Fantasy Book Club Series discussion

I want to raise a rather philosophical question that Arithon brings to the fore at one point in Traitor's Knot. I draw your attention to a scene between Arithon and Fionn Areth. The latter asks why Arithon risks the people he cares about--specifically the people on Evenstar, but it applies more broadly to the Clansmen as well--"You would kill them all, and yourself as well, just for the well-being of strangers? [...] Why spare the Alliance? I don't understand."

Arithon's response is that it's "Because these people here understand why they fight. Their love and their loyalties are freely given, and based on the truth, however unsavory. Their choice has not been triggered by fear, or embellished by self-righteous vainglory."

Now, that assessment may not be perfectly true for the entire crew, but it fits fairly well, and is perhaps even more thoroughly true for the Clans.

It's a nice sentiment, and in the world Janny has created, it seems true. Arithon's the good guy; the Fellowship cause and the related compact that the clans uphold is the right one.

BUT that's a fantasy world (pun intended). In the real world, we have competing visions of the Truth that can't be so neatly judged. That doesn't--and probably shouldn't--stop us from making those judgments, but discerning who's true and who's deluded is a dicey proposition.

In a sense, doesn't Lysaer believe exactly the same thing--that his enemies are deluded, that they serve a false cause. Granted, his reaction to this is starkly different--in essence, those poor deluded bastards need to die so that Truth can win out. It's a big difference, no doubt about it, but it seems like both sides hold the other to be deluded without being able to consider that they themselves might also be deluded.

What would it mean for Arithon's position if it turned out that he was mistaken? Given what we've seen, that seems most unlikely, but I'm thinking in terms of the applicability of this moral position in the real world.

The other question to ask ourselves is this: why should those who are not deluded die for the sake of those who are? Is it simply to preserve the chance that they could find grace and truth? Or is there something else to it?

I wouldn't look at the 'other' side from Lysaer's viewpoint as it is skewed by the Curse. I would instead point to his followers who, in Arithon's words have had 'their choice triggered by fear, or embellished by self-righteous vainglory'.

In other words, Janny's world involves people who are in a similar position to people who live in the 'real' world. They try to discern the Truth from what is likely a plethora of points of view, but often times one of those viewpoints is so much in their face they cannot evaluate any other POV. Just like in our world, the problem becomes how to discern what is obfuscation thrown up with the sole purpose of coercing a specific reaction. In both the case of those who hear Lysaer's appeals and many who live in our world, the clouding of the issue is being done primarily by fear. Fear of shadow or fear of terrorism. When one gives into fear, is one really making reasonable decisions?

In an effort to try to answer your questions in your last paragraph. I think that those who have given their loyalty, and possibly lives, through an act of Free Will took the responsibility of that decision upon themselves. To me this is the difference. One who is deluded may seem to be executing Free Will, but are they really? I don't think so.

"Is it simply to preserve the chance that they could find grace and truth?"

For some people the path they walk is spent by looking at the ground in front of their shoes while others spend their lives looking up at the horizon. I think grace and truth are found by looking at the horizon and by preserving Free Will.

(I'm not sure I haven't rambled off the edge of the page here.)

Well, I just have to pop in here and point out that Arithon's followers have volunteered for the position. He has never asked people to follow him. He has, in fact, discouraged them from following him because of the very fact that it puts them in danger. Does he ask Fionn Areth to follow him? No.

Contrast this with Lysaer, whose every act is aimed to lead, to look like the 'white knight' to inspire loyalty, to goad people to the 'right'.

When has Arithon ever asked anyone to follow the 'right'? I think this is what is being addressed in this passage.

But you're right. There are many truths. Arithon has been through the maze, though. He has confronted all he can see of the dark side of his behavior. Has Lysaer? Could Lysaer survive such a test?

Still, there are layers, and I think that somewhere underneath Lysaer sees. He steadfastly denies it however in his conviction that he does know the one truth. I don't think Arithon says that. I think all he's saying in that passage that the people in danger have chosen their own path without any coercion by him or anyone else.

I don't feel like I made the point that I was trying to make very well, so thank you both for poking holes. Of course you're right about the methods that each employs (fear vs. go-away-I-don't-want-you-dying-for-me). Perhaps my point was really that Janny has stacked the deck: Arithon is as good as Lysaer appears to be. His allies are good: they're protecting the order that allows humans to live on Athera, they're fighting a defensive war, and if I'm not mistaken, back in CotM, they were merely robbing, not killing, and Arithon is trying his best to get back to a non-violent approach and even take it further.

So Arithon's great, his allies are great, they're clearly on the right side, AND they're working toward winning in what can only be characterized as a morally good way. And what's more, we have the author's authority behind this--unless Janny's really pulling one over on us, we can be confident in our conclusions about them.

Now that we have that out of the way, let me try again. Go back to Arithon's explanation for why he's putting his own life--and the lives of those he cares about, those who trust him--in danger for the sake of people who are misguided. I would maintain that in more or less all cases in our real world, things are far murkier: it's unclear what the Truth is, people's motivations are mostly a jumble of conflicting emotions and ideals, and we all feel at least a little self-righteous sometimes, even if we don't like to see it in ourselves. So, while Arithon can say that and have it make sense, have it be true, is it possible to do so in our world?

It should be obvious that I'm skeptical.

Now, if anything, I think that my position makes Arithon's overall response even more morally justified: in a world of competing and often unverifiable claims to truth, in a world run by imperfect people, doesn't killing and dying for a cause make even less sense?

I think you need to read Stormed Fortress

But I agree that killing and dying is the option that makes the least sense. And absolutely the choices are muddy indeed in the real world. Which should underline the insanity of war.

I quite agree that I need to read Stormed Fortress! If only someone would get it for me as an early Christmas present!

John wrote: "I quite agree that I need to read Stormed Fortress! If only someone would get it for me as an early Christmas present!"

Well maybe you'll win it in the next drawing!

To change direction a bit in the issue of moral responsibility, there's a very interesting scene in the early part of the book between Sulfin Evend and Lysaer following Evend's break of the necromancy hold on Lysaer. In it, Lysaer appears to acknowledge his errors, experience remorse, and furthermore to stop blaming all bad on his half brother. Very very interesting indeed. It does hint at unknown processes going on within Lysaer that may allow for a change in him later on.

Certainly, remorse is something we haven't seen much of in Lysaer to this point. The one exception was the death of Talith, but his angst over her loss was still colored by his conviction that his half brother had polluted her.

When you say "Lysaer appears to acknowledge his errors, experience remorse, and furthermore to stop blaming all bad on his half brother," are you thinking of the passage Siv quoted in one of the other threads: ”The Mistwraith's fell vengeance.” Lysare sounded torn. ”You insist I am cursed? That my half-brother's crimes are all innocent?”

I can't find the passage to re-read it in context now, but I remember reading Lysaer's tone very differently, not as an admission that he might have been wrong but a reason to distrust Sulfin Evend. I may be wrong to read it that way, but when he asks that, Sulfin Evend is characterized as "too wise to attempt a reply," and when he finally does, it's a rather diplomatic one: "I can't speak on matters of innocence or guilt. [...] I can't find my comfort in righteousness."

It seemed to me that he saw it as a trick question, that Lysaer was looking for him to pick a side, tell him who he thinks is right and who he thinks is wrong. Sulfin Evend seems to know that Lysaer has been more in the wrong, to understand that the fact that Arithon is working with the F7 and has their support means something.

Yet, you are right that Lysaer seems to be gaining *some* understanding of his cursed nature: he begs Sulfin Evend to leave "save yourself. Please abandon me." But he's not going to let that stop him from besieging Alestron and prosecuting his war against Shadow.

John wrote: "When you say "Lysaer appears to acknowledge his errors, experience remorse, and furthermore to stop blaming all bad on his half brother," are you thinking of the passage Siv quoted in one of the ot..."

I'm talking about the conversation between Sulfin Evend and Lysaer that occurs in the chapter 'Resolve'. In it, the Lord Mayor comes in and reads the letter from Ellaine that tells that Talith was murdered. It is early in the book, and while Lysaer's insight doesn't last, and he later assaults the fortress of Alestron, in this conversation he shows some insight and some acknowledgement of his own mistakes - having necromancers in his council, the butchery of his own men at Daon Ramon Barrens, etc.

The part you're referring to is later, I think. I didn't mean to imply that it's a big change. It's just that we see so little of Lysaer's inner struggles and this scene gives us a glimpse. And you're right - he gains *some* understanding.

John wrote: "I don't feel like I made the point that I was trying to make very well, so thank you both for poking holes. Of course you're right about the methods that each employs (fear vs. go-away-I-don't-want..."

John, I waited to respond to your point, here, to see what the discussion would bring to bear on the issue.

The section of dialogue you quoted (Arithon's) referred to the fact that Feylind's crew were fighting to survive, and to spare their companions - their 'cause' was in support of saving the people they cared about.

Lysaer's following were 'for' a principle - and not even a truthful one, but mislead from the start.

I think the scene later in the book, where Sulfin Evend and Lysaer fight clarifies this a bit. In this scene, it is remarkably clear that Lysaer is operating almost completely under the influence of the curse. He attacks Sulfin and tries to kill him. Sulfin fights back and desperately tries not to kill Lysaer. The guard breaks in and after he knocks Lysaer out, accuses Sulfin of treason. He asks them to wait and witness, and when Lysaer returns to consciousness, he is pitiful. He clearly says - you say I am cursed by the Mistwraith and my half brother is innocent? For an instant he is able to see it.

Also, during the scene, it's clear from Sulfin's memory of his swearing to Asandir that Lysaer will face a reckoning. He will have to face the Paravians. When Sulfin Evend says he already has, Asandir says not really - the one at Daon Ramon was a shadow....and there have been too many lives lost in his false cause for clemency.

I understand what you're saying, John about the scene you questioned. I think Arithon is fighting for the complex. His cause is not a simple one. He has spent time with Davien, remember? Lysaer's cause, because of it's one sidedness, is simplistic. He fights to 'protect the innocent against evil'. Isn't that exactly what George Bush did when he started the 'war on terror'? Lysaer wants to kill his half brother because of the curse. To justify it, he decorates it with all manner of flowery phrases. And perhaps because of the corruption in the reason for the fight, he has attracted all manner of evil to his side - ie. the necromancers.

I actually think Janny has created a very complex world here that doesn't have clear black/white issues. That may be why the average reader, looking for light entertainment, has a hard time with this series.

Arithon fights to save Athera and all it's people. Lysaer fights to eradicate his half brother because he is possessed by madness. The people who follow one or the other do so for their own reasons.