[Dragaera] Vlad's passivity

[Jerry Friedman]

--- On Thu, 10/16/08, Jon Lincicum <lincicum at comcast.net> wrote:
> From: "Alexx Kay" <alexx at panix.com>
> > From: "Jon Lincicum" <lincicum at comcast.net>
> > > How boring would it be to see a Vlad story where
> > > he starts out as the
> > > aggressor at the beginning of the story, and
> > > knows everything that's going
> > > on, and just bulls through a bunch of weaker or
> > > less-informed opponents the whole time?
> > 
> > While that would be boring, it seems one could build
> > an interesting story where Vlad was the aggressor
> > against a strong, well-informed, difficult
> > opponent, but one whom Vlad independently wanted (for
> > whatever reason) to take down.
> 
> Well... Yes, but so long as the opponent is just a LITTLE
> BIT more powerful than Vlad is, then he still has to be
> passive, at least until he figures out a way to overcome the
> difference.  
> 
> /Athyra/ mostly follows this pattern, actually. Vlad
> didn't HAVE to stay in Smallcliff, he could have run
> away. Instead, he chose to remain and try to take out
> Loraan, despite the Wizard being in a strong position. The
> drama of the story was driven by Vlad's inability to
> easily dispatch a powerful opponent. This doesn't mean
> the decision to engage in the struggle was not a proactive
> one, or that Vlad was not, in some sense, the aggressor.
> 
> Sure, you could say he was reacting to the death of Reins.
> But what loyalty, exactly, did Vlad really have to Reins?
> This was really a side issue, IMO.

The way I read it, the murder of Reins and the attempts
on Vlad's life reveal that Vlad's in danger from Loraan,
so he decides he'll have to kill Loraan sooner or later.
Then for reasons I don't understand, he decides it should
be sooner.  Of course he dislikes or hates Loraan, but
if Loraan hadn't attacked him, I doubt Vlad would have
done anything.

Most people just let things slide unless they feel they
have to react.  I hadn't really thought about that in
connection with Vlad, but I think it's an excellent
point.  Someone just minding his own business, then
caught up in danger, is a popular scenario in thrillers,
one we can imagine happening to us.

The idea of Vlad taking the initiative to attack a
powerful opponent, even if he could live comfortably
without doing so, is a very interesting one.  But who
could that opponent be?

Steve has admiringly depicted people who let things
slide but then decided to take the initiative:
maybe Khaavren in /Paths of the Dead/, maybe Jack
Agyar, definitely Susan Voight deciding to
investigate James's "death" in /Freedom and
Necessity/.  But the outstanding example, with the
cause closest to the author's heart, must be James.
After the revolution he's part of is defeated, he
explicitly decides he's not going to do that again,
but Engels of all people convinces him to resume
fighting for and protecting the proletariat against
tyranny.

Although Vlad sympathizes with Kelly's revolution,
he's ruled out taking part in it.  Heh.

Jerry Friedman