The Dresden Files > DF Reference Collection
Harry's murders of Non-humans! (Cold Days spoilers)
Ezakra:
it appears that many who are troubled by the events in the original post are missing the forest because they are totally occupied with the mainicured garden. Stated otherwise, they are trying to apply rules from one carefully defined structure (Western Judeo-Christian human culture) to an entirely different and much less constrained structure ( The (Unseelie) Winter faerie culture, as defined by Jim based on historical references)
Why in the world would the rules be even vaguely similar? Because they used to be humans (some of them)? what if none of them were Western Humans, what if they were from the Assyrian empire ( look it up, arguably the longest lasting, and most viciously cruel human society that ever existed, over 1000 years)? what if they were from the Mongolian empire of Genghis Kahn, where there were many laws, but the punishment for almost all of them was death?
What if they just followed the one law all living creatures do, that if it can kill you, you leave it alone, unless you are forced into a confrontation?
in a society defined by never trust anyone, never turn your back on anyone, might makes right and the strong can have whatever they can take (well defined in the chapters preceding the party), and the only real rule is to not upset those who can kill you (say, Mab), then you define your place in that hierarchy by killing. Its that simple. As many as you need to, or want to, or are forced to not exceed.
you can also be defined by not being able to kill but being protected by another who can (see "marriage" in less well regulated societies than the ones in the modern West)
The world we live in and the one Jim writes in are defined by the aggressive use of force, those who can use it, and their victims or dependents who will not or cannot.
Mira:
--- Quote ---t appears that many who are troubled by the events in the original post are missing the forest because they are totally occupied with the mainicured garden. Stated otherwise, they are trying to apply rules from one carefully defined structure (Western Judeo-Christian human culture) to an entirely different and much less constrained structure ( The (Unseelie) Winter faerie culture, as defined by Jim based on historical references)
--- End quote ---
This^
Sully:
--- Quote from: Xandarth on November 21, 2013, 05:20:19 PM ---My trophy girlfriend comment is based on Butters being 42 years old and Andi being 28-29 years old.
--- End quote ---
It's only odd if you look at it in years, not stages of life. Medical school(4 years), residency(1-3), a bit more school(medical examiner is a specialist), maybe some time as a fellowship. So in terms of being out of school, a working adult, etc...the difference is a lot smaller, and more manageable.
Figure that as a doctor, butter's probably isn't that far along in life(by the home ownership metric), seeing as how he still lives in an apartment...
123456789blaaa:
--- Quote from: Serack on November 22, 2013, 11:36:02 AM ---Unfortunately, the analogy/parallel I am going to build will be based off of RL which doesn't have magic, and thus this non magical parallel could muddy some of the waters because part of this discussion is magical corruption from killing and doing nasty things, vs just plain corruption for the same thing without magic. But the goal of this parallel is to conceptualize corruption WRT non mortals.
The Nazis went through a long, systematic campaign to dehumanize in the minds of the populace people like Jews and Gypsies and other victims of their "Final Solution.” They even used the term “Untermensch” (German for underman, sub-man, sub-human) to describe these people. From my life view it is incredibly difficult to understand what was portrayed in the last episode of “Band of Brothers” where the baker was completely indifferent to the fate of the “Untermensch” in the concentration camp down the road.
Tying it to how killing non mortals can corrupt Harry, in reply #26 of this very topic I quoted the relevant portions of WN where, at the beginning of the Camp Kaboom scene, Harry said there was no use hating the Ghouls for who they were. At that point he displays that he still posses empathy for this class of sentient beings. Now however, Harry appears to see them as the equivalent of “Untermensch” not worthy of compassion while they are being exterminated in mass.
Harry’s ability to remain empathetic towards humanity remains largely intact (the goal of the Council’s laws) but it seems to have been destroyed for those that fall into the class, “non human” which could certainly fall under the concept of having been corrupted by his killing non-humans with his magic. (A consequence of the "universal guidelines" of how magic works)
--- End quote ---
I go with SAZ's response:
--- Quote from: SAZ on November 19, 2013, 02:44:23 PM ---Thanks Serack.
Does anyone think any of the rage and hate Harry is feeling in the above WK quote was just his own natural over developed “defend and avenge the children credo” happily enhanced by Lashiel’s shadow?
Knowing that I am bucking the trend, I am still unconvinced that killing non humans with magic results in a mystical black magic mind warping stain. As argued by others above, it seems that the normal psychological stress and strains of killing anything in a violent way is more than damaging in a normal real world way. Everyone is different and deals with violence and gruesome stuff differently, but the stuff Harry has seen in the books is more than enough to make him at least a candidate for any number of PTSD like issues… (Or at least I think so in my non professional mental health way of thinking).
So are Harry’s actions at his B-party a result of black magic warping? Sure in part, but let us not forget what he has gone though in life. It is not surprising Harry is getting darker and more violent. I suspect and hope that toward the end of the DF or the BAT Harry will begin to heal or find some balance.
--- End quote ---
Harry was angry because the ghouls ripped apart sixteen year olds. Even with the quote from Backup, I think Harry would have done the same thing if humans had did that (though he may have not used magic to kill specifically).
Musings on the morality of how to treat non-mortals (non-Free Willed beings) are blurry. Personally I think Jim himself is struggling a bit with his decision to make some creatures "always evil" and our modern time views. I'd elaborate but conveniently, I started a discussion on the subject in a thread that I started in another forum (note: on the Maeve thing at the bottom, I was later convinced that Nemesis did not give her Free Will. It only altered her nature. She was just tricked).
SAZ:
Hey Count and others
More musing…
If the WG’s team (Uriel, the swords, the KotC etc…) are truly the final authorities on free will, and if the WG is the capital C Creator, then I think most readers can feel safe in not worrying about the destruction of the Red Court. Consider that when the KotC square off against the nickelheads they always try and convince the hosts to give up their coin, thus using their free will and we assume saving their soul. But as far as I know there was no on screen attempt at reforming or saving the Reds, therefore if you assume free will is the WG’s team most important goal, and that they are the final authority - the Reds destruction was not a moral crime.
Now if the WG’s team is just one of many equally old and valid teams out there, then perhaps the notion of free will might just be an abstract fetish that the angles and fallen like to squabble over… and the destruction of the Red Court could be considered bad – or good, but it depends on whoes POV.
When reading a fictional work and judging a character’s good or evil rating, I usually try and see if there are any cultural or world clues built into the story to help readers understand what the author intended to be good or evil. Some works of fiction spell out that some people or races are just evil, therefore if the main character blows them up or shoots them or whatever, I can easily gauge if this is a bad thing, a good thing, or merely an act of survival. I usual don’t impose my own standards on the story, unless the author has completely left me no frame of reference to judge good vs. evil or make moral judgments in their world, and then I just overlay my own standards.
In the DV I think we are left with enough in text and WoJ hints to gauge about how good or evil or morally wrong or right JB thinks destroying the Red Court or killing faeries is meant to be taken. But I also don’t think he intended or will ever intend to dictate to us readers how we must morally view any act or event within the story.
Two people can listen to the same piece of music and come away with different feelings and emotions. The same is true for stories like Harry killing the faerie at his party or the Red Court.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version