Malazan discussion beware of spoilers

Remove all ads!

Now you are getting into the nature of evil and how writers use characters and certain devices to blur our preconceived notions of good and evil. The nature of evil is far more complex than the two-dimensional, cardboard cutout, prototypical "dark overlord" that prevades much fantasy adventure. Does evil have a conscience? The "manservant" is the surrogate conscience to Rhulad's evil nature. We often see these characters who are often foils to the intentions, often acting as underlings - to their "masters." The Jester in King Lear comes to mind as this type of character. Thusly, the manservant is in many ways the foil to Rhulad's complete fall into the abyss.

Why does the Crippled God choose Rhulad? And not Trull? Because as Trull tells Rhulad before they recover the sword, that he is untrustworthy. Trull sees the latent flaws in Rhulad's character. Even before they recover the sword, Trull knows that Rhulad is plotting to take Fear's woman.
Remember that it is revealed in the story that the Warlock King has engineered the entire sequence of events leading up to the sword's recovery, working in concert with the Crippled God.

Another good example from Shakespeare is the problem of Macbeth and his fall into evil. But given the nature of Macbeth's love for his wife, and her manipulation of him, and the great lines that Shakespeare gives Macbeth, it is easy to have sympathy for this character, despite his murderous actions. Like our character, Rhulad, Macbeth seems "cursed." There is that gripping scene with the witches, that sets in motion Macbeth's undoing. But all this is in the nature of tragedy. And Rhulad, Trull and Fear, the three brothers are tragic figures in different ways. There is another pairing of three brothers on the opposing side, the Beddict brothers, who are also tragic figures. I'm sure there is supposed to be some kind of mirroring going on here in Erickson's plotting. Which brings up another point: Is Hull an evil character? or just a misguided traitor?

The problem of the "Good and Evil" scenario in fiction - and this applies to real life - is that our sympathies are easily swayed. We can have "sympathy for the devil" if the writer wishes to render evil with the right "circumstance." It's like OJ getting off because of the racial circumstances of his trial, rather than the actions he is widely thought to have committed. Many don't consider the actions, only the circumstances. Let's look at Milton and Paradise Lost. The most moving parts of Milton's epic are those dealing with Satan's Fall. The Fall is so well done by Milton, that the rest of Paradise is anti-climatic. In this instance, it was never Milton's intention to make Satan appear sympathetic, at least we don't guess - yet it's in the nature of tragedy, and the power of Milton's writing, that moves us to that point. So it would appear that we can have sympathy even for the devil.

 

This is the Malazan Book of the Fallen, not an English literature essay, Chandos. Although now that you mention it, most of Erikson's books make about as much sense as Shakespeare so maybe you are on to something.

I still think that Rhulad was just a wayward teenager. If he's evil, then so are the kids who drive up and down my street in their souped up cars with tail fins and neon lights. Actually, what am I saying? They ARE evil! EVIL, I tells ya!

 

OK, HB, let me put it another way then: If your own people believe you are an evil dictator, then maybe you are....

 

Maybe. But his own people don't know that he has effectively been hypnotised. Of course, this is mostly a futile argument that can have no real resolution.

 

That's just it: I don't think he is. He cut the deal with the Crippled God - The choice was his. By contrast there is that other guy on the island with the Crippled who doesn't quite go along, so the Crippled God torments him. I can't remember his name. But it seems as if we can agree then that the Crippled God IS evil - I think.

 

That is really what is up for discussion? There have been indications that the Crippled God is sacrificing things for the greater good. Even if it isnt even CG is like a tormented leashed animal that is lashing out at anything that dares to venture close to him.

There is some speculation that the CG was a very benevolent god, a god of love or something before he got torn from his world and chained to the one the books mostly take place.

The means by which the CG tries to reach his goals are often quite nasty or outright evil but we dont know what his goals are or if they are evil. Especially since we dont know what the goals are of those who are opposing him and most of their means arent exactly wonderful always.

 

Yeah the crippled god is definitely evil.

But I agree with this too. I would be hella pissed.

 

Well, yes. The interesting point is that Paran allowed the House of Chains into the Deck of Dragons. That would appear to make the House a necessary part of the balance of good and evil, which is where the story seems to be leading. Nevertheless, Paran is the key player to watch in the unfolding events. Paran cut a deal with Hood to end the plague, and we don't know all the motives of the individual players. We know that Cotillion and Shadowthrone are working against the Empress, and that she is seeking allies who are opposed to High House Shadow; that would include the Crippled God. We know that Quick is attempting to aid Burn, who seems to be at the center of the over-arching conflict of the story, and that she is being poisoned, as are the Warrens of Magic. We can guess that this is the work of the Crippled God.

I will say this much: if Tides is read as a stand alone story, then it can be reasonably argued that the evil character, and even the evil overlord, is the CG. The problem is that the stories lack any real resolution at this point, which is why after 6 books, 7 for some, a portion of the story still seems nonsensical. I really hope Erikson can pull the whole thing off, because atm, he appears to be floundering.

 

It's not "floundering", it's an epic narrative arc beyond the comprehension of most mortals.

I thought Bonehunters and Reapers Gale were awesome, although I'm not 100% sure what happened in them.

 

Your comment reminds me of that old Peter Sellers' movie, Being There. The guy eveyone kept passing off as a genius was just as confused as everyone else....