Ironeyes Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 (edited) I was browsing a site that a friend directed me to when I stumbled upon this very interesting and very detailed essay on the concept of honor. I'll provide the links below. Part 1: http://artofmanliness.com/2012/10/01/manly-honor-part-i-what-is-honor/ Part 2: http://artofmanliness.com/2012/10/16/manly-honor-part-ii-the-decline-of-traditonal-honor-ancient-greece-to-the-romantic-period/ Part 3: http://artofmanliness.com/2012/11/06/honor-during-victorian-era/ Part 4: http://artofmanliness.com/2012/11/12/manly-honor-part-iv-the-gentlemen-and-the-roughs-the-stoic-christian-code-of-honor-in-the-american-north/ There are more to come, so I'll just edit them in when they're written. And now, discuss! Edited November 23, 2012 by Ironeyes 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morsk Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Thanks for linking this. Some time ago I got a vague idea of what "honor" used to mean from Wikipedia's entry, but it's not one of WP's better articles and I've wanted to see a better description for some time now. It looks like this series is still ongoing, because he's mostly said critical things about honor so far, but the introduction made it sound like he was going to end up praising it in the end, once criticism was gotten out of the way. That hasn't happened yet. I actually think very poorly of honor, and am glad men have mostly escaped from it. I think it's a parallel to the oppressive aspects of female gender roles, and feminists' desire to escape from those. Men enjoyed a head start on purging our gender role of oppressive elements, and I'm grateful for this, and I want to go further and see the female gender role purged of oppressive elements too. The past scares me. Honor was so oppressive, for so long. The real question to me is what "Honor" means in the Stormlight Archive. Honor (the deity) said he missed the past, but what he really missed was the people united in war. Honor is saying he missed the Desolations, and that he thought they made people better. Try telling that to one of the survivors of the Desolations, or the victims, or their families, and Honor would have a lot of apologizing to do for his bad moral sense, his making light of atrocity. Will SA ever address this conflict? Maybe it will try to turn Honor into something new and better instead of just equating it with "good". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormfather Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Maybe it will try to turn Honor into something new and better instead of just equating it with "good". But that may be the point of this. All of the shards together make a whole and balanced person, but look what happens when they just have one of the sixteen. It may be the point that we need balance in our lives and can't let one aspect dominate over the others. I feel like this is the moral of Mistborn when we see that Ruin and Preservation, although opposite forces, are made to work together. Honor seems like a good thing, but it needs it's counterpart to balance it in our personalities just as its counterpart needs Honor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honor Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Unite them. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cayden Posted November 8, 2012 Report Share Posted November 8, 2012 Unite them. I always thought that had a link towards uniting the shards of honor but we'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morsk Posted November 9, 2012 Report Share Posted November 9, 2012 But that may be the point of this. All of the shards together make a whole and balanced person, but look what happens when they just have one of the sixteen. It may be the point that we need balance in our lives and can't let one aspect dominate over the others. I feel like this is the moral of Mistborn when we see that Ruin and Preservation, although opposite forces, are made to work together. Honor seems like a good thing, but it needs it's counterpart to balance it in our personalities just as its counterpart needs Honor. Maybe this is why Honor and Cultivation went to the planet together. Honor may have realized that his principle is a bit lacking as a guide in anything outside of war. I mean, look at Dalinar's "realization" at the end of the book: people should be treated like children and denied all civil liberties, until they've been brainwashed to accept his culture. Granted he's in a war camp, and the Alethi are really bad at discipline, and Odium is coming. It's not so bad an idea, given all those special circumstances. But as a way of running an entire planet, it can really use a balancing principle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Observer Posted November 9, 2012 Report Share Posted November 9, 2012 I think you're looking at Honor wrong. To me, honor is to act with fairness. Argh. It's like Tempi describing Lethani. The path that shows a path. This is impossible >_> Point is, you're talking about honor in the stage where it has gone too far. Never abandoning a friend when you can save them, not killing people because you can, charity. All things of honor that aren't really what I'd call oppressive. Yes, Honor could take the harsh and evil honor route, but from what I've seen all he wants is a world where people act with honor, which is not a bad thing. Honor applies outside of war, and what Honor misses is the way people used to be. Dalinar's plan is fine, war or not. The Alethi are quite happy to backstab and betray. Even in a "united" war, they're the kind of people who leave one of the kings stranded between two armies. Without a war, they would be the ultimate example of Darwinism, crushing one another without a thought. Dalinar thought he could give them the principle of honor an dlet them expound on it, but they're simply to hateful for that. He's not necessarily brainwashing them, he's rebuilding their ethics from the ground up, something that would need to be done even without a war. Yup, thta's my soapbox. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyman Posted November 9, 2012 Report Share Posted November 9, 2012 Maybe this is why Honor and Cultivation went to the planet together. Honor may have realized that his principle is a bit lacking as a guide in anything outside of war. I mean, look at Dalinar's "realization" at the end of the book: people should be treated like children and denied all civil liberties, until they've been brainwashed to accept his culture. Granted he's in a war camp, and the Alethi are really bad at discipline, and Odium is coming. It's not so bad an idea, given all those special circumstances. But as a way of running an entire planet, it can really use a balancing principle! They aren't so much being denied civil liberties as much as they are being held responsible for their decisions. If they decide to go to war, they had better darn well do it properly, with the intent to win, but not by any means possible. "Civil liberties" just means that decisions that aren't immediately and obviously catastrophic to other people are allowed to stand without interference. The Alethi are so far from a point where that is possible, it isn't even funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StormAtlas Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 Thanks for linking this. Some time ago I got a vague idea of what "honor" used to mean from Wikipedia's entry, but it's I actually think very poorly of honor, and am glad men have mostly escaped from it. I think it's a parallel to the oppressive aspects of female gender roles, and feminists' desire to escape from those. Men enjoyed a head start on purging our gender role of oppressive elements, and I'm grateful for this, and I want to go further and see the female gender role purged of oppressive elements too. The past scares me. Honor was so oppressive, for so long. Really? I think that your thoughts on Honor a little closer to what most would consider chivalry. The two do go hand in hand with each other and the old gender roles that portray men having to take care of women and open doors for them does have a little to do with honor, but in this day and age honor is so much more. Honor is what drives people to keep their word, to not stab some one in the back the first chance they get. Honor is doing the right thing even if it means doing things the hard way. Honor in stormlight is a little different though, at least than the way we view it in modern society. Sanderson has crafted a military society based on feudalism so honor is portrayed a little as being similar as to what it was in reality two hundred years ago or so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightReader Posted November 11, 2012 Report Share Posted November 11, 2012 I have a feeling that a big part the Stormlight Archive will be the protagonists each coming to understand what honor really is. The people in book one are just starting to realize that there is a better way to live, and they are seeking to teach that to others. I'm hoping that as the series progresses they will grow from the imposed chivalry/militaristic sense of honor and start establishing that more modern sense of honor, as integrity and respect. Honor in its current state in the Stormlight Archive is broken, and someone needs to take it up again and repair it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arondell Posted November 14, 2012 Report Share Posted November 14, 2012 Really? I think that your thoughts on Honor a little closer to what most would consider chivalry. The two do go hand in hand with each other and the old gender roles that portray men having to take care of women and open doors for them does have a little to do with honor, but in this day and age honor is so much more. Honor is what drives people to keep their word, to not stab some one in the back the first chance they get. Honor is doing the right thing even if it means doing things the hard way. I would add that while the chivalry in Europe could be oppressive and often represented an ideal that was often not lived up to it was still better then not having such a code. If nothing else it got the idea across that women not of your own family had some value and should be treated well. Just look at how women are treated in some cultures that didn't have a similar code of conduct in their history. Yeah I'm looking at you Middle East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nepene Posted November 14, 2012 Report Share Posted November 14, 2012 Yeah, while honor can be oppressive at times in a violent world where people will murder you and destroy you and do bad things for you at their whims it's much better to be protected by honor than not. It may be insulting to you at times, but in your roles and positions you're much safer than you are alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironeyes Posted November 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted November 23, 2012 Another part went up, so I edited it into the OP. Here it is: http://artofmanliness.com/2012/11/12/manly-honor-part-iv-the-gentlemen-and-the-roughs-the-stoic-christian-code-of-honor-in-the-american-north/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.d41b1ca865930ccf5f63b08a839f908e.png){kind=logo}
Recommended Posts