What's up with Bloody Tan? (Poll)

[Atlas333]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who finds the mystery of Bloody infuriating. (How did we not get an answer in four books?!) To add to that, Brandon has a habit of RAFO-ing any question about him. 

To me this it seems like the question of Bloody Tan won't be answered anytime soon (Maybe in secret history 2 if we ever get it).

The purpose of the thread isn't to discuss bloody Tan (although you're more than welcome to). Rather, this is just me being curious and wanting to gather some data.

Above I've listed every possible explanation I could think of to explain how he was able to move Lessie like that (if I missed one let me know). I'm curious to see what explanation is the most popular amongst fans.

Edited July 16, 2024 by Atlas333

[Treamayne]

You're missing the obvious one, mentioned at the end of SoS (Spoilers)

Spoiler

Lessie moved herself, on Harmony's Orders

 

[Returned he/him]

I agree with Treamayne. I picked "Influenced by Harmony" from the poll choices as it's the closest one that fits what we know.

Spoiler

It wasn't Tan's show, whatever he thought. What happened to Lessie was predetermined, whether or not the encounter with Tan was choreographed.

 

[LightRinger he/him]

I’ve always wondered if they were both Kandra…

[Atlas333]

I've added Lessie as an option. I guess I was biased there because I've always focused on Bloody Tan and how weird he is. I'll admit I'd be disappointed if the answer was that simple.

[Elite01]

Its been a second since I read shadows of silence but I thought Tensoon says that Lessie was against the plan to have her get killed so Wax would go back to Elendel, but when the opportunity presented itself she agreed to trust Harmony and play along. So if it does turn out to be Lessie who moved I would vote that Harmony took control over her like Ruin would in era 1. This seems to land more in line with what we know. 

 

In the actual book it says

Quote

Wax fired.

In the same instant, Tan yanked Lessie to the right.

The shot broke the air, echoing against clay bricks. Lessie’s head jerked back as Wax’s bullet took her just above the right eye. Blood sprayed against the clay wall beside her. She crumpled.

Wax stood, frozen, horrified. No . . . that isn’t the way . . . it can’t . . .

“The best performances,” Tan said, smiling and looking down at Lessie’s figure, “are those that can only be performed once.”

It is from Wax's point of view so he may not be a reliable narrator. Bloody Tan also doesn't seem suprised that his captive moved into the bullet's path. I think its more likely that Tan is doing something. 

 

Also relevant WOB I found after typing above

Quote

Argent

Was Bloody Tan influenced and/or controlled by Harmony or one of his agents? During those introductory events [in The Alloy of Law prologue]?

Brandon Sanderson

Controlled by Harmony? No.

Argent

Was he controlled or influenced by anyone outside of himself?

Brandon Sanderson

*sounds like he's about to say “yeah”* RAFO.

 

So he wasn't influenced by Harmony. I am not sure if Lessie moving herself would fall into the category of "one of his agents" 

Edited July 16, 2024 by Elite01

[Green Hoodie Mistborn he/him]

9 hours ago, Treamayne said:

You're missing the obvious one, mentioned at the end of SoS (Spoilers)

  Hide contents

Lessie moved herself, on Harmony's Orders

 

This has been my understanding following Shadows of Self and the revelations in it 

[Returned he/him]

6 hours ago, Elite01 said:

So he wasn't influenced by Harmony. I am not sure if Lessie moving herself would fall into the category of "one of his agents" 

"Controlled or influenced" is pretty broad, and the whole tableau seems unreasonable with only Lessie being controlled. We do have some suspiciously cryptic utterances from Tan:

Quote

"I have seen God, lawkeeper," Tan whispered. Where was he? "I have seen Death himself, with the nails in his eyes. I have seen the Survivor, who is life." (Alloy of Law, page 9).

"[...] we're all just puppets... you see..." [...] "Someone else moves us," Tan said. (Allow of Law, page 10)

Death is clear enough, with the "nails in his eyes comment", and the Survivor is also pretty clear (even if it's not clear how or why Kelsier would interact with Tan or tell him anything about Harmony's modes of action). But to whom is Tan referring when he says "God"? Plenty of characters refer to Harmony that way, but what interaction with Harmony would lead Tan to his conclusion that "someone else moves us"?

Before Lost Metal I'd thought that perhaps Tan was influenced by Trell one way or another, not unlike Paalm. The idea was based on how similar Tan's rantings were to Paalm's singular focus on freeing Scadrial from Harmony's manipulations. I no longer think that that makes sense. We saw too much of what Autonomy was up to and how she worked for Tan's scheme (or even involvement in events) to fit.

The similarity of Tan's observation to Paalm's obsession does remain troubling, though. It's so specific and technically accurate (if biased to a specific perspective), and Tan was already on the game board long before Wax and Lessie's assault on his hideout. Perhaps it was Harmony's ruinous side that interacted with Tan in some way short of spike-imposed control? I can't shake that the similarity means something, but the WoB stating that Harmony wasn't controlling Tan rules out so many options.

But we know that what happened with Lessie was intended by Harmony by her own testimony, testimony which Harmony did not contradict or deny (and tacitly confirmed, by my reading as I recall it). So random chance doesn't really fit, nor does any other "just so" story that doesn't involve divine intervention or Lessie herself making the movement.

Lessie communicated with Wax for the timing of the shot via blinks and intended to be shot. I don't see how Wax would be able to tell the difference between Lessie being yanked by Tan versus her lunging just slightly to the side, especially when he wouldn't imagine that she would intentionally move into the path of the bullet. But at least she could have done it.

The only other plausible explanation I can think of relies on Harmony making use of Fortune to see a sequence of events leading to the shot striking Lessie and then choosing to make that sequence happen. We've seen other characters do things like that, most notably Preservation, so I think it's a reasonable (if unsatisfying) explanation that doesn't rely on explicit control of Tan or Lessie maneuvering to be struck by the bullet.

[Atlas333]

9 hours ago, Returned said:

The similarity of Tan's observation to Paalm's obsession does remain troubling, though. It's so specific and technically accurate (if biased to a specific perspective), and Tan was already on the game board long before Wax and Lessie's assault on his hideout. Perhaps it was Harmony's ruinous side that interacted with Tan in some way short of spike-imposed control? I can't shake that the similarity means something, but the WoB stating that Harmony wasn't controlling Tan rules out so many options.

This is something I've thought for a while; I'm just wondering if Brandon would be so specific to say that Ruin is its own entity and could be considered separate from Harmony. 

It would clear the most things up in my opinion. It would be Ruin acting to bring about Harmony's plan (perhaps against his will) and explain why Lessie blames Harmony even if the action was somehow involuntary.

 

I think autonomy is another decent option. While it could be counter-intuitive to help Harmony this action did give her a new agent on Scadrial; however, I find it hard to believe that Lessie would still blame Harmony if Autonomy was the one truly responsible. There could be some deception and manipulation there, I suppose. It would also explain Tan and Bleeder's fixation on choice and autonomy.

 

Either option feels easy to explain though; it makes me wonder why we don't have a definitive answer. Did Brandon just forget to tie up this loose end? Did he just want to add a bit of mystery to the story? Or is there something even bigger here that we won't get until a later era? (I personally doubt that last one and worry it may be the first reason)

Edited July 17, 2024 by Atlas333

[Returned he/him]

21 minutes ago, Atlas333 said:

This is something I've thought for a while; I'm just wondering if Brandon would be so specific to say that Ruin is its own entity and could be considered separate from Harmony. 

It would clear the most things up in my opinion. It would be Ruin acting to bring about Harmony's plan (perhaps against his will) and explain why Lessie blames Harmony even if the action was somehow involuntary.

My major piece of evidence in this regard is Sanderson's comment that Sazed isn't managing holding both Shards very well, coupled with the obviously non-harmonious state of Scadrial. A couple of characters specifically mention Harmony's dual nature by one component or the other (TenSoon and Wax at minimum both refer to Wax as Harmony's Ruin, though how knowledgeable they are on the topic isn't clear). I've got a pet theory on the development of Scadrial through future books that relies on Sazed trying to suppress Ruin more than he can manage, with the excess seeping out into the world to various effects. Not that that's evidence of anything!

We might still learn new things about Autonomy's actions on Scadrial, but as above I don't entertain the idea that she was invovled with Tan any more. Some pieces fit really well, most notably the similarity to Paalm, but now that we know what Autonomy's plans were I can't think of a way that Tan would have been involved for any reason. And we'd also have to explain why no one bothered to recover Tan's Trellium spike (unless perhaps it was Paalm, immediately after Wax shot him?), or why it wasn't mentioned at all in BoM or LM. I suppose Harmony could have noted the sorts of things Tan was doing and formed his own plan around them, bending Autonomy's efforts to his own purposes. I feel that I can't totally rule out that Autonomy was influencing Tan but it's too thin a reed for me to support. At least, not when there are other explanations that are at least as plausible and don't require so many assumptions.