[OB] Moash

[aemetha]

8 minutes ago, Vissy said:

In any case, peasants were treated as better than slaves. They weren't even functionally slaves. Especially considering that the difference between peasants and slaves was even ordained in the Bible, which was a big part of society at that time. 

What was the difference?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/slave

Quote

Definition of slave

1: a person held in servitude as the chattel of another

2: one that is completely subservient to a dominating influence

3: a device (such as the printer of a computer) that is directly responsive to another

4: drudge, toiler

They were serf's which is a synonym of slave.

http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/slave

[Vissy]

The difference between a serf and a slave was that a serf still had rights, as poorly treated as they were. Unlike slaves, they had a right to land and personal property. Unlike slaves, they could not be sold at the discretion of their lord. There were people like borders and cottars who had even fewer rights than a serf, but were still marginally better-off than slaves. The point is that the caste system can suck balls for these people, and we don't have to condone slavery to accept that (and to accept that Alethkar as a society has bigger problems than their caste system right now). 

Edited December 20, 2017 by Vissy

[aemetha]

I'm not condoning slavery in the modern context. I am saying slavery was more morally ambiguous in the historical context, in response to the suggestion of an equivalence between modern slavery and historical slavery. I'm also not saying that slavery was good for these people, I'm just saying that the alternatives weren't any better in most cases. History has to be interpreted by the standards of the time, not by our standards because there is absolutely no equivalence in terms of capacity to implement more equitable systems. 

[Korbin]

I think when we look at the terms of Roshar choosing to use slavery is about to be one of their worst mistakes. Because there slaves are about to enslave them... Now thats what I call bad karma.

[Nymeros]

I just want to ask a question: when Moash absorbs stormlight he feels his Passion returning....the heck does that mean? Can he now feel emotions normally and take action as he pleases?

[Farnsworth]

I think he means a hightened state of emotion. Similar to the sort he felt while fighting.

[Vissy]

To breathe some new life into this topic, I've got a question.

Is Moash supposed to be a villain? An antagonist? Or something else?

Let me explain the why. Personally, Moash was a huge disappointment in OB. If he was supposed to be built up as a villain, I'm afraid to say it didn't work for me. He was completely underwhelming and non-threatening. I can't see him as a threatening villain. So was he even supposed to be one? Or would Brandon seriously just put Moash chapters in there solely for some convoluted reason like seeing the other side of the conflict? 

[Dahak]

2 hours ago, Vissy said:

Is Moash supposed to be a villain? An antagonist? Or something else?

A reflection of Kaladin in a dark mirror.

[Vissy]

Isn't it a bit wasteful to create a character and allocate entire chapters to its existence purely because you want to show a "Dark Kaladin"?

[Greywatch]

There's nothing inherently wasteful in giving Kaladin a foil. I think Moash as a character achieved what he was supposed to - someone who shows us what Kaladin could have been had he decided not choose to let go of his hatred, as well as giving Odium's side a serious contender as a human character. I'm really interested to see what happens with Moash next, as it seems he's going to be given a lot of powerups.

[ALAKA]

If you read a Sci-Fi novel about, say, medieval England, in which the entire country was about to be annihilated by aliens, would you:

a. Cheer as Richard the Lionheart decapitates little green men,

or

b.  Say- "well, feudal society was immoral and those knights had it coming" - and throw the book away.

I assume the answer would be (a)

In the context of a medieval society, Alethkar is relatively moral. Projecting the 21st century onto another era is not a good idea.

[digitalbusker]

1 hour ago, ALAKA said:

If you read a Sci-Fi novel about, say, medieval England, in which the entire country was about to be annihilated by aliens, would you:

a. Cheer as Richard the Lionheart decapitates little green men,

or

b.  Say- "well, feudal society was immoral and those knights had it coming" - and throw the book away.

c: Avoid the false dichotomy and read the book carefully, looking to see how the author handles the fact that the nominal "heroes" of the piece are deeply flawed. Only if the author shows no interest in engaging that issue, or worse, comes out on the wrong side of it, will I throw the book away.

[ALAKA]

On 05/01/2018 at 4:35 PM, digitalbusker said:

c: Avoid the false dichotomy and read the book carefully, looking to see how the author handles the fact that the nominal "heroes" of the piece are deeply flawed. Only if the author shows no interest in engaging that issue, or worse, comes out on the wrong side of it, will I throw the book away.

Good point, and Brandon does tackle the issues. But at the end of the day a feudal Alethkar is going to be immoral by modern standards, and it's unlikely that even a decent person like Dalinar would question the system. It's just not in their cultural consciousness. Does that make him "deeply flawed"? Perhaps, but he wouldn't even think of it like that. What him and Gavilar, as well as every highlord, do and did in their any of their wars, would be considered a war crime today, but all he and his soldiers regret is the Rift, because that was, even by their standards, beyond the pale.

[digitalbusker]

56 minutes ago, ALAKA said:

Does that make him "deeply flawed"? Perhaps, but he wouldn't even think of it like that.

Yes, and being unaware of it doesn't make it less of a flaw.

Although I wouldn't be so sure nobody in the book is going to be aware of that flaw. Kaladin is well on his way towards a universal declaration of sapient rights, and I think Dalinar is on a path to a place where he'll be able to hear that, if not come up with it himself. He already knows that Vorinism primarily exists to support the machine, see his conversation with Kabsal in the monastery when he's looking for Taln's room.

[Korbin]

4 hours ago, ALAKA said:

Good point, and Brandon does tackle the issues. But at the end of the day a feudal Alethkar is going to be immoral by modern standards, and it's unlikely that even a decent person like Dalinar would question the system. It's just not in their cultural consciousness. Does that make him "deeply flawed"? Perhaps, but he wouldn't even think of it like that. What him and Gavilar, as well as every highlord, do and did in their any of their wars, would be considered a war crime today, but all he and his soldiers regret is the Rift, because that was, even by their standards, beyond the pale.

This is very true. And I think a big part of this story is about people coming to reseal there system. Them WANTING to change it. So that the same thing doesn't repeat.

 

On 12/24/2017 at 0:28 PM, Vissy said:

Isn't it a bit wasteful to create a character and allocate entire chapters to its existence purely because you want to show a "Dark Kaladin"?

I wouldn't say it was wasteful. And I also don't think that is the only reaeson for the Moash chapters. I think that we are going to see a lot more of him in future books. Also he has a very interesting and fun story line which really ads to the story of Stormlight. And even if something doesn't need to be in the book it can still be in there to make the book better.

[Carla Bridge Four]

Alethkar is *already* falling because of how its feudal/cast system worked.

There's no more a capital. Armies have been defeated, thousands of alethkis are already dead or running for their lives.

The lighteyes ultra high rights were given by Vorinism, and all of its truths are being challenged by how the World is changing.

Brandon is giving us a long social transformation history and it's amazing.

That said, I do think Moash *had* reasons to be angry, but also, he didn't see that you don't build a new society just by destruction. You need to actually build something new and different.

His ambition turned him blind and he betrayed those he actually loved. Now he's empty and that's just so sad.

I think at the very end of his confrontation with Kaladin, he'll ask for his forgiveness, and will die in Kal's arms.

My 2 cents. 

[hypatia]

Don't know, but this whole scene with Moash killing Elhokar had reminded me nearly forcefully on the Tanalan flashback.

A father killed violently right before the eyes of his son and his shardblade taken away.

I think it will be Gavilor's part with Moash - perhaps to try to kill him, perhaps to stop the circe of vengeance.

I would like to see something in this direction, because this would also connect with Dalinar's arc.

And Gavinor has become a version of Moash himself, traumatisiced by the death of his father.

Edited January 19, 2018 by hypatia

[Lord Mistborn Bondbreaker]

I REALLY dislike moash, he betrayed Kaladin after Kaladin basically saved his life (he probably would have died a bridgeman). I also think that he acts more babyish and immature than even Lift.

[Govir]

10 hours ago, Carla Bridge Four said:

That said, I do think Moash *had* reasons to be angry, but also, he didn't see that you don't build a new society just by destruction. You need to actually build something new and different.

During my first read through I absolutely hated Moash because of what happened at the capitol. During my second read through, I came to understand why Moash did what he did. I still don't like what he did, but it wasn't as random as I thought the first time through.

10 hours ago, Carla Bridge Four said:

I think at the very end of his confrontation with Kaladin, he'll ask for his forgiveness, and will die in Kal's arms.

While I think this would make a good scene, I hope it doesn't happen. Sometimes when people go bad, they need to stay bad. The issue with Moash is that he believes the whole system is wrong and it needs to be burned to the ground and replaced. He's working on the burning it to the ground, but doesn't really have a good replacement system. He has seen the injustices of the Lighteye/Darkeye system in the death of his grandparents and the treatment of Darkeyes in general. Then, during a time of upheaval where Lighteye/Darkeye shouldn't have mattered, humans returned to the comfort of the system. Lighteye refugees hoard food and "luxury" while Darkeye refugees starve. His motivation right now is that the Humans had their turn, and now maybe the Singers/Listeners can do better (spoiler: they probably can't / won't).

8 hours ago, hypatia said:

Don't know, but this whole scene with Moash killing Elhokar had reminded me nearly forcefully on the Tanalan flashback.

A father killed violently right before the eyes of his son and his shardblade taken away.

I think it will be Gavilor's part with Moash - perhaps to try to kill him, perhaps to stop the circe of vengeance.

I would like to see something in this direction, because this would also connect with Dalinar's arc.

And Gavinor has become a version of Moash himself, traumatisiced by the death of his father.

Gavinor is only about 3 years old at this point, and was already pretty messed up from the voidspren tormenting him. I don't think he'll be able to fully remember his father's death. If Sanderson does relate it to Tanalan's death, I hope that he takes it the other way (i.e. Gavinor *doesn't* kill Moash / have him killed). I'm hoping Gavinor forgives Moash for killing Elhokar, because that would be a good difference from Tanalan's story arc. It would also indicate that maybe the future generation can fully change their ways.

[WhiteLeeopard]

On 19/1/2018 at 8:17 PM, Govir said:

His motivation right now is that the Humans had their turn, and now maybe the Singers/Listeners can do better (spoiler: they probably can't / won't)

I actually wouldn't mind seeing what kind of society the Listeners could make on a large scale, since in all of Roshar they seemed to me to be the group most aligned with Honor. Honor in the good sense, not the darkness hidden under the light way of the Shin, or follow the letter of the law skybreaker way, but in the be honorable and do good in the world sort of way. Unfortunately the Listeners are gone. The parsh are a group that have been slaves all their lives with no culture or society as a base. Their leadership and new customs come from the vengeful spirits of their ancestors, who are full of rage and hatred in the best case, and insane with no minds to speak of in the worst case. What could go wrong? 

[Bort]

On 19/01/2018 at 9:00 AM, Carla Bridge Four said:

Alethkar is *already* falling because of how its feudal/cast system worked.

There's no more a capital. Armies have been defeated, thousands of alethkis are already dead or running for their lives.

The lighteyes ultra high rights were given by Vorinism, and all of its truths are being challenged by how the World is changing.

Kholinar wouldn't have fallen, if it were not for the Everstorm, so that can't be blamed on slavery or the caste system.

And while the whole enslaving Parshmen thing should never have happened, modern Alethi have no idea that the Parshmen can actually think for themselves, so much so that they need a new word for it when they encounter 'thinking Parshmen'. Therefore, how can the blame for the entire system be placed on Elhokar's shoulders? Yes, he could have done something about it, but he did't know any better.

If anything, the fault lay with the Radiants after the False Desolation, who should have seen this coming. At least, I think it was the False Desolation where the Parshmen were created. In all of the rushing around to claim these new, docile and subservient Voidbringers, did none of the Radiants of the time think, "Hang on, this could be bad, should this Unmade we've captured get loose, the world will go to hell"?

That's not to say I agree with slavery myself. But in a society that already had slaves, what else was going to happen?

The lighteyes were given their rights because people were used to following the Radiants, all of whom had light eyes, as we've seen on Kaladin. The question there is whether or not Vorinism decided that was how things were going to be, or because the people who claimed Shardblades after the Recreance were able to enforce their will