acts of war crimes and crimes against humanity go.

⚠ Trigger Warning ⚠ 

(This could be taken personally and discusses literal murder. Please go to the spoiler tag immediately below this one if you want to read my whole point but feel uncomfortable opening this one. That one is also slightly more positive)

Spoiler

How would you feel if you were in a situation similar to a hypothetical survivor from Rathalas? Imagine someone sets your family on fire and then years later, have genuinely changed and come asking you for forgiveness.

I would go the route of Arya Stark on them! 

Spoiler

These are two videos on YouTube, for real-world examples of forgiveness on the sheer scale of a genocide:

'Why I forgave the man who killed my children' - Rwandan genocide survivor - BBC Africa

Rwandan Tutsi forgives - CBS

So, people have forgiven crimes of that magnitude before.

But whether or not Dalinar felt remorse and pain is irrelevant to the discussion. This isn't a topic on whether or not Dalinar is a psychopath, he very clearly isn't. He does feel remorse.

But Oathbringer can be seen as taking a stance of forgiveness over punishment. A lot would depend on your interpretation of justice and the law for making any judgement on this one.

Do you believe punishment should be reduced with genuine admittance of guilt? Do you believe that punishment by the law should, as its primary purpose of being, exist to discourage these acts rather than provide any measure of vengeance or closure to victims or their families? So should killers walk free after ending another human being's life, as long as they feel genuinely terrible about it and are productive to society?

Oathbringer's very preface started with Dalinar's confessions. His act of trying to change has dramatic, positive consequences in-world. It is quite understandable if some see it as a statement, I think, and that is what the OP is questioning.

I myself am apprehensive about this. But I also do understand that is just the thematic focus of the series. I think I can see these things as questions put forward by the author to his readers.

Whether Dalinar incurs any pain later on in the series, even on the scale of the Heralds, isn't really a great response to the question. Neither is pointing out instances from the book showing Dalinar is trying to redeem himself (since his redeemability itself is under question, the very subject of this discussion), nor saying that forgiveness is the better moral stance.

Putting Dalinar's actions through real-world historical contexts, explaining your own viewpoint on redemption and your own beliefs on ethics are much better responses.

If you feel that this post is attacking you, I do sincerely apologize because that is not my intent. I just felt protective or even defensive on behalf of the OP, I guess. However, since I have not mentioned anywhere within this post any names, I would also like you to quote which part of my post made you feel so, as well as the relevant post by yourself that you feel that I might be pointing fingers at.

Edited October 20, 2019 by Honorless

[Calderis]

@Honorless I understand your point of view here, and even the OP's even if I don't share it. That isn't the problem.

By framing the opinion as an objective narrative problem, the thread says that the opinions of those who do not see the problem are objectively wrong. That means this is no longer a discussion, but at minimum a critique... But the call for a need to rewrite the book makes it more of a rebuke. 

For the many who find the book inspiring, that is saying that their sense of morality is objectively wrong. 

If it were stated only as an opinion, I would completely agree with your post, but the last few points have basically said "your opinions don't fix the fact that the book is morally wrong." 

That's my issue. 

[Honorless]

8 minutes ago, Calderis said:

@Honorless I understand your point of view here, and even the OP's even if I don't share it. That isn't the problem.

By framing the opinion as an objective narrative problem, the thread says that the opinions of those who do not see the problem are objectively wrong. That means this is no longer a discussion, but at minimum a critique... But the call for a need to rewrite the book makes it more of a rebuke. 

For the many who find the book inspiring, that is saying that their sense of morality is objectively wrong. 

If it were stated only as an opinion, I would completely agree with your post, but the last few points have basically said "your opinions don't fix the fact that the book is morally wrong." 

That's my issue. 

I did not feel that the OP framed it as an objective moral stance, but even interpretation of someone's phrasing can be subjective so that isn't going anywhere...

Agreed on your response though, if that is how the OP came across, he needs to make a few apologies.

Either way, I don't think I'll be comfortable with the idea of coming back to this thread however... and it looks like I'm not the only one.

Ugh, imma go read some mind melting fanfics now! 

Edited October 20, 2019 by Honorless

[Karger]

8 hours ago, Honorless said:

Either way, I don't think I'll be comfortable with the idea of coming back to this thread however... and it looks like I'm not the only one.

Ugh, imma go read some mind melting fanfics now! 

Be careful.  Fanfics can be dangerous.

[Pathfinder]

On 10/20/2019 at 5:15 AM, Honorless said:

I did not feel that the OP framed it as an objective moral stance, but even interpretation of someone's phrasing can be subjective so that isn't going anywhere...

I am not sure how these quotes were taken out of context:

 

On 10/19/2019 at 7:14 PM, Parallax said:

2. So let's assume what Dalinar did is in fact redeemable. The question becomes what did he do to redeem himself? Nothing. We are supposed to cheer for a character who has committed the greatest onscreen crime without any actual accounting for that crime. This is the first problem.

3. Others have made the suggestion that Dalinar will redeem himself in the future. At the end of a redemption arc you have self-sacrifice or the creation of a hero. Having a hero and then having him go through a redemption arc doesn't work. This is the second problem.

4. We know there is a one year time jump at the beginning of Stormlight 4 and that Dalinar doesn't feature prominently in that book. Any reckoning for what happened in the Rift would be a major turning point for Dalinar so I can't imagine it appearing until Stormlight 5. So basically the reader has to set aside Dalinar's war crime for more than a book (the last part of Oathbringer all the way to Stormlight 5) not worrying about Dalinar's guilt.

5. In Oathbringer Brandon makes us worry about Dalinar's soul because we think he might have killed a 6-year old, later he does something far far worse and the reader is not supposed to question the hero and whatever happened to the worst crime he committed? This is the third and most serious problem. 

6. Those three problems are not my personal opinion, they are problems of how Brandon has structured his story. 

 

On 10/19/2019 at 6:34 PM, Parallax said:

1. The perpetrator drinking himself into oblivion doesn't count as dealing with the crime, particularly when he magically gets over his crime without doing anything to redeem himself. Looking forward by the end of Oathbringer Dalinar is pretty much over his atrocity as well. 

2. Sanderson can write his story however he wishes, I am pointing out problems and issues with internal inconsistency of his story. 

This is not about Honor specifically. Let me paraphrase: "Whatever Dalinar had to do to atone for the Rift should have happened before he summoned Honor's Perpendicularity. became the hero of the story and the leader of the forces of good."

This is a valid point raised by @ChickenLiberty as well. However it still has the issue that the reader has to cheer for war criminal in the Battle of Thaylan Field.

Dalinar thinking about his crime doesn't really count and Evi's unintentional murder is nothing compared to killing of an entire city full of people. 

 

Quote

You are misrepresenting my stance. 

I have quoted you word for word. Don't really see how that is misrepresenting your stance. You are presenting absolutes. Then stating that because the book does not match your absolutes, they are objective problems that Brandon messed up. You can totally not like the novel. To each their own. But the fact that we disagree on interpreting the book says to me it is a discussion point, and means how Brandon wrote it was successful. The objective fact that I, as well as many others, can disagree with you on a wide range of topics you brought up, from minor to fundamental, for very well reasoned reasons, speaks to it being an opinion. Does not mean you are wrong to dislike it, nor does it mean I am wrong to enjoy it. But just because you did not enjoy it, does not make it objectively bad and requiring re-writing. That was my point. 

You have stated what you deem is wrong with Sanderson's novels. You have stated what you deem is the way for Sanderson to fix it. Unfortunately I personally do not see either occurring. The solutions you listed were:

1. Sanderson rewrite the book. He struggled with deciding to alter a few sentences of the end of Words of Radiance. I highly doubt Sanderson would rewrite an entire book.

2. Have a survivor of Rathalas confront Dalinar. It is continually hammered home that there were no survivors. Also of all times a survivor popping up now? Personally, it makes no sense. 

 

But at the end of the day, both those points are my opinion. I personally highly doubt either of those will occur. But you are free to hope and desire those changes. 

Edited October 21, 2019 by Pathfinder

[Honorless]

Thank you, @Pathfinder, but Calderis already corrected me on this.

I was reading those comments under a different frame of mind. One where there are people who've tattooed Brandon's quotes onto their skins. Some people get attached to an author, really attached and sometimes that leads to this when they feel completely blindsided. Not saying I agree, just that I understand. All literature is a dialogue, it used to be more apparent with old literature, now it has become subtler. 

I wrote that under the assumption that sometimes people say things that they don't mean, things that hurt other people, when they themselves feel hurt.

Of course, this is a public forum, and the OP doesn't need to be pandered to. And people come here to have civil discussions, no one gets to make outright demands that others change their minds because they themselves have made up their minds. OP was rude and should apologize. I believe I said that too, responding to Calderis.

Please don't use bold or Red, and definitely not that overly large font on texts, it makes it seem like you're shouting. Personally, I'd recommend underlining for stressing a point.

Edited October 21, 2019 by Honorless

[Pathfinder]

13 minutes ago, Honorless said:

Thank you, @Pathfinder, but Calderis already corrected me on this.

I was reading those comments under a different frame of mind. One where there are people who've tattooed Brandon's quotes onto their skins. Some people get attached to an author, really attached and sometimes that leads to this when they feel completely blindsided. Not saying I agree, just that I understand. All literature is a dialogue, it used to be more apparent with old literature, now it has become subtler. 

I wrote that under the assumption that sometimes people say things that they don't mean, things that hurt other people, when they themselves feel hurt.

Of course, this is a public forum, and the OP doesn't need to be pandered to. And people come here to have civil discussions, no one gets to make outright demands that others change their minds because they themselves have made up their minds. OP was rude and should apologize. I believe I said that too, responding to Calderis.

Please don't use bold or Red on texts, it makes it seem like you're shouting.

No problem. As to the bold or red in texts, I use that for emphasis to call attention to something because I was given to understand caps was shouting. The forum rules does not mention bolding being an issue, so I will continue to do so to call attention to certain points. But please understand my intention is not for shouting. I was highlighting what I felt was the pertinent portions of Parallax's quotes. I could change the background color, so I could always try that so it would be highlighting instead of bolding. 

[Honorless]

@Pathfinder, as edited, I think underlining is the best alternative to not come out as too aggressive.

No problems on this end either. Personally, I'd also recommend not responding to this thread, it's become... very unhealthy. I've stopped following it. Forums are for discussion, yes, doesn't mean propriety should die by defenestration for the sake of freedom of expression. I'm surprised the banhammer hasn't struck this thread down already.

Edited October 21, 2019 by Honorless

[Pathfinder]

20 minutes ago, Honorless said:

@Pathfinder, as edited, I think underlining is the best alternative to not come out as too aggressive.

No problems on this end either. Personally, I'd also recommend not responding to this thread, it's become... very unhealthy. I've stopped following it. Forums are for discussion, yes, doesn't mean propriety should die by defenestration for the sake of freedom of expression. I'm surprised the banhammer hasn't struck this thread down already.

Maybe I am misunderstanding your post, but I do not see anyone being hostile towards Parallax that would warrant banning. As per the rules of the site, if you feel any posts were inflammatory or attacking, you should report the post, and let the Mods handle it. They are the best suited to decide and act. 

[Honorless]

2 minutes ago, Pathfinder said:

Maybe I am misunderstanding your post, but I do not see anyone being hostile towards Parallax that would warrant banning. As per the rules of the site, if you feel any posts were inflammatory or attacking, you should report the post, and let the Mods handle it. They are the best suited to decide and act. 

Even that one person if they are the OP alone, should warrant a thread lock at this point, honestly

Edited October 21, 2019 by Honorless

[Pathfinder]

Just now, Honorless said:

Even that alone should warrant a thread lock at this point, honestly

I have tagged the main moderator I can recall off the top of my head for you so you may discuss with them what steps you feel should be taken with this thread

@Chaos

[Guest Parallax]

@aneonfoxtribute In this page you have made three posts advancing three different justifications for the way the book deals with Dalinar's war crime: (1) It was part of Odium's plan; (2) It will be addressed in future books; and (3) Dalinar has already paid the price for his crimes. I am not sure which one is your position. 

@Gilphon just saying something is my opinion is not an argument. If you think Dalinar has done something to redeem himself then please specify Dalinar's redeeming action(s).

@Honorless Thanks for the post. I would just emphasize that at this point we have not even gotten to the question of forgiveness and who gets to forgive. I will also note that in your example the forgiveness is not with respect to the crime as whole but only a very small part of it. If a single survivor of the Rift forgave Dalinar killing her family that would not absolve Dalinar of the totality of his crime at Rathalas. 

@Calderis The issue is about consistency. You can't have something like: "A is a villain because he killed one person for personal gain, B is the hero of the story, I know he slaughtered 100 people in the village but he is reformed now so let us move on." The fact that all else being equal slaughtering 100 people is much worse than killing a single person is not my opinion it is just a fact.

@Pathfinder You did misrepresent my position. I have not said: "Dalinar is irredeemable, that is an objective fact" or something to the same effect. 

***

3 hours ago, Honorless said:

OP was rude and should apologize.

Please provide an instance in which I was rude. 

Edited October 21, 2019 by Parallax