Spoilers Deadhouse Gates: The Complex and Difficult Morality of Baudin
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 2 ต.ค. 2024
- Spoilers for Deadhouse Gates (Book 2 Malazan Book of the Fallen by Steven Erikson)
It is often said quite glibly that Malazan is morally complex, or morally grey, but what does this mean for us the reader?
It is relatively easy to admire heroes, hate villains, and sympathise with victims, but morality in Malazan is complex with 'good' people doing bad things, 'bad' people doing good things.
When we talk about morally grey characters we sometimes overlook the moral and ethical questions that their actions pose to us about how we perceive good and evil, and raise questions about notions of redemption, forgiveness, and justification.
Baudin is a fascinating character, not because he is a hero, nor because he is a villain, but because he is a representation of a complex person who does both evil and heroic acts. His arc probes some very uncomfortable and difficult areas of morality and justice, and asks the reader to delve deeper into issues of redemption, justification, and forgiveness.
Correction: Felisin actually propositions Baudin, joins him in her tent. They have intercourse and finish. Then she draws the knife and attempts to kill him. Baudin disarms her, threatens her, but then leaves without forcing himself on her.
There are still issues of consent and abuse of power that should be considered, but it is not as straightforward as I presented in the video.
Intro and Music by Professor Trip.
If you would like to buy me a coffee or a book, Support me on Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/crit...
Correction for an error in the video:
I made a mistake with the sequencing of the tent scene.
Felisin actually propositions Baudin, joins him in her tent.
They have intercourse and finish. Then she draws the knife and attempts to kill him.
Baudin disarms her, threatens her, but then leaves without forcing himself on her.
There are still issues of consent and abuse of power that should be considered, but it is not as straightforward as I presented in the video.
That's what I thought, but I just assumed I had misremembered (maybe to preserve the image of Baudin I had in my head)
It was a false pretence from both sides really. There’s also the issue of her age (iirc 15) but that’s probably a larger discussion about cultural relativism
Hearing about Baudin’s situation and decisions makes me glad I opted for the professor route rather than becoming an assassin. It was a close call, but I figured it would be easier to read about assassins than to be one. Now I have to deal with such perils as paper cuts! 😱
With all due respect, Philip, you would have made a very bad assassin! :))
Come to think about it, you can kill people with paper cuts as well. I am pretty sure I saw it happen in the movies :)))
@@claudiaiovanovici7569 You’re right, Claudia - I’d be a terrible assassin, and I’m more likely to kill myself with a paper cut than anyone else. 😁
@PhilipChase I remember that careers' fair, the assassin and academic tables were right next to each other. It was a close call for me too.
@@ACriticalDragon AP, it could be said that working in the legal field would place one right between the two tables ;))
To muddy things up a but more and hopefully my recollection if events is correct ....
Felesin is attempting to gain power/control over Baudin the only way she knows how - by offering her body. She believes she is the one in a position of power.
Baudin accepts the offer but denies the price - that he did not fall under her control. Her power is denied.
This is something Felesin could understand and made her hate him even more. It does not validate either of their actions but does reflect the complex nature of their relationship.
However, at Baudin's death they realized that Felesin did hold the power over Baudin and in some ways always had. Not just in the ways or reasons that they thought.
And yes, once again Erickson confronts the reader without judgment of the characters.
Very interesting, My impression reading the book was that Baudin was extremely frustrated by the situation of Felisin inside the camp because he sees it as a failure of his job to protect her, and that it would raise questions from the employer once they come back. In part he cares about her (in fact he sacrifice himself at the end), but the killing of the guard who takes advantage of her was mainly a personal revenge, using her pain as an excuse.
I hope I explained myself. This is not my language.
As you mentioned in the final minute of the video: Felisin does forgive Baudin for the rape, and yet Erikson doesn't state whether the reader should.
To add to this - Felisin is only in a position to forgive him for the harm that he has caused her. It is not up to her whether or not the families of the (many) people that Baudin has killed in the past would forgive him for those murders, even if they were to see or hear of his heroic actions.
And the funny thing is although those families aren't mentioned, Erikson's writing causes us to think about and care about characters that aren't explicit in the text - and makes us go "but what about the families of Unnamed Victim #37?" Genius work.
It raises the question of whether we can judge a person by the sum of their deeds (in which case does Felisin's forgiveness "eliminate" the act of rape from this sum?), or whether we should look at each deed in isolation and pass judgement individually.
That being said - looking at each deed individually also requires context to understand people's motivations... BAH! "Complex and difficult morality" indeed :)
Oh, i can't wait to listen to this one! :D
Another point that complicates this situation is a thing called gamma bias, where people implicitly are more empathetic towards women and more judgemental towards men (granted, Felisin is a child, so that muddies the waters a bit). We are quick to judge Baudin for taking out his frustration and lashing out at Felisin, ignoring the restraint he shows, the trauma that he has gone through, and how his every good deed is completely and utterly rejected by Felisin. He is likely pained, hurt and lonely but since it isn't explicitly shown, we assume he is fine.
It is an unclear scenario, morality is a complicated topic and in many cases there is no clear cut answer. We are all humans and we adapt to our environments. Many concentration camp victims during the Holocaust did things that would be shocking to outsiders, but I don't see how someone can cast moral judgement on them considering the environment they were trapped in.
Damn it. I barely understood Deadhouse Gates in its entirety. Now you have put Lolita on my reading stack which seems to bear more than a passing resemblance to Felisin ;)
Oof, I wouldn't be picking up Nabokov so soon after Deadhouse Gates. They are radically different approaches and have a completely different focus, but questions of ethics, morality, perception, and subjectivity are again key to the central concerns.
Back when I first read this, as a novice reader and Felisin simp, I very much disliked Baudin. After finishing the series, reflecting back, and through engaging in discussions and videos like this where you exercise flipping the pov, I feel more generous now, and very much look forward to revisiting this story to see Baudin in a different light.
On a side note: the love/hate relationship between both Felisin & Baudin, as well as Heboric, I find to be one of the more compelling interpersonal dynamics in these books. It always makes me think about the concept of the Hedgehog’s Dilemma; our desire to get emotionally close to others, but due to our own traumas, we end up hurting one another. This look at complex relationships and emotions is when I first thought: “wow, so these books aren’t just badass magic stuff!”
Baudin and Felisin have such a complicated relationship, with all the darkness that comes with stress, trauma, and dire circumstances, so I find it a fascinating one to discuss. Especially given the point of view emphasis which can swing reader perception wildly into different camps.
Oh I just love these types of discussion 😄
First point I'd like to make is that in Malazan - and most other fantasy works - the morality of death and killing are different from our current one.
Many in particular martial professions can exist legally (and/or publicly accepted) and use lethal force without anyone batting an eyelid. Assassins, soldiers, guards, adventurers, duelists etc. Most often it's the target of lethal force that makes it good, bad or neutral - not the killing itself.
So from an in-world perspective Baudin wouldn't be a bad guy just for being a killer. The majority of characters in the books are killers.
Like you say, it's very much a blood and sports type entertainment.
Next, the defining characteristic of Baudin to my mind is loyalty. If I recall correctly he joined the Talon out of familial loyalty and stayed loyal to their principles despite being outlawed. He also stayed true to his assignment to the very end.
And it was an assignment he accepted with open eyes.
As such, I never saw him blaming Felisin for where he was or what he had to do. He does blame her for bringing harm to herself and being unreasonable.
But he never utters the words that might break through to her and ease his burden - 'your sister sent me to protect you until we can be rescued'.
It had to have been part of the assignment to keep that secret, or it could invalidate the entire exercise. And he holds to it.
The tent scene to me seems to be mostly about them using each others weapons against each other, and Baudin 'winning' the battle on both counts. Despite not wanting nor initiating either fight.
Those are really good points, Rob, particularly the point about each other's weapons.
The contrast between reader morality and character morality is a really important consideration. What may be diegetically acceptable ('in-world') could be completely unacceptable in our world. But this then goes to the larger debate about moral relativity and moral objectivity, and questions those positions.
Then we factor in the authorial intent in writing these scenes and characters for readers in our world in this time period, so is it to provide contrast, juxtaposition, or is it to offer affirmation and endorsement? Are scenes and characters to reflect our society (or the society in which the narrative was written) or to contrast with that society?
This is why I like the complexity of morality in Malazan, and the technique that Erikson uses in not passing judgement on the characters and leaving it to the reader.
Your videos always enrich my Malazan reading experience. As a non-native english speaker who wants to learn more about the language this type of content is very valuable. Thank you.
Hi Vasco, thank you very much. I am so pleased that you are enjoying them and finding them useful. It was really nice to read this comment today. Thank you.
Speaking of Assassins: A major point of contention I have with the Video Game series “Assassins Creed”, is that the Maxim of the Assassins “Nothing is true; everything is permitted”, inspired by Hassan-I-Sabbah in Bartol’s book “Alamut” (“Nothing is an absolute reality, all is permitted”), is clearly missing the main point made in “Alamut”: The “Amorality” of Hassan of leading people into a cult of assassins mixing pleasure and death, is clearly presented as a BAD thing (especially as seen through the lenses of Bartol’s 1930s Europe, as a critique of the moral decay of Fascists and their false promises to the people about “Spoils of War or Glorious Death” (in tune with Eco’s later book “Ur-Fascism”)).
This was great. Thank you, because I never looked at things from Baudin’s perspective before. My bad.
This is one of the great challenges presented in the Malazan series. There are a number of characters that we never get the point of view from, that they are always perceived from an external perspective. Sometimes it can be very rewarding or every interesting to dig a little deeper into them by trying to pick up on the information about them that is included in the text.
Deadhouse Gates is still my favorite Malazan novel (I've only read through Bonehunters) and I think about this book a LOT. Through reading these books, I've discovered that I'm much more forgiving of characters in novels than I am in real life... and I've been struggling with this perception/realization of myself. Karsa, of all people, is my favorite character in Malazan, and sometimes I even find myself defending him when I talk about him, which really surprises me. Erikson does an excellent job of making us as readers question practically everything. I really want to reread Deadhouse Gates, but I want to finish the series first!
Excellent video, I was so excited when I saw what you were discussing today!!
I am glad that your excitement was at least in part justified. Thanks for watching and the great comment. It is always nice to hear from you.
Always liked Baudin, tough gig he was given.
Thank you so much for this video! You have touched on so many great points! From Felisin's pain to Baudin's point of view, which we can only see if we ourselves consider it, since Felisin is completely oblivious to it. I have often seen people holding on to the concept that if you are a good person, you will never be mean to anyone and lash out, no matter how much you may be hurting inside. You explained beautifully even if not directly how this isn't quite true and how Felisin's circumstances shape her behavior to the point that even she doesn't understand why she is doing it.
There is a passage in Deadhouse Gates right after Felisin accepts the role of Sha'ik where the goddess speaks through her and she makes a few prophecies. It explains beautifully the essence of Felisin, how the cruelty is a desperate cry for help. That and the fact that all sex and the drugs have been anything but an easy woman seeking pleasure.
‘And finally, Felisin. Now who is this woman in a child’s raiment? Pleasures of the flesh devoid of pleasure. Selves surrendered one after another. Kindness yearned for behind every cruel word she utters. She believes in nothing. A crucible fired clean, empty.’
There is also another concept that I believe affects the perception of these types of characters, and Felisin all the more so since we get her internal landscape - which she herself isn't able to process - yet we identify with the people around her whom she hurts. And that's the selective applicability of morality. Or, better said, applying a blanket statement type of morality to all situations. In my experience, people who have never faced situations that are dibilitatingly traumatic are far more rigid when it comes to judging morality than those who have suffered severe trauma and who understand that certain situations force you into decisions you would rather otherwise not make. I suppose this invites a discussion about privilege and how the absence of severe pain may be considered as such, but that is another very complicated topic.
All in all, I am glad that you approached this topic. God knows I have been reluctant to speak about it. Or even approach it with Erikson. Perhaps I will after all. Perhaps.
So many quotes I have forgotten and take new meaning.
But does that mean that Felesin could also be considered a mhybe?
@@EricMcLuen No, I don't think so. She is being possessed, which is different from housing another spirit inside of you. Or even having the ability to house another spirit inside of you. But the parrallel between possession and being a mhybe is a very interesting one.
@@EricMcLuen The reference about selves given up is about how with every sacrifice she makes, another piece of her soul collapses until she becomes an empty carrier. The soul within, the 16 year old noble born, innocent, who hasn't faced the evil of the world, is crumbling away one rape at a time, one consented sexual contact in exchange for safety at a time, one smoke at a time. Piece by piece she is being scoured until Dryjhna comes to the point she is almost possessing an empty body. Almost but not quite.
This is not an easy subject to discuss, and you do it in such a balanced and nuanced way. Very interesting, thank you!
You are very welcome. These sorts of subjects can be very difficult to discuss as they touch on some very painful and dark aspects, so I try to be sensitive to that.
What a great video. Really shows how exceptionally SE character work is.
I think your only mistake in this video was to make the assumption that we as readers have far more sympathy for Felisin than Baudin. :D
When I have read DG I had definitly for sympathy for Baudun than Felisin. But I'm sure that on a reread this could change dramatically.
And yet a lot of people have more sympathy for Felisin than for Baudin, because he is a man, a killer, brutal, cold, and threatening. Whereas as she is a young teenage girl going through a lot of trauma. We also have the added point of view empathy that Baudin is missing.
@@ACriticalDragon But .. but Baudin is a cool assassin. (missing the hole point of the video :D)
I just realized that my comment before was generalized. It was more my own reading experience, because I got really infuriated with Felisin again and again pushing Baudin away, where in my opinion the best way of action was to stick to Baudin and let him get her out of this mess. So sorry for that.
Also I think another reason I did not enjoy Felisins "arc" as much, is that I think I would act the same way in her position.and well for me that was not easy to face. (Maybe not exactly the same way but especially the lashing out at people that wanna help is something that I can relate to.)
One thing to keep in mind when trying to figure out his perspective is motivation. I think you can divide assassins into more categories.
1. Vocational - That would fit with the assumptions you have made in this video, implying that he just sees it as a job. This would fit most of the Claws.
2. Ideological - I think the Talons fall into this category. Killing for what they believe the greater good to be.
Baudin couldn't show his hand while in the slave camp, since that would jeopardize the mission. Presumably, if the wrong people found out that Tavore had arranged for Talon protection, it would not go well for either Tavore, Felesin or even Ganoes. I think his frustration at not being able to protect her more directly in the camp might explain some of his behavior, rather than resentment for her being the reason he's there.
On a side note, I see Baudin protecting Felesin not as proof necessarily of Tavore being a Talon master, but rather that she might have been in contact with Dancer off page. This implies that her actions in the series may be partly ascribed to being part of a Shadow throne plan.
I guess to the pinned comment about the tent scene sequence error, I found that scene to be Baudin becoming what he despises. He certainly didn't drug Felisin to have sex, but after all that it seems he understood the exchange as much as Felisin did; Paying for services rendered.
I always felt more for Baudin than I did Felicin. She was abhorrent from the start.
Baudin was so complex and it was so difficult to have a stance on his character because everything was so complicated. And I feel like that is the point. This is a series where I am learning that everyone has so many sides to their character and it seems as realistic as it can get within the bounds of a fantastical world. How would we act in those situations? What would we do to survive? It's difficult to say that all of our decisions would always be morally good given the conditions of this world.
I think that one of aspects of compelling fiction is its ability to challenge us and ask difficult questions. Heroes and villains are simple in comparison to actual people.
If we were offered easy answers then we might not interrogate the subject as closely.
Baudin is one of my favourites, just a little behind Heboric. Malazan has a whole bunch of great if a little twisted characters.
Great case for the complex and difficult morality of Baudin. Now, Philip, on the other hand is just pure evil incarnate down to every thread of that tweed coat.
I am fascinated when fantasy authors explore the balance between agency and trauma, and this series is so rich with in-depth questions regarding this topic.
I also wonder about free will and forgiveness. I think many of us know a state of forgiveness (like redemption) in which we feel completely free of any pain endured or any anger towards the perpetrator. This might even be accompanied by a sense of compassion in which we wish the perpetrator care and freedom from suffering. There can also be a reluctant type of forgiveness in which we acknowledge an understanding of why something horrible may have happened but still feel the hurt and anger the actions caused. Some may argue that reluctance means it is not true forgiveness, but how much control do people have over that? How much of forgiveness of any type is a choice? How much does it require effort to understand, and how much of it is a sort of grace? Those are questions that come up for me. Loved this video for getting me to think about it more!
Ah Johanna! If you think that this statement will conceal that it's you who runs the Philip Chase fangirl channel -- well, it's not working.😁
Those are such great questions, and the books that inspire us to look deeper and harder at the difficult or complex choices are the books that I have come to admire more and more as I have gotten older.
Thank you, Johanna.
@@brush2canvas849 Darn it! 😂
The problem with the mentioned classic hero assassin trope isn't just the reader's quasi hypocrisy to be okay with murderers, they're also just written wrong from the start. Writers write their personality so unrealistic, on one hand being so morally Bankrupt and okay with living life as an assassin, murdering for money but then also be compassionate and fighting for the down trodden. A person just doesn't work like that, they're either psychotic enough to push aside their morals and murder innocents, or they live with compassion and morals. To do/be both is just so unrealistic. This was seen especially with Dancer in the flash back novels in which he met Kelenved. On one hand a cold blooded murderer for pay, the next minute a fairly normal, moral boyish rogue. The two are just mutually exclusive in a real person.
Although Janny Wurts has a brilliant assassin character in the Empire trilogy.
Robin Hobb does as well in Rote.
Quite some thoughts about this one.
First, you didnt consider that Tavore was his talon master and the adjunct. Talons were hunted by the claws at some point and only a few were left. With tavore's position as it is, he could also wonder what this means afterwards, what does it mean that the adjunct owes him.
Then the aspect of rape. Well, the sex was consented and at that point Baudin was not yet 100% sure if she wanted to kill him. At the point she tried he took the knife and went out of the tent. Question is... Should he have gone into her tent to have sex with her (and here I do not consider her age as rape in because of age is something that is current practice, but hasnt been that way) expecting that she was going to attempt to kill him. Baudin in the whole novel never talks about things, but will show it. That's what he did with her.
So is this acceptable, hell no, Felisin was hurting and taking advantage of her is reprehensible, but from his point of view they all are and Felisin should be stronger and be more "clearheaded". And as she isnt, she'll get what she deserves (according to him).
Hi Andre, it is hard to do a video spoiling only aspects of Deadhouse Gates is I use information from the end of the series.
Also, I pinned a comment and changed the description to acknowledge that I had made a mistake about that part.
FANTASTIC video, man!!
people blame and judge others way too quickly without ever putting themselves in the "evil" one's shoes.
What they don't understand is that life isn't hard for you only, it takes its toll on everyone, including that "evil" person you're blaming for everything. Life hasn't been kind to anyone.
It's not that easy, not everything is 0 and 1. People blame people cause it's easier that way, it's hard to hate someone when you view the world from their eyes. "Many things aren't as they seem, the worst things in life are never are".
Hi Riashad,
Thanks for watching and I am glad that you found the discussion interesting.
Great way of highlighting Malazan's complex moral scenarios. Thank you, A.P.! It's very much appreciated!
You are very welcome. Thanks Brush.
Great video! I hope to see more of these, exploring different characters and their choices!
Hi Torbjörn, I am glad that you enjoyed it, I will have a think if there are some others that might be of interest to discuss like this.
I have only read the first 2 books so far, both of which i have found somewhat disjointed. What keeps me going though is the characters don't feel good or evil but are humans dealing with the shitty situations they are in.
One of the things that I find interesting about the structure of the Malazan novels is that they often have very clear thematic connections, and arcs that can appear disparate or disjointed are actually thematically very closely linked, rather than being linked through clear overlapping or contiguous narrative events.
But we all have our individual preferences. Thanks for watching.
@@ACriticalDragon i can't remember if it was you or someone else who compared more to interconnected short stories linked by themes like you just said. It did help me rethink what i have read and i will take into Memories of Ice.
@@cmmosher8035 I hope that it helps, but if not then remember that there are lots of other books out there that you might enjoy more.
Obviously I would like everyone to appreciate the books the way that I do, but ultimately that would lead to some very dreary conversations.
Have a great weekend.
OOooooooo interesting title can't wait to watch
All right finished watching. Very interesting. So... one thing you've got slightly wrong (or at least out of sequence) is that Baudin has sex with Felisin before she tries to kill him. After she pulls the dagger out, he threatens to rape her but then leaves her alone.
You are right, I had misremembered the sequencing.
Felisin suggests that Baudin stay in her tent.
He goes in first.
She joins him.
They have sex.
They finish having sex.
She pulls out the knife.
He disarms her and walks away.
I pinned a correction in the comments and in the video description.
@@ACriticalDragon Agreed. Your larger point that it's morally muddied still stands, though, and may even be stronger because it's ambiguous.
@@ACriticalDragon The scenes that have the most impact seem to be the ones most easily mis-remembered. After watching your video, I recalled it the way you described even though I had reread it less than a year ago.
That's why my anniversary is in my day planner. 🤣
It's clear you've read this novel more than once, given how much empathy you seem to have for Felisin.
I've only read it once (and only two more novels after), so when I read it, I was constantly annoyed at Felisin's selfishness and narrowmindedness.
I have read Deadhouse Gates twice now.
The first time I was reading I was finding Felisin grating, and then I paused after the break out of the camp and thought about her position. After that I did not find her annoying, but rather saw her in a much more tragic light.