what does kelsier look like?

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Charity, but that Sirius Black behavior isn't nearly borderline crazy. I have four kids, and sometimes I have to say four names before I say the right one. Frequently I will call Maire by "Rachael" and not even notice I did it. What's crazy about that?

If 50% of the world needs counseling, then as I said, your judgement of what's crazy isn't based on a normative behavior, I think.  So, when you say I'm barely clinging to my sanity, it doesn't mean much to me. Especially with the very normal behavioral things that you seem to think are unbalanced.

[charity]

Wow... go from discussing the way a character looks to if he's crazy.  And I think to an extent he is slightly crazy, but it's more of a Crazy Genius.  I mean, you have to be slightly off base from what most people thing (thus being slightly crazy) in order to come up with something no one else has ever done, give it the passion and the drive to make it seem possiable, and then go off and do it.  Crazy?  Yes, but also a genius.

Thank you. Agreed.

Ehler's I have three kids, and I agree at times it is hard to keep their names straight, but it's not exactly the same, as you ought to know. Are you arguing just to argue? 

I like Rainbow's definition, it's a genius thing. And I often don't make sense, even to myself, so don't worry to much BUT, I didn't say you were barely clinging to your sanity. You did! You said you were like Kelsier, that he was based on you.
AND, the whole team thinks he's crazy too. They even say it. And he agree's.

[Pygmalion]

As far as Kelsier being "crazy" goes, I think maybe he would have a little of the mad scientist look. A blonde Aragorn plus the mad scientist look? I don't even know if that works... maybe "rakish" is the word we're looking for here....

Ummm... puppy? 

Ahhh!!!   Get out of my head! Get out of my head!

bwahahaha... I knew you were going to say that.

 

[charity]

wouldn't rakish imply

a man who is licentious;

  (that's from the dictionary.com for rake).

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

Ehler's I have three kids, and I agree at times it is hard to keep their names straight, but it's not exactly the same, as you ought to know. Are you arguing just to argue? 

No, not at all. I fail to see a difference. It would be abnormal for Harry *not* to remind him of James. What's substantively different there?

Yes, he says he's crazy. And I say I'm going to stab something when I'm frustrated. Do I ever actually stab something? No. Do I ever actually INTEND to stab something? no. Do I ever actually SERIOUSLY feel like ACTUALLY stabbing something? No. Taking a comment like that literally is, itself, a sign of being a bit crazy.

He actually has a solid, well planned, thoroughly reasoned, farseeing, and above all WORKABLE plan for accomplishing something that they thought might be impossible. That's the *opposite* of crazy. But what would be the point of saying "no i'm not. It will work because of x, y, and z"? Even if they DID mean it literally that he was crazy, you've created a paradox. "Who's the greater fool? The fool or the fool who follows him?" If they know he's crazy, than *they* are by definition crazy for going along with the plan. Being crazy, isn't their judgement of what's crazy more than a little suspect?

[charity]

Yes, he says he's crazy. And I say I'm going to stab something when I'm frustrated. Do I ever actually stab something? No. Do I ever actually INTEND to stab something? no. Do I ever actually SERIOUSLY feel like ACTUALLY stabbing something? No. Taking a comment like that literally is, itself, a sign of being a bit crazy.

I can't believe we're arguing this. But he isn't like you in that he does intend to stab them. He goes around killing people callously because of their birth, and he enjoys fighting Inquisitor's when any normal person would be scared spitless.

Admit it, he's a bit off the average.

And Sirius saw Harry as James, not just called him that. She makes that clear outside and inside the story.

[Pygmalion]

wouldn't rakish imply

a man who is licentious;

  (that's from the dictionary.com for rake).

My OED (Oxford English Dictionary for those of you who aren't English majors  ) defines it as "having or displaying a dashing, jaunty, or slightly disreputable quality in appearance" or "trim and fast-looking," and "devil-may-care".

That's more of what I was going for....

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I can't believe we're arguing this. But he isn't like you in that he does intend to stab them. He goes around killing people callously because of their birth, and he enjoys fighting Inquisitor's when any normal person would be scared spitless.

Admit it, he's a bit off the average.

And Sirius saw Harry as James, not just called him that. She makes that clear outside and inside the story.

No no no no. Now you're taking it out of context. *I* say I'm going to stab them, non literally. He says he's going to stab them, not because of his emotional alienation from them, but because it's part of his plan. The statement that we're taking nonliterally from him is that it's "i'm crazy." Try to keep up here. Wanting to kill someone does *not* automatically make you unstable. He holds a different set of morals and ethics than you do. Is everyone with a different set of behavioral standards from you nearly crazy? That doesn't make sense. He is perhaps a bit more loose in what he calls a justification for killing, but he is not just killing every noble because they're nobles. He's doing it because killing them will advance a plan that will bring MORE justice to MORE people.

You haven't yet presented a solid argument for why he's nearly crazy, so I can't admit it. On many points, I agree with his behavior from an objective points of view. On those that I don't agree (such as the murder and such) I can see how a rational person could come to that conclusion.

Perhaps I will need to re-read the passage about Sirius -- though it holds no bearing on the Kelsier discussion. Though "outside the story" holds little to no weight. If the character doesn't behave crazy, he's not crazy. Saying "He's crazy," especially outside of the narrative, just indicates poor writing.

[Skar]

He holds a different set of morals and ethics than you do. Is everyone with a different set of behavioral standards from you nearly crazy? That doesn't make sense.

Since someone being willing to perform acts that observers would consider abhorrent (rampant murder of nobles on general principle in this case) unavoidably implies that they have different morals and ethics than those observers, we've got a nice circular argument here. 

Since the morals and ethics of any given person are only really observable through their behavior, especially in books (as Ehlers points out by rejecting extratextual sources about Sirius Black) then we must assume that a character's morals and ethics closely match their behavior, (unless explicitly stated otherwise in the text).  And since Ehlers insists that having different morals and ethics than the observer doesn't make the observed crazy (see above), it follows that no one is crazy, no matter what they do.  Ergo, Kelsier is not crazy and Ehlers is right.

You've found a brick wall here Charity.  But don't feel bad, most people on this forum have bloody foreheads and brick dust in their hair.

[firstRainbowRose]

I'd like to point out that there are different levels of crazy.  There's the "Quick, lock him away.  He's a danger to himself and everyone else around him," kind.  There's the "Slightly off his rocker, and not able to funtion in the normal way, but harmless none the less" crazy (a lot of your crazy old ladies in stories fit in this.  They don't make any sense in what they say, live in the past, and are barking mad, but not going to cause any problems.)  There's the "for the most part not able to work with normal people but every once in a while comes up with the amazing idea that helps you in a pinch."  (This is like Adien would have been before the AonDor was restored, had he popped up with the number of steps like he does.) then there's the "Has weird passions, loves things that most people don't, has habits that are a bit too weird for normal people, but they can do what most people do -- just not without being looked at weird." Crazy.  I fit into this catagory, as does, I think, Kelsier (though on different levels).  I personally think Enstine was on this level as well.  (Did you know that even though he could do those insanely hardmath problems he couldn't count his pocket change?)  He's not normal in any sense of the word.  He doesn't act like most people do.  If he isn't careful he'll move up into the next step and be truly crazy.  Right now he's harmless, but still a bit off his rocker, and not living with the rest of the world, but he can do what normal people do when he needs/wants to.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

ah, no.
You've equated my statement that different morals and ethics always involves killing
Some people think that homosexuality is not immoral. Others consider it immoral. Does that make one side or the other crazy? If you say so, than honestly, you frighten me. Yes, I insist that "different morals and ethics than the observer doesn't make the observed crazy" but I have *not* made the argument that no one is crazy, nor do I intend to. Nor does that follow from my arguments. That's *your* input, thank you. Nice straw man though.

No, a difference in morals and ethics does not mean a person is crazy, but that doesn't mean a crazy person can't have different morals and ethics.

No, there's no circular argument there. You simply need to demonstrate to me with more specific arguments. To take Skar's statement, is it "rampant murder?" seems to me it was more targeted. There's also the question of what motivates the murders. It's unquestionable that Kelsier hates nobles and thinks they're better off dead, but he isn't killing them willy nilly, nor is he systematically killing all of them. He's selecting targets in order to cause more damage than the killing itself in order to achieve a strategic advantage.

Sort of like killing enemy combatants in order to disable an advantage they have or maintain your own.

So maybe by your argument anyone in the military, or at least in a position of command regarding the military, is doing something abhorrant. I know that YOU, skar, definitely don't agree with that. The question then, is NOT is he killing them, but is he justified in killing them. I don't see that he's doing anything insane here by killing these people.

I like how not being convinced of something else makes me unreasonable in my arguments though. That was a nice touch. Also a nice companion to the currently popular theory that if you *do* change your position you're a "flip flopper" or a "waffler." There seems to be no winning. If you don't change your mind, you're arrogent and unreasonable. If you do, you're weak and undependable.
*shakes head*

Now, that we've both gotten our shots in Skar, should we try again and perhaps find *real* flaws in the arguments instead of making them up about the person making them?

@ rainbow: "Has weird passions, loves things that most people don't, has habits that are a bit too weird for normal people, but they can do what most people do -- just not without being looked at weird."  I find it irresponsible to call this "crazy." It has an undeserved stigma attached to it, and doesn't accurately approach the issue of difference at hand. I like collecting action figures. "Most people" don't do this and consider it "weird." That makes me a step or two away from dangerous? How does that follow. HOnestly, this is the sort of thinking that alienates people. Actually treating people that are different like their minds don't work right WILL drive them to insanity. Not because something was wrong to start with, but because they've been alienated and treated as damaged.
None of that seems to apply to Kelsier. He's *revered* for his differences. And his differences are rationally based. His interests are not very different from those of his peers. He doesn't actually do anything that different either.

[charity]

He doesn't act like most people do.  If he isn't careful he'll move up into the next step and be truly crazy.  Right now he's harmless, but still a bit off his rocker, and not living with the rest of the world, but he can do what normal people do when he needs/wants to.

Thankyou for saying what I was trying to say. Yes, Skar, my head is hurting a bit... is that why?

And Ehlers you keep talking about his well planned killing... okay, that's smart, but he's heartless about it, he's cold and heartless and enjoys it and to me those aren't the types of behaviors a normal person has. Add to that his internment in the Pits and what Rainbow said fits.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

wow. It's like you don't even read what I write.

or else you think that by not agreeing with you, even when I explain why, I'm inherintly and unreasonably obstinate.

[charity]

Actually I didn't read what you wrote... cause I was posting too.


And he's not revered for his differences until AFTER he's dead... everyone goes along with him cause they trust him. Not because they revere him

[charity]

But your probably right. He's more eccentric than crazy.

and ehler's this is just for you, my husbands response to the same question:

Nope I don’t think he is portrayed as insane in the least.  If anything at all, the brilliance of his plan, and the accuracy of his prediction how the mass would react to his death, and his foresight in having his Kandra convince everyone he is a god show up show him extremely sane.