I enjoyed Mistborn immensely and plan to read the remaining two books in the trilogy at a future date. In an examination of its story, the overall plot is not very original. The overthrow of an evil tyrant, the martyrdom of the "teacher" hero, and the central element of prophecy are all classic fantasy devices. However, the details and specifics that go into these fantasy conventions I found more original in and of themselves.. I thought the deviousness and ruthlessness the heroes used to implement their plans were quite refreshing. None of this "beware our tactics lest we become the enemy we seek to destroy" crap. Yeah for Kelsier and his followers being not afraid to pile up the body counts on both sides. Which brings us to the characters themselves. While we see many traditional fantasy stereotypes: the teacher and the pupil, the loyal friends, a faceless enemy, these characters are all well-developed, if not very original. Their motivations are clear, well-presented for the most part, and contain enough quirks and flaws that they become actual characters rather than caricatures. I say well-presented for the most part because there are a few instances in the book where exposition is given in too great a clump and the story becomes bogged down with it. But at least these instances happen during dialog in an active setting, so I don't have a big problem with it. Perhaps the most original thing about the book is its setting. A world in which evil has already won (decisively, not just temporarily) and put its physical mark on the landscape, rather than a world in which evil is trying to be restrained, is a clever departure from fantasy convention. The system of Allomantic magic in Mistborn is also unique. Sanderson takes a cue from "The Wheel of Time" series in this regard and makes his magic system come with rules, limitations, and consequences and I wonder if this is part of what influenced the decision to have him take over the completion of that series.
A few questions for discussion:
1) The character of Kelsier is an especially interesting one. Do you see him as the altruistic character he tries to set himself up as or are there other motives at work here?
2) If you could have only one of the Allomantic powers for your own, which would it be and why?
3) Do the ends justify the means? In the case of Mistborn, do you foresee the methods of the heroes in undertaking their plans having any negative consequences in the future? Or will things work out without determent?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I haven't finished the book, but I know I'd want to be able to pull on metal. Then it would be much easier to find my keys/purse. And I won't have to bend down for any coins I drop. Being able to shoot decorating tips at annoying people at work is also a plus.
I honestly don't know what I think about Kelsier. He seems altruistic when it's his POV, but he seems kind of out of control in anyone else's POV. But I guess the point is that he was trying to do what was weirding his team out. But I'm sure it's hard to set yourself up a a religion and be entirely altruistic.
There would be negative consequences if not for Elend. Bloodthirsty skaa killing everyone like the French Revolution wouldn't have gone well. They were fortunate to have someone who had a plan on how things should be run. Tearing down a society is easy - it's the building that's hard.
Post a Comment