Shallan and slaves - analysis of a single scene

[kari-no-sugata]

There's a particular scene in WoR that I don't remember getting much discussion, but I've found myself pondering it for quite a while. This scene is from chapter 21, towards the end with Shallan and Tvlakv talking:

"Your Almight is a farce."

"You should hope he is," Shallan said, walking to the back of Tag's wagon nearby. "For if he is not, then Damnation itself awaits men like you." She inspected the cage. Five slaves in grimy clothing huddled inside, each one looking alone, though they were crammed in close.

"These are mine now," Shallan told Tvlakv.

"What!" he stood up on his seat. "You--"

"I saved your life, you oily little man," Shallan said. "You will give me these slaves in payment. Dues in recompense for my soldiers protecting you and your worthless life."

"This is robbery."

"This is justice. If it bothers you, submit a grievance with the king in the Shattered Plains, once we arrive."

 

Some thoughts:

1. I would guess that the law would side with Tvlakv - she's basically dictating terms. It could be argued that she's subtly threatening him by mentioning "her" soldiers.
2. I would say that Shallan is abusing her status as a lighteyed too, by telling him to go complain to the king if he doesn't like it - she knows he's worried about his debts and would probably not want to create unnecessary risks by taking on a lighteyed.
3. Shallan really does not like slavers ("men like you")
4. It could also be argued that Shallan is being unfair since he sort-of saved her life simply by being there at the seashore.
5. The above is not typical behaviour for Shallan.

So... why does Shallan do this? Here's a few more lines:
 

One by one, five hesitant slaves stepped from the wagon, shaggy bearded and shirtless. Her trip with Tvlakv had not been pleasant, but it had been luxurious compared to what these men had been through. Several glanced at the darkness nearby, as if eager.

"You may run if you wish," Shallan said, softening her tone. "I will not hunt you. I need servants, however, and I will pay you well. Six firemarks a week if you agree to put five of them toward paying down your slave debt. One if you don't."

 

1. The wrong way, I think, to interpret this is she wanted some slaves for herself so decided to steal some.
2. The critical indicator is she says that "you may run if you wish" - she would not say that if she truly needed slaves and was willing to steal to get some. I think Shallan is lying when she says she needs servants - this is a bit complicated but I think she wants them to feel that should they decide to stay they would be welcomed. I don't remember any actual indication that Shallan needed servants later.
3. The first line indicates her real motivation - she felt sorry for them and decided to do something to help their situation.
4. I have no proof but her actions feel somewhat pre-meditated to me
5. The last line is subtly interesting too. One firemark is a week's wages for a sailor (according to Yalb) and due to the danger and skill required, sailors would normally be paid very well (based on Earth history at least). Yalb is also not a slave, who are paid worse. So, the cost to Shallan may be somewhere around 10-30x what a non-slave unskilled servant might get! (This is a rough estimate - corrections welcome) Shallan is certainly not doing this for her own financial benefit.

 

To follow up from the last point, there is this paragraph from chapter 24:

These were accustomed to labor, and seemed frightened by the idea of what she was paying them. Pittance though it was, it would see most of them freed in under two years. They were obviously uncomfortable with the idea.

 

I would say that this is why Shallan didn't simply just free them out-right: these people had probably been slaves for a very long time, possibly since they were born. They aren't used to freedom so I think Shallan is trying to more gently free them in a way that is less of a shock - and gave them the option to run if they felt ready.

 

It could be argued that Shallan should have simply bought the slaves if freeing them was her real objective, rather than steal them (journey before destination and all that). She does, after all, pay Tvlakv for a wagon immediately afterwards. My best guess is that Shallan probably had a rough idea of what the going price of a slave would be (having worked on the finances of her house, which did employ slaves) and with her limited finances felt there was a high risk she wouldn't be able to afford it - she really wanted to succeed so decided to go aggressive.

 

So why was she so motivated? Because she identified with the slaves - as a child "Freedom was as valuable as an emerald broam to Shallan, and as rare as a larkin" (chapter 45). Also, see this quote from chapter 75:

I will worry about what I wish to worry about," Shallan said. "I don't need to be protected."

"But--"

"I don't!" Shallan said. She breathed in and out, calming herself. She reached out and took him by the hand. "I won't be locked away again, Adolin."

 

Note the "locked away" bit - that's what she really fears.

 

From our 21st century point of view, slavery is terrible and condoning it in the slightest is reprehensible. In-world on Roshar, however, is completely different and personally I think Shallan is quite enlightened in this regard, though some of her specific actions are certainly questionable. If she ever carries her feelings to their natural conclusion then I would expect to see her push for the abolition of slavery (or at least strongly side with someone who proposes it) - and given her connections to Dalinar (who also has to unite mankind) it could be achieved.

 

(sorry to ramble but I hope this is all interesting food for thought)

[Swimmingly]

I think a lot of it was revenge for the small things - for example, the whole debacle with the supposed loss of shoes. My interpretation was that she wanted her servants and guards to be taken from the lowest they could be, so they wouldn't betray her - and so they saw her as giving them a new chance at life.

[name_here]

There may have been legal complications to freeing them outright.

 

As for pay, bridgemen made two clearmarks a day, and slave wages are apparently usually half normal wages, so the slave bridgemen made one clearmark a day. According to the sphere value table on the wiki, that would come out to half a firemark a week. So the spending money Shallan is giving them is pretty respectable.

[happyman]

I view this in a complicated light.

 

I think Shallan was doing the right thing, both by her lights and from a practical point of view.  The slaves will be grateful to her, and I see no reason they shouldn't be.

 

On the other hand, there was definitely some classism in the way she viewed the slaves.  She, the powerful lighteyes, was doing them, the enslaved darkeyes, a favor.  That made me uncomfortable.

 

In the end though, I thought:  which would I rather have?  A paternalistic aristocrat who does the right thing, or anybody else who does the wrong thing?

[king of nowhere]

So, all that long post to say that shallan has a good heart? I didn't think that needed proof.

 

Furthermore, slavery is terrible to us, but virtually every ancient society has practiced it, so to those people it felt normal. Good people in those societies were not against slavery, but cared that slaves were treated decently. And, when the slaves are treated well and given basic rights, the distinction between a slave and a poor worker tends to fade. Slaves may even be better of, since they don't risk unemployement and will always have food and shelter, while the poor worker could lose his job and his home at any time.

the vorin system of practicing slavery (people are made slaves only as punishments, they have to be paid  a bit, they can save money to buy their freedom) is quite enlightened for ancient standard, and I wouldn't dare to expect any better from any preindustrial society.

An intersting comparison is the "indentured servitude" system practiced on illium, in the mass effect universe. that is basically slavery for a fixed amount of time, without violence, and with a limited number of tasks the servant can be ordered and lower standards of treatment set. I see that as morally acceptable. it's not really that different from a job contract: you agree to do a certain job for a certain amount of time, and you get paid with food, shelter and the erasing of some debt or whatever was the cause that forced you to sell yourlself. It also look good on the curriculum.

 

So, I have no problem whatsoever with shallan keeping slaves, as long as she treat them that way.

[Swimmingly]

Indentured servants of exactly this type were how a lot of European settlers came to Canada when it was founded, in case anyone cares.

[Pathfinder]

I will look for the quote, but when Kaladin is first a slave under that guy, he is surprised that the slaver would go anywhere near Alethi civilization. It is a strange nuance but I believe the slave trade itself is illegal, but owning a slave is not to the Alethi. Or it might have been a people they were passing. Sorry got to locate it to be sure

 

edit: ah found the quote and it is too vague for me to make this assumption, i have included it below:

 

"This place would be subject to Alethi law and rules. he'd expected that Tvlakv would want to avoid such things. But here, he'd probably also find the best prices"

Edited May 9, 2014 by P4thf1nd3r

[name_here]

I gather it's not illegal but people are not fond of it. Plus, the Alethi do have laws regarding treatment of slaves that might be stricter than Tvlakv wants to deal with. Also, I got the impression that a fairly large number of slaves are Alethi; I can't imagine many people are happy to be reminded that they could potentially end up in those cages too.

 

Overall, the Alethi seem to run a fairly respectable system of slavery, but it's still slavery. It's not a bad deal, except for the bridgemen, but it's one people are forced to take. But honestly, they seem to be better off than Arleon serfs and definitely better than Skaa.

[SmurfAquamarineBodies]

I think what she is doing is quite intelligent. She is not freeing them, she is letting them free themselves. The way she is doing that is doing that, is by giving them a job that through her, all things going to plan ( she could of course fail, be killed and then they are chainsawed) they could have job that they will have for the rest of their lives.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Chaos
Restrict swearing, please.

[Baine]

...What exactly is paternalistic about Shallan helping the slaves? I mean, would it have somehow been better if she were a darkeyes and helped them?

Edited May 9, 2014 by Baine

[name_here]

...What exactly is paternalistic about Shallan helping the slaves? I mean, would it have somehow been better if she were a darkeyes and helped them?

 

It carries an implicit assumption that darkeyes need lighteyes to take care of them, particularly since she isn't outright freeing them. I think she is doing the sufficently right thing given the circumstances and cultural context (I'd say free and hire on as workers, but slavery is accepted in Vorinism and she's treating them well) but there is the question of whether she's doing it because of a paternalistic attitude. She might be evaluating this situation correctly but for the wrong reasons.

 

Personally, I think she's bought into the idea that lighteyes are favored by the Almighty and must use their gifts responsibly to lead and protect the darkeyes, but mostly because she's never been seriously pressed to consider the issue.

[Numb]

These are career slaves remember. They haven't been "free" for most of their lives in some cases. Just outright freeing them and telling them to go do whatever is more of a death sentence than anything else. Paying them and paying off their "debt" is way more sensible. She can slowly introduce them to the idea of being free without completely abandoning them.

[name_here]

In Rome, which had a somewhat similar system, it was not uncommon for people to free slaves and then hire them. Actually, pretty much the entire early imperial bureaucracy consisted of ex-slaves of the emperor. That seems like it'd be a reasonable enough solution.

[Numb]

That's what she has done now. What's the difference between "freeing" a slave then having their only means of support be yourself and not "freeing" a slave and paying them. It would be different if they could live on their own or had skills that other people would hire them for but there's no evidence of that. There's no real evidence of Lighteyes even hiring servants is there? They either use parshmen or slaves I think.

[woolhead]

...What exactly is paternalistic about Shallan helping the slaves? I mean, would it have somehow been better if she were a darkeyes and helped them?

I think the way it works is if you harm someone less fortunate than yourself then you're oppressive/bigoted/prejudiced/etc, if you ignore them you're complacent/bigoted/prejudiced/etc, and if you help them you're paternalistic/bigoted/prejudiced/etc. 

[Aleksiel]

There's no real evidence of Lighteyes even hiring servants is there? They either use parshmen or slaves I think.

 

There are masterservents that wear all black, Dalinar mistook Wit for one at a feast. There are plenty of servants basically everywhere. They serve food at the said feasts; Brightladies have their handmaids (or something), which are hired and not bought. Kaladin doesn't use the word slave when describing the boys who 'pamper' the lighteyes on the training ground. When he was still little and in Hearthstone, Roshone's son tried to made him bring him food and he said 'I'm not a servant!' again no mention of slaves. To say there are only slaves and parshmen that serve lighteyes, is an exaggeration. 

[Numb]

I thought those master servants were all lowly lighteyes, same with handmaids but seemsI was mistaken.

[name_here]

That's what she has done now. What's the difference between "freeing" a slave then having their only means of support be yourself and not "freeing" a slave and paying them. It would be different if they could live on their own or had skills that other people would hire them for but there's no evidence of that. There's no real evidence of Lighteyes even hiring servants is there? They either use parshmen or slaves I think.

 

The difference between a free worker and a slave in this case is that the free worker gets to leave if he wants. They might not be able to find other jobs, but they have the choice to try. Plus, they could sign up as spearmen; always room for new recruits in an army at war. I do agree there's really no reason they'd pass up a firemark a week (plus likely room and board) but they should have the option to decide that themselves.

[Baine]

I'm not sure if she actually can free the slaves outright, by Alethi law, without paying off the slave debt.

[Aleksiel]

The slave debt passes to the next owner. Kaladin was thinking of that when Tvlakav sold him, how in the documents is written the amount that has been paid and what remains of the slave debt.

 

Besides, Dalinar just freed them. He paid Sadeas, then declared the bridgemen free without complications.

[Numb]

That actually makes me curious. My understanding of the slave debt is that it's actually a bunch of financial rubbish made up in order to keep people permanently slaves while having hope of one day not being slaves. The documentation is all with the owner without any third party involved. At the same time the slaves don't even seem to know the exact amount of their debt and there's no recipes given so their legal standing of actually paying the debt would be impossible to prove(Lighteyes word vs Darkeyes). 

 

I wonder if Shallan realizes this.

[Pathfinder]

That actually makes me curious. My understanding of the slave debt is that it's actually a bunch of financial rubbish made up in order to keep people permanently slaves while having hope of one day not being slaves. The documentation is all with the owner without any third party involved. At the same time the slaves don't even seem to know the exact amount of their debt and there's no recipes given so their legal standing of actually paying the debt would be impossible to prove(Lighteyes word vs Darkeyes). 

 

I wonder if Shallan realizes this.

I believe that was subjective. Not whether or not the law exists, but whether or not it is rubbish. Kaladin thinks it is given his experiences with lighteyes, Shallan probably thinks it is not given that she is a lighteyes herself. So perhaps in some areas or among some light eyes it is rubbish, while among others they honor that tradition and thereby it is not rubbish

[Sphinx]

That actually makes me curious. My understanding of the slave debt is that it's actually a bunch of financial rubbish made up in order to keep people permanently slaves while having hope of one day not being slaves. The documentation is all with the owner without any third party involved. At the same time the slaves don't even seem to know the exact amount of their debt and there's no recipes given so their legal standing of actually paying the debt would be impossible to prove(Lighteyes word vs Darkeyes). 

 

I wonder if Shallan realizes this.

 

That depends on your definition of "made up." I read it as a very The Junglesque set up. Ridiculously high prices for food, lodging, all sorts of hidden fines for every infraction, etc etc etc guarantees that the debt is never actually paid off in almost all cases. The slaves are mostly kept in the dark as to the sums of what's going on so they don't fuss, but if someone gets really insistent, or another light eyes investigates, there probably is paperwork "proving" that the slave debt hasn't been paid off. Kaladin never really puts a lot of effort into finding out how much his is (that we see), and when he wants to stop paying it back and get all his wages, he's allowed to. There's no massive conspiracy among the lighteyes to keep slaves in the dark about the fact that slave debt is a myth that no one actually keeps track of. There's just lots of mini conspiracies to keep the debts exorbitant and the wages low.

 

This has a lot of parallels in real world indentured servitude/debt bondage/immigrant factory workers.

[Numb]

I was actually also thinking of real world parallels but more so in banking. The floating interest rates people tried to use with home loans where it basically guaranteed the debtor would be unable to pay eventually which leads to the bank both getting the money and the property back. You could build a slave contract in such a way that if the slave's wages were ever threatening to overtake the debt then the interest on the debt would increase by an amount to counteract this. A thought came to mind though, this is a society where the men can't read. Not only that but one "race group" has superior social standing and rights to the other. Why then go through all that trouble of building a clever contract? It seems easier just to falsify documentation while either lying or never disclosing the full truth to your debtors. 

 

I do agree to some extent that it's more likely not some kind of big conspiracy and more likely the mini conspiracies crafted a long time ago to keep the system in place. The system has most likely been around for some time now. It's entirely likely that the people of today(Light and Dark)  don't even realize it's corrupt(If it is).

Edited May 9, 2014 by Numb

[Pathfinder]

This is just me hazarding a guess but I think it has to do with the fact that not all slaves are dark eyes. Slaves can be light eyes as well. It makes lighteyes uncomfortable to know that even they could "fall so low". So false documents can be discovered to be false and proven so. Leveling tons of charges that prevent paying off a debt is immoral, but in and of itself may not be illegal, which is how they got away with it in the real world like Sphinx pointed out.