Vin and Elend Passionless?

[spacemonkey]

Oh and this has nothing to do with anything, but I just thought of it. Shouldn't Mistborn and/or Tineyes be getting it on quite a bit? I would think having that particular allomantic power would be particularly useful in the old sackaroony. I hazard a guess using the power in that way has never even crossed Brandon's mind...

Everything can be used for sex. Everything.

[Thor]

While I respectfully disagree on some facets of your post, it is your perogative to have an opinion, though I do agree that Brandon tends to write with an idealistic tone, which I personally find a nice break from some of the more cynical novels I have read...

Oh and this has nothing to do with anything, but I just thought of it. Shouldn't Mistborn and/or Tineyes be getting it on quite a bit? I would think having that particular allomantic power would be particularly useful in the old sackaroony. I hazard a guess using the power in that way has never even crossed Brandon's mind...

I wouldn't be surprised if he had, to be honest. It is a rather logical train of thought to follow with "enhanced physical senses" and the relative proximity of a pair of emotional teenagers (effectively). I would imagine that a Tineye/Mistborn would want to turn off Tin while having sex, for most of the time. Any discomfort or pleasure that is felt would be amplified by Tin's effect which has interesting consequences. One consequence specifically relating to pleasure: if one was a Tineye then it would almost certainly influence one's, um, stamina. Whether this is good or bad depends on the Tineye, their partner and other...factors. There are other conclusions which can be reached by extending this and other lines of reasoning and it doesn't take too much thought to get there, so I won't delve farther, but they are there. So, a Tineye/Mistborn may not be getting it on as often as one might suspect...

Edit: Grammar...And NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! TVTropes!!!!!! Why u make me waste my life?!?!?!?!

Edited January 18, 2012 by Thor

[Aminar]

Well I haven't finished Well of Ascension yet, so I'm not 100% certain if you are referring to things that haven't happened or not. I also never said BS works are totally idealistic. I said they are heavily bent towards it.

For example at the moment I seem to be bombarded with a lot of referencing to how good people are, or how bad they are. Sazed and Vin with their internal monologues seem to be continually going on about it, as does Tindwyl it just seems to be a part of the story. Elend is a good man, Straff is a bad evil man. And on it goes. Thankfully the characters are drawn a bit better than that, as you say, but that kind of contradicts what I'm reading. Like BS created some complex interesting characters, but couldn't help throwing in a bit of idealistic black and white thinking into the story to contradict it.

I already explained I feel like Sanderson gives his characters more complexity than most of the stock standard fantasy that is out there. I've ultimately been praising him, with just some minor criticisms. He toes a line, he uses highly idealistic characters in a setting where they probably shouldn't succeed, giving them more complexity than usual, but he still uses plot devices to advance characters IMO in somewhat unbelievable ways that cheat a little bit so that said characters develop to where they can succeed while keeping their ideals in tact.

In any case a lot of my previous post was directed at the majority of fantasy in general and not just at Mr Sanderson's work.

Oh and this has nothing to do with anything, but I just thought of it. Shouldn't Mistborn and/or Tineyes be getting it on quite a bit? I would think having that particular allomantic power would be particularly useful in the old sackaroony. I hazard a guess using the power in that way has never even crossed Brandon's mind...

I was cynical once. Then I started working non-profit and seeing how hard people work just to help a few kids for minimum wage. How many nearly broke families donate what extra money they have because we charge next to nothing for our services. How many well to do people throw their energy into helping us. There is a whole lot more good intentions in the world than bad. We're just not capable of understanding the scope of our actions. If you examine Martin's work that's almost always the message too.

I think that's what Brandon is getting at. Look at book 2. It's all about the consequences of book 1. Consequences I could see from a mile off, but they mattered anyway. They were a good story to tell.

I dunno. I like to think of myself as a good person. I'm an idealist, but I only hold myself to those ideals because frankly not everyone was given as much as me. I use my advantages to help people. I really empathized with Elend. He felt like me. To have myself called unrealistic feels almost personal. Don't take it the wrong way. I heavily blame my personality on deriving my moral code from reading about too many heroes. They're my inspiration. If all fantasy were like ASoIaF I wouldn't be me. I'd be someone else and probably not someone I like as much as myself.

[Eric]

One consequence specifically relating to pleasure: if one was a Tineye then it would almost certainly influence one's, um, stamina. Whether this is good or bad depends on the Tineye, their partner and other...factors. There are other conclusions which can be reached by extending this and other lines of reasoning and it doesn't take too much thought to get there, so I won't delve farther, but they are there. So, a Tineye/Mistborn may not be getting it on as often as one might suspect...

Maybe not the Tineye... *coughpewtercough*

[Aminar]

Maybe not the Tineye... *coughpewtercough*

Well, not Male Tineyes anyway.

[Scattered]

If you really want to see a flat romance, try reading The Belgariad by David Eddings, or the Shadowmarch series by Tad Williams. They both use the love mechanism of, "I only met you briefly, and despised you, but now that you're gone the thought of your pretty hair/honest face just won't leave my mind." And that's how with virtually no interaction of any kind, characters fall in love. Now that's cheap.

With Vin and Elend (and granted, it's been awhile since I read the books), I always felt like they had an opposites attract thing going on, so even though they're different, I never felt like they didn't make sense. As previously stated, they both obviously have a lot of issues, but I also feel like their relationship wasn't a main focus of the novel. Not the romantic part anyway. The part that Brandon was most interested in (it seems from the annotations) was Vin's ability to trust. That's why we have a lot of inner monologue and doubts - not because she doesn't feel something for him, but because despite those feelings, she doesn't know how to trust other people. I think the more romantic part of their relationship probably took place in the background, behind the scenes, because their feelings for each other don't actually drive the novel. Vin's conscious decision to trust is a major part of her character arc, so that's what took the foreground. Not to mention, how much romantic stuff do they really have time for? They just overthrew an empire and now they're desperately trying to hold it together. They don't exactly have a lot of time to go on dates, or even just be around each other without the weight of the world on their shoulders. I think that's got to make things pretty awkward. I also don't remember feeling like Vin was acting clingy, but again, it's been awhile since I read the books.

And I disagree with the idea that just because a character is an idealist means he doesn't have any depth. I think it's much easier to have a character who's always looking out for number 1 than it is to have a character who has ideals and then has to struggle to hang on to them in a world where that's becoming increasingly difficult. I would much rather read about that, even if they don't succeed, than read about a bunch of selfish people who get what they want because they're selfish. I get enough of that in real life. I think the idealist has a much harder struggle, which is what makes those characters interesting.

[Aethling]

I do not get the idea you are saying for the Belgariad. Polgara is around Durnik for 14-15 years before the story even starts. Garion and C'Nedra are together for months before she is left with the Gorim. The entire time Polgara is doing whatever she can to put them in situations to get to know each other.

Yes, Elend is an idealist. Most famous politicians are when they first start off. Vin has huge problems with trust. Kind of hard to love someone without being able to trust them completely. She does make that discovery in the book in question.

[Aminar]

If you really want to see a flat romance, try reading The Belgariad by David Eddings, or the Shadowmarch series by Tad Williams. They both use the love mechanism of, "I only met you briefly, and despised you, but now that you're gone the thought of your pretty hair/honest face just won't leave my mind." And that's how with virtually no interaction of any kind, characters fall in love. Now that's cheap.

I so want to defend Shadowmarch here, but I just can't. The love story was exactly what you say it is. But how much of falling in love is a mental thing built upon your thoughts of a person rather than time you spend around them. I'd say a whole lot of it is. The conjunction of two people falling in love like that is unlikely, but it happens, and it can be just as true as any other kind. If you puzzle over a person long enough you will start to care for or despise someone. A big part of love forming is the mystery bits. I wouldn't call it cheap. I would honestly call it more realistic in many ways.

[Dund]

I was cynical once. Then I started working non-profit and seeing how hard people work just to help a few kids for minimum wage. How many nearly broke families donate what extra money they have because we charge next to nothing for our services. How many well to do people throw their energy into helping us. There is a whole lot more good intentions in the world than bad. We're just not capable of understanding the scope of our actions. If you examine Martin's work that's almost always the message too.

I think that's what Brandon is getting at. Look at book 2. It's all about the consequences of book 1. Consequences I could see from a mile off, but they mattered anyway. They were a good story to tell.

I dunno. I like to think of myself as a good person. I'm an idealist, but I only hold myself to those ideals because frankly not everyone was given as much as me. I use my advantages to help people. I really empathized with Elend. He felt like me. To have myself called unrealistic feels almost personal. Don't take it the wrong way. I heavily blame my personality on deriving my moral code from reading about too many heroes. They're my inspiration. If all fantasy were like ASoIaF I wouldn't be me. I'd be someone else and probably not someone I like as much as myself.

I wasn't saying the person is unrealistic per say. Just the person is unrealistic within their position in the world of the novel. Idealistic Elend doesn't make for a good king, and while I can see how they are building him and gearing him up to change and become a great king, it seems kind of convenient to have all these things happen to improve his ability to become king, starting with the overly convenient arrival of Tindwyl.

If I were an idealist (I probably am a bit despite the cynicism), I would actually probably not want to read about me. I know what I am, and would rather read about different personalities. Plus I don't really see me being a hero in a gritty rough war torn world, at least not in any kind of realistic way. People irl today are a product of a (relatively) peaceful world, just like the people in a war torn chaotic world should be a product of that. I know I'd be a completely different person growing up in medieval Europe. So I sort of try to identify the people with the world they live in to some extent, rather than our world. Medieval based worlds of fantasy should be somewhat more chaotic and perhaps primitive in their societal values than our world by default. Then plus some if you make the world particularly grim.

Basically idealists thrive in a world where their ideas can be protected, which is obviously something we have a lot of with freedom of speech etc and the armies to protect those values. In a world where that protection doesn't really exist, I guess I expect it to be much more muted and scarce. And if it does appear for it to be put down fairly quickly. Otherwise I guess to me it seems kinda unrealistic.

Also I understand they are going for the opposites attract thing with Elend and Vin, but I just don't get how she is opening up at all trust wise to someone she has nothing in common with and from both of their POV's, they barely understand each other. Vin is now questioning that trust and rightly so, but apparently they have been together a year? I find it difficult to understand how they built their relationship up to what it was at the start of the second book understanding each other so little. What the hell were they doing in that year, avoiding each other? Yet they are still intimate at the start.

I wouldn't say that is a major issue for me though, it's only a minor quibble with the book.

And I disagree with the idea that just because a character is an idealist means he doesn't have any depth. I think it's much easier to have a character who's always looking out for number 1 than it is to have a character who has ideals and then has to struggle to hang on to them in a world where that's becoming increasingly difficult. I would much rather read about that, even if they don't succeed, than read about a bunch of selfish people who get what they want because they're selfish. I get enough of that in real life. I think the idealist has a much harder struggle, which is what makes those characters interesting.

I think the issue has to do with how the character struggles to hang onto their ideals. Often times they are not done very believably. So many novels use predictable and convenient plot devices in order to have their idealistic heroes keep their honor and also save the day that it becomes tiresome. Whereas the selfish character simply fits a selfish gritty medieval world better.

An idealistic character used in the right setting and done well can of course be interesting to read about. I usually tend to find I like them when they aren't the hero of the story though, but more supporting characters, because I find they just don't fit that role as well due to an abundance of the issues I mentioned above.

Edited January 20, 2012 by Dund

[Alliare]

Let's do something:

I'm going to quote something general you said about Brandon's work and answer it.

Then do the same with something about Elend and Vin.

And try not to spoil you anything.

Sanderson certainly seems very set on there being good and evil in the world, which I disagree with and goes against the world Martin tries to portray. Everyone has the ability to do good and bad things, but no one is inherently evil or inherently good like BS seems to push.

Now, I am not sure if I have read this correctly. If there is something Brandon does not do is having "goodies" and "baddies". This is something you can read in most interviews he has given. In TFE, at the end, when the "great enemy" is slain, his last words are "You don't understand. You don't know what I do for humankind. I was your god, even if you couldn't understand it. By killing me, you have condemned yourselves..." (Spanish edition, "No lo comprendéis -gimió-. No sabéis lo que hago por la humanidad. Era vuestro dios, aunque no pudierais comprenderlo. Al matarme, os habéis condenado...", p. 631 translated by me, didn't have the English one at hand).

I cannot say if he is good or bad, for you haven't finished Mistborn, but there you have that - take your conclusions.

However, we could mostly say that, in Brandon's books, things are more or less like in real life, there is not such thing as 'bad' people. More like - people have passions, have appettites, and they might do things which are not ethically acceptable to get what they want. And the more power they have, the more accustomed they grow to doing so, the more damage they will cause.

On the other hand, as being moral is something more or less universal - it seems that every human being experiences the feeling of having 'limits' and not being able to do what it wants, acting according with one's moral code, or with a group's moral coge, would be doing 'good things'.

And most people will do both.

Oh, and a word about idealists. There are always idealists. Only... most idealists never triumph. And most never even get to try. But those lives would be very boring to write about, don't you think? That's why authors get to choose. Most times, idealists are behind someone with power that will listen to some of their aideas, or will manage to turn ahat they think into something economically beneficial, for example.

But, pray tell me, if there have been idealists in history, in this oh so corrupted world/real life, why can't there be idealists in fantasy?

Also I understand they are going for the opposites attract thing with Elend and Vin, but I just don't get how she is opening up at all trust wise to someone she has nothing in common with and from both of their POV's, they barely understand each other. Vin is now questioning that trust and rightly so, but apparently they have been together a year? I find it difficult to understand how they built their relationship up to what it was at the start of the second book understanding each other so little. What the hell were they doing in that year, avoiding each other? Yet they are still intimate at the start.

I wouldn't say that is a major issue for me though, it's only a minor quibble with the book.

Attraction. That's a important reason. Also and that, mo matter how long you have been in hiding (your feelings, your true self...) or maybe even because of it, when you want to open yourself, you want to do it now. Vin is afraid Elend will leave her, the more she tells him anything about the topic, even encouraging him, the mora afraid she is. And she wouldn't forgive herself if he left because of her not being open enough.

... on the other part, yes, they understand each other. Vin is very perceptive, with all her time in the streets and the bands, and so is Elend, having to look at everyone who surrounded him. They both were and felt not wanted and rejected. And, now, even if they have kind of 'friends', they both feel themselves Kelsier's shadow. They have much in common.

... Besides, the story doesn't 'jump' from scene that appears in the book to scene that appears in the book. It continues, the characters think, talk...

[Dund]

Let's do something:

I'm going to quote something general you said about Brandon's work and answer it.

Then do the same with something about Elend and Vin.

And try not to spoil you anything.

Now, I am not sure if I have read this correctly. If there is something Brandon does not do is having "goodies" and "baddies". This is something you can read in most interviews he has given. In TFE, at the end, when the "great enemy" is slain, his last words are "You don't understand. You don't know what I do for humankind. I was your god, even if you couldn't understand it. By killing me, you have condemned yourselves..." (Spanish edition, "No lo comprendéis -gimió-. No sabéis lo que hago por la humanidad. Era vuestro dios, aunque no pudierais comprenderlo. Al matarme, os habéis condenado...", p. 631 translated by me, didn't have the English one at hand).

I cannot say if he is good or bad, for you haven't finished Mistborn, but there you have that - take your conclusions.

However, we could mostly say that, in Brandon's books, things are more or less like in real life, there is not such thing as 'bad' people. More like - people have passions, have appettites, and they might do things which are not ethically acceptable to get what they want. And the more power they have, the more accustomed they grow to doing so, the more damage they will cause.

On the other hand, as being moral is something more or less universal - it seems that every human being experiences the feeling of having 'limits' and not being able to do what it wants, acting according with one's moral code, or with a group's moral coge, would be doing 'good things'.

And most people will do both.

Oh, and a word about idealists. There are always idealists. Only... most idealists never triumph. And most never even get to try. But those lives would be very boring to write about, don't you think? That's why authors get to choose. Most times, idealists are behind someone with power that will listen to some of their aideas, or will manage to turn ahat they think into something economically beneficial, for example.

But, pray tell me, if there have been idealists in history, in this oh so corrupted world/real life, why can't there be idealists in fantasy?

Attraction. That's a important reason. Also and that, mo matter how long you have been in hiding (your feelings, your true self...) or maybe even because of it, when you want to open yourself, you want to do it now. Vin is afraid Elend will leave her, the more she tells him anything about the topic, even encouraging him, the mora afraid she is. And she wouldn't forgive herself if he left because of her not being open enough.

... on the other part, yes, they understand each other. Vin is very perceptive, with all her time in the streets and the bands, and so is Elend, having to look at everyone who surrounded him. They both were and felt not wanted and rejected. And, now, even if they have kind of 'friends', they both feel themselves Kelsier's shadow. They have much in common.

... Besides, the story doesn't 'jump' from scene that appears in the book to scene that appears in the book. It continues, the characters think, talk...

That first part I already agree with. BS characters don't seem like they are cookie cutter types in the end, even if initially they do. My issue is more the prevailing vibe in the story seems to continually talk about good and bad. If I read a full page with Vin internally assessing whether someone is good or bad, then the same with Sazed, then the same with Elend, it starts to feel like BS is pushing that agenda even though the characters themselves are more well drawn than that. So it feels a little bit contradictory, like BS knows full well how to create complex grey characters, but still wants to push the good vs bad thing in other ways.

On your last point, I guess I could understand a physical attraction, but not personality wise. I just don't understand how Vin can respect someone whom isn't ruthless, more like Kelsier, as opposed to the soft, sheltered Elend. For me given her background and the way she is, it seems like she would respect that quality in someone more than anything else, and it's just not there with Elend.

I guess it seems like to me Brandon is trying to make her softer as a character than she should be given her upbringing. She seems a little too accepting of weakness when it comes to Elend, when she does not accept it of anyone else, and that just seems convenient, and IMO gives the relationship an unnatural vibe. Plus her clingyness. Whenever they are together she always seems to be grabbing him or clutching him etc. Which I guess is supposed to relate to the trust issues, but still.

[Alliare]

On the contrary, she has been brought up to believe the world and everyone is ruthless, and that is how everything should be. That's what he likes about Elend - he is not ruthless, and yet he is kind to her. She would like to despise him at first, but she - she finds out she can't. Because he cares. Because her world is upside-down. Reen said nobody could be trusted, Kelsier proved otherwise. If she can question that very 'truth' of her universe, she can question anything. Including her own way of being. Elend is so different from the people from the slums. She fascinates him. And she can't be indifferent to that.

Now, to the first you said - that's human nature of the very same characters. We, as human beings, always strife about what is 'good' and what is 'bad', and we always try to justify things saying 'oh, but that person did that because he was bad, or crazy, or psychopatal, human nature is being good', or so. It is not Brandon forcing the issue. It's the moral of the characters themselves forcing the issue. You'll see something more interesting about it later with Sazed.

[Dund]

On the contrary, she has been brought up to believe the world and everyone is ruthless, and that is how everything should be. That's what he likes about Elend - he is not ruthless, and yet he is kind to her. She would like to despise him at first, but she - she finds out she can't. Because he cares. Because her world is upside-down. Reen said nobody could be trusted, Kelsier proved otherwise. If she can question that very 'truth' of her universe, she can question anything. Including her own way of being. Elend is so different from the people from the slums. She fascinates him. And she can't be indifferent to that.

Now, to the first you said - that's human nature of the very same characters. We, as human beings, always strife about what is 'good' and what is 'bad', and we always try to justify things saying 'oh, but that person did that because he was bad, or crazy, or psychopatal, human nature is being good', or so. It is not Brandon forcing the issue. It's the moral of the characters themselves forcing the issue. You'll see something more interesting about it later with Sazed.

With your first point I think Vin is ruthless. Or at least it's portrayed she is. She believes rightly that everyone is ruthless because she understands that is what is required to survive. That is the impression I get anyway. Ruthlessness in and of itself isn't a negative quality, it's simply a requirement for survival in a dog eat dog world. Therefore to me it stands to reason that she would admire the quality in others, not admire it's absence. You don't admire a quality you value highly that is missing in someone. That's what I would read her as anyway, she should be a product of her environment and upbringing, as I mentioned in my previous post. She shouldn't be your typical sheltered girl dreaming of honourable princes etc (I know she isn't and doesn't dream of that, but you get what I mean, as it relates to Elend).

I think if you read about people that grow up in harsh environments/societies that is generally the way it works, they value the very harshness that in some ways has repressed them above all else. It's what makes them strong and better able to survive. Vin is a survivor that has used that quality and I think understands it's value and it's necessity. I think for me it seems like a softening of what should be a harsh character that she makes allowances for Elend that she doesn't for herself or seemingly everyone else also.

Anyway, we could prob argue this for ages, I guess I'm taking the more cynical view on character development, while you are taking the optimistic view.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Dund

[Alliare]

Actually, I was taking a more 'psychological' way, if you would call it so. It just so happens that I have had many hours of being present as a student in a psychologist's, given that it has always been one of my main interests, I am a medicine student and so XD. I was just applying what I have seen and learned there. Human personality is fascinating.

[spacemonkey]

With your first point I think Vin is ruthless. Or at least it's portrayed she is. She believes rightly that everyone is ruthless because she understands that is what is required to survive. That is the impression I get anyway. Ruthlessness in and of itself isn't a negative quality, it's simply a requirement for survival in a dog eat dog world. Therefore to me it stands to reason that she would admire the quality in others, not admire it's absence. You don't admire a quality you value highly that is missing in someone. That's what I would read her as anyway, she should be a product of her environment and upbringing, as I mentioned in my previous post. She shouldn't be your typical sheltered girl dreaming of honourable princes etc (I know she isn't and doesn't dream of that, but you get what I mean, as it relates to Elend).

I think if you read about people that grow up in harsh environments/societies that is generally the way it works, they value the very harshness that in some ways has repressed them above all else. It's what makes them strong and better able to survive. Vin is a survivor that has used that quality and I think understands it's value and it's necessity. I think for me it seems like a softening of what should be a harsh character that she makes allowances for Elend that she doesn't for herself or seemingly everyone else also.

Anyway, we could prob argue this for ages, I guess I'm taking the more cynical view on character development, while you are taking the optimistic view.

It's because she grew up in such a ruthless environment that Vin becomes attached to someone who doesn't want to take advantage of her. And you're right that Vin is attracted to ruthlessness to some extent, but ultimately, kindness is more important to her. This is why she chooses Elend over Zane.

Vin does become softer in some ways- and that's not a bad thing, because she also becomes stronger emotionally. She's better able to deal with the problems she faces when she has that foundation of trust in her friends. I think that's part of the point Brandon was making with her character- that she doesn't need to be a paranoid loner to be a badass.

Edited January 25, 2012 by zas678
The creator of the thread isn't done with the book yet.

[Captain.Kaulu]

That first part I already agree with. BS characters don't seem like they are cookie cutter types in the end, even if initially they do. My issue is more the prevailing vibe in the story seems to continually talk about good and bad. If I read a full page with Vin internally assessing whether someone is good or bad, then the same with Sazed, then the same with Elend, it starts to feel like BS is pushing that agenda even though the characters themselves are more well drawn than that. So it feels a little bit contradictory, like BS knows full well how to create complex grey characters, but still wants to push the good vs bad thing in other ways.

I think you've nailed it, except for the agreeing with it part.

Brandon does believe in good and evil as absolute concepts, and I agree that is reflected in the subtext of his writing.

On the other hand, he also understands that people are not purely good or evil, and so he does a good job (most of the time) avoiding characters that are unbelievably morally polarized.

[Aranfan]

One reason why Vin is so clingy to Elend is that he came back for her in the first book. Only two people came to save her when TLR captured her, Saze and Elend. That made a big impression on her, especially so soon after she found out that Reen actually spend his last moments protecting her at the cost of his life.

[Dund]

Coming towards the end of the second book.

I have to say I liked Elend finally having the balls to do something drastic, harsh and necessary like kill Jastes, but his evolution to that point still seems somewhat unnatural to me. Too much of the timid farmer boy turned confident hero. It's a pretty big jump from where he was.

I also found it kinda unrealistic that he was able to draw his sword and cut of his head, just like that. He's not a mistborn or a thug, and that feat would have been difficult for someone really strong to do to someone with their head on a block in one go, much less in direct confrontation, where I find it difficult to believe Jastes had no time to react.

Also Vin running back to Luthadel. After she ran out of pewter why the hell didn't she collapse and pretty much die? It was made pretty clear in the first book that the pewter dragging could be lethal due to the fact that if you run out of pewter then the strain of the force put on your body overwhelms you. If she went harder than she did in the first book as it said, then without some pewter to draw on she should pretty much be dead, or at the very least unconscious. Seems kinda inconsistent, given consistency of Sanderson's magic worlds is meant to be one of his main strengths.

[the95th]

Coming towards the end of the second book.

I have to say I liked Elend finally having the balls to do something drastic, harsh and necessary like kill Jastes, but his evolution to that point still seems somewhat unnatural to me. Too much of the timid farmer boy turned confident hero. It's a pretty big jump from where he was.

I also found it kinda unrealistic that he was able to draw his sword and cut of his head, just like that. He's not a mistborn or a thug, and that feat would have been difficult for someone really strong to do to someone with their head on a block in one go, much less in direct confrontation, where I find it difficult to believe Jastes had no time to react.

Also Vin running back to Luthadel. After she ran out of pewter why the hell didn't she collapse and pretty much die? It was made pretty clear in the first book that the pewter dragging could be lethal due to the fact that if you run out of pewter then the strain of the force put on your body overwhelms you. If she went harder than she did in the first book as it said, then without some pewter to draw on she should pretty much be dead, or at the very least unconscious. Seems kinda inconsistent, given consistency of Sanderson's magic worlds is meant to be one of his main strengths.

Elend was trained as a duelist by that point, by Ham, A Thug. He knew how to swing a sword pretty well.

Admittedly, yes it is tough to cut off somones head in one swoop. But mix rage, justification and a sharp sword in to the mix and it is possible.

Vin had also practiced her pewter drag and had become resistant to it.

[Aminar]

Coming towards the end of the second book.

I have to say I liked Elend finally having the balls to do something drastic, harsh and necessary like kill Jastes, but his evolution to that point still seems somewhat unnatural to me. Too much of the timid farmer boy turned confident hero. It's a pretty big jump from where he was.

I also found it kinda unrealistic that he was able to draw his sword and cut of his head, just like that. He's not a mistborn or a thug, and that feat would have been difficult for someone really strong to do to someone with their head on a block in one go, much less in direct confrontation, where I find it difficult to believe Jastes had no time to react.

Also Vin running back to Luthadel. After she ran out of pewter why the hell didn't she collapse and pretty much die? It was made pretty clear in the first book that the pewter dragging could be lethal due to the fact that if you run out of pewter then the strain of the force put on your body overwhelms you. If she went harder than she did in the first book as it said, then without some pewter to draw on she should pretty much be dead, or at the very least unconscious. Seems kinda inconsistent, given consistency of Sanderson's magic worlds is meant to be one of his main strengths.

Writing requires a certain level of tension building. The strain Vin threw on herself there had me tense as hell. I was worried about just that, but she willed her way through. Standard Epic Fantasy writing there. Admittedly that's a very meta answer, but as somebody who does a fair bit of writing I understand what he was doing, and feel it's consistent enough. I rarely ask why something works after it did, because frankly the answer is This universes god(the author) felt it was consistent enough.

[Aeshdan]

BTW, I think Elend gave Vin her own set of rooms for three reasons:

1. So she could have some alone space. She really likes that.

2. So he'd be less tempted to sleep with her.

3. To make it more obvious to the skaa that he wasn't sleeping with her.

She mentions when correlating the Terris Prophecies in WoA that she spends nearly all her time in Elend's room or out hunting. She just has rooms to sleep in. Or make a mess in.

[Dund]

Elend was trained as a duelist by that point, by Ham, A Thug. He knew how to swing a sword pretty well.

Admittedly, yes it is tough to cut off somones head in one swoop. But mix rage, justification and a sharp sword in to the mix and it is possible.

Vin had also practiced her pewter drag and had become resistant to it.

I guess in a fantasy world it is. In real life, nope. Especially not one who's only learnt to wield a sword for a few months, and from the descriptions, isn't physically imposing at all. It is in fact quite difficult to take a persons head off whom is kneeling prostrate with their neck bared on a stone block in one go. That can often take multiple tries, even by someone experienced in performing it.

But not a massive issue that I couldn't get over, I was more just pointing it out I guess. I was hoping as Elend was talking to Jastes, that he'd have the balls to take him out, not thinking he would, but happily surprised that he did and in spectacular fashion.

Writing requires a certain level of tension building. The strain Vin threw on herself there had me tense as hell. I was worried about just that, but she willed her way through. Standard Epic Fantasy writing there. Admittedly that's a very meta answer, but as somebody who does a fair bit of writing I understand what he was doing, and feel it's consistent enough. I rarely ask why something works after it did, because frankly the answer is This universes god(the author) felt it was consistent enough.

I've seen plenty of that in fantasy, it happens all the time. The difference I think is that most fantasy authors don't have their magic systems anywhere near as well fleshed out as BS, giving them an easy out with their characters able to pull things off when they feel like it to get out of trouble. But in this situation it's been specifically mentioned what the result of this particular magic use should be.

As I understand it building up a tolerance as you say, would be like building up a tolerance to be able to run at 30 miles an hour non stop for a few days without assistance. i.e. The body can't no matter the training. I thought the full weight of that was supposed to be felt by what is without pewter just a normal flesh and bone human being. And a small one at that in Vin. I could just be understanding it wrong though I guess. But I had that in my mind as she was running and fully expected Vin to at least the very least keel over unconscious when she ran out of pewter.

That was actually more concerning to me reading the sequence than her actually getting back in time. It seemed obvious to me she would get back in time somehow, at least to save the crew and likely some portion of the people in the city, or that they would find a way themselves to get out. In fact I read BS' annotation for that chapter and he wasn't happy with it as he also thought it may not carry enough tension with some readers simply expecting Vin to get back in time.

I was somewhat surprised that a few of the crew got killed off, although less surprised that the characters were all pretty much the least idealistic members of the crew (booo!!). I quite liked that Tindwyl was somewhat providing the voice of hard reason in the group (and Dockson also), I hope that gets replaced by someone, to play off the others. I think it would have carried more impact had say Sazed been the one killed, but I highly doubt anything bad will happen to any of the overly idealistic characters in the story.

Edited February 1, 2012 by Dund

[Sunblesser]

Sazed loses a ton of his idealism after events in WoA and goes through some great development

[Exile]

I'm going to throw this out here and maybe I'm wrong but...

I love being critical as much as the next guy, but until you finish the series you should probably hold off on the skepticism and critiquing. Sanderson manages to answer a number of your worries with what I feel are credible responses. And I'm sure a number of people reading this thread want to respond to your worries on idealism, black and white morality and so on with different examples, but a lot of them come to fruition in the final book.

So please, finish the Hero of Ages. If you finish that and still have worries about character motivation and beliefs then we can start this party in real grandeur.

p.s. Also on the passion of Vin and Elend, the main topic of this thread, I think that was one of the harder to read subplots of the book. The tension of their relationship was a very important part that was hard to notice as more than annoying until you realize what Zane wanted of Vin. Then it became very important. Also, the scene in the tent at the end of the Well of Ascension where Vin mentions sleeping naked is enlightening as to the state of their relationship. That time period was a bit like their honeymoon come to think about it.

[Aeshdan]

And I think Sanderson tends to write relationships with Christian-like wiev on sex, because he is also Christian (LDS are Christians, right? Wikipedia says so, sorry if anyone feels offended by this question)

Technically, Mormons are what I would call "demi-Christians" (People who retain some Christian ideas and knowledge but are lethally wrong on the important issues.)

EDIT: Goradel seems to have misunderstood what I meant by important issues. In this case, "important issues" refers roughly to those things covered by the Apostle's and Nicene creeds (there is one triune god, creator of all things; we have sinned against that God and are justly deserving of eternal damnation; the second person of God, Jesus Christ, came to Earth, was born of the Virgin Mary, lived a perfect life, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, died, rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven; and by his death and resurrection he has redeemed some of us for himself, to be brought with him to heaven.)

If you disagree with any of that, you definitely are not a Christian.

Edited May 10, 2012 by ReaderAt2046