Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Matthew_L._Martin Nov 03, 2003 20:44:00	"Kender are not allowed here."--the Queen of Darkness, _War of the Twins_, speaking of the Abyss. In the recently released _Annotated Legends_, Tracy Hickman clarifies that this is because kender, for all their faults, are innocents who never really choose Evil. This explains Her Dark Majesty's statement, but it raises another question: _Why_ do kender never do real, fully understood, solemnly chosen Evil? I see three possible explanations for a race of mortals never choosing Evil; however, only one of those can be said to apply to kender. 1. They live in a world free from temptation, where Evil is never presented as an option. This is clearly not the case for kender. 2. They are so Good, virtuous and wise that they never yield to the temptations of Evil. This sort of sanctity is also apparently not the case for kender, who appear to give little thought to matters of the spirit, at least in their younger and adult years. (We've seen so few examples of old kender that it's impossible to say. :-) ) 3. They are like children in that they don't have the intellectual, emotional, and spiritual maturity to make a real choice between Good and Evil. They may perform kind, selfish, or cruel actions, but they don't really understand things well enough to really be said to be Evil. This may be a gift to the kender, as it guards them from the downfalls of sin and damnation--but in it is also a seed of tragedy. Kender may be free from vice, are also spiritually stunted, unable to perform real acts of virtue as opposed to 'natural' behavior arising from their cheerful dispositions. They are a race 'in between', in most cases capable of neither great Evil or Goodness. In this one case, the Greygem may have functioned as it was originally designed. It was meant to anchor Krynn between Good and Evil, leaving Neutrality dominant. In the case of the kender, it did just that, by rendering them largely _unable_ to move far to one side or the other. Note the use of the clauses 'in most cases' and 'largely'. It _is_ possible for kender to 'grow up' somewhat and develop a real moral sense and capacity for virtue--and theoretically for vice, although I don't know of any actually Evil kender in the published material. Tasslehoff's development through the first six DRAGONLANCE novels is largely this very maturation, as can be seen in his sincere care for others and his eventual revulsion for Raistlin's evil. And the affliction of the kender in the Fifth Age, for all that it _is_ a terrible and sorrowful event, may actually bring about more of this maturity among the kender race. Commentary is welcome; it may be that there is an alternate explanation for the innocence of kender that I've overlooked. Matthew L. Martin
#2 Dragonhelm Nov 03, 2003 21:39:13	Sending a kender to the Abyss is akin to sending a child to hell. It's just wrong somehow. Kender are aptly described as the "children of the world". The description touches upon their diminuitive size, child-like features, innocence, child-like wonder, and the fact that they carry an oversized slingshot as a favored weapon. ;) To purposefully do an evil act, one must lose their innocence. Yet how many kender have "grown up" enough to lose that innocence? Very few. When Tas went back to his people, he felt very out of place, as he couldn't talk to them about the things he saw. They just didn't understand. Afflicted kender also have lost that innocence, especially seeing the destruction of their homeland. Innocence is the key. The door to evil cannot be opened until innocence is taken away.
#3 Matthew_L._Martin Nov 03, 2003 21:54:03	OK, but what is 'innocence' in this context? It might be a freedom from temptations to Evil, but given kender habits, I'm dubious. I think it can best be explained as an ignorance or immaturity that prevents them from understanding Evil and thus participating in it. See #3 in the original Essay. Matthew L. Martin
#4 zombiegleemax Nov 04, 2003 3:45:32	Stunted? Hmmph! Kender have the same capacity to love and hate that any other race has. They realize the sanctity of marriage and the dominion of the gods. Even Old Takky herself deserves some respect. As far as I can tell, and going on the stories about Tasslehoff, the Abyss is supposed to be awful, and it is. It's boring. I'm glad we aren't allowed in. But we aren't AFRAID of it. If everyone's right about Takhisis, she looks at it like this: if there's no punishment, there's no sense in doing it. She's pretty twisted if you ask me. But then again, she is an EVIL goddess and if being evil means being able to make a place as boring as the Abyss, then maybe it's just a natural thing for a Kender not to want to do. I don't see that it's all that anomolous if a whole race decides that being evil is bad. It happened with the Elves, but they just took it way too serious. Anyway, stunted is a very bad word to describe being good natured. That's all. Ummmm, Haldon
#5 cam_banks Nov 04, 2003 6:17:58	Originally posted by Matthew L. Martin I think it can best be explained as an ignorance or immaturity that prevents them from understanding Evil and thus participating in it. OK then, define Evil with a capital E. Is this somehow different from a subjective view on what is and isn't wrong or harmful? Is there a difference between evil and Evil? Does it have anything to do with one's relationship to the High God, Paladine, Gilean, or Takhisis? Can you provide canonical references to what Evil is, and why it is permitted to continually exist? Cheers, Cam
#6 Matthew_L._Martin Nov 04, 2003 9:29:29	I capitalize Evil because I've been influenced/corrupted by the Fifth Age line and its style guide, nothing more. As for what Evil is in this context, the best definition might be fully understood, freely chosen sins against self, others or the Order of Creation. As for why it exists, see the Appendix and the followup Commentaries on Creation. :-) Matthew L. Martin
#7 zombiegleemax Nov 04, 2003 9:57:07	How about gully dwarves? They don't have the mind to be truly evil. they just do what they can to survive.
#8 cam_banks Nov 04, 2003 10:09:49	Originally posted by Matthew L. Martin As for what Evil is in this context, the best definition might be fully understood, freely chosen sins against self, others or the Order of Creation. Yes, but what's a sin against the self, others or the Order of Creation? If I throw myself in the way of a crossbow bolt for my brother and die, is that a sin against myself even though I sacrificed myself for somebody else? If I choose death rather than be killed by a spectre who's likely to bring me back as an undead creature like him, is that suicide and therefore a sin against myself? What if I have the choice between killing an innocent or letting the world be destroyed? What if I have to commit a minor act of harm to prevent a larger one? I think the real problem with all of this is an implied existence of certain distinctions between what is good and evil and what is merely helpful and harmful. I think kender can be every bit as helpful as the next guy, and their innate understanding of exactly what provokes rage and anger in others is pretty harmful. Think of it this way. Kender can act nobly to save others, their families are protected by their warriors, they don't like people invading others, and they forced Istar's hand with the whole kender tax thing by stirring up trouble until the Kingpriest let them do what they wanted to. They're remarkably cunning and wise in the ways of psychology and emotional triggers. It's an instinct all kender have to taunt and ridicule. That's not so much a child-like trait (many people don't find the taunts of children hurtful unless they are themselves children) but an annoyingly astute form of social conflict. I think Takhisis said what she did because she realizes that as fearless and uninhibited as they are, kender are resistant to her corrupting influences and power trips. She can't dominate them with fear and promises of power since they don't care. Kender can feel fear, but they're not burdened with the effects of it, which must really annoy the hell out of the evil gods. Tracy's comment is an interesting take on it, since kender very likely never choose to live a life of commitment to active harm and wilful ending of lives and the ruin of others, which is what Takhisis would probably like them to do. This doesn't make them any less likely to intentionally hurt somebody, just that they don't make a career out of it. Cheers, Cam
#9 zombiegleemax Nov 04, 2003 15:04:00	Well, one of the first problems is that the concepts of sin and evil are socially subjective. As such, we look at such with cultural bias. Now, trying to put it in terms that deal do not with morality or ethics, it is simply this. Kender are pure souls. Things that inspire them to love, they love without the thought of reciprocal affections. Like children, they are filled with an endless amazement of the world - a blissful existence of never-ending surprises and adventures (even if that might be finding an old silver spoon in the remains of a long abandoned house). Fear, which is almost an impossible concept to them, is replaced with an insatiable curiosity and wonder. To everyone else, Kender may not seem to be particularly civil minded - okay, flat out, they are a race of little grubbing thieves. However, to the Kender, it simply is not theft. If a Kender found something that belonged to someone else, and that person asked for it, they would return it. If that person never thinks to ask for it back, then surely they don't care that it's missing or rather that they feel that who ever has it needs it more. As for the Abyss, well, it is a place of endless horror and suffering. To a Kender, it is practically a vast amusement park. For where is the horror to one who knows not fear? And where is the suffering, to one that would find entertainment in the novelty?
#10 zombiegleemax Nov 04, 2003 15:52:34	Kender can still be endlessly tortured and suffer. Let's face it, there's nothing more horrible to a Kender than the idea of having nothing to do, nowhere to go, and absolutely nothing novel or interesting. This is a large part of the reason why Tasslehoff loathed the Abyss (combined with the fact that anything that did happen, happened 'wrong'). So the reason Kender don't go to the abyss has nothing to do with the fact that they wouldn't uffer there. I'm not sure how I feel about Kenders and why they're good and such. They're child-like, but it's important to note the 'like', because they don't act totally like children. They're Kender. They have an insatiable curiosity, and an almost alien outlook on the world and its events that can often be construed as being akin to a child, but I think it's important to realize that there are some important differences between the two. It takes a lot for a Kender to 'mature', as we know it. Not so much for an actual child. There has to be a reason behind this, and I think this would help identify a lot about what Kender are, fundamentally. But that's all looking more in depth than I care to look. In short, I just think the unique Kender perspective prevents them from seeing eye-to-eye with evil. There's a lot of individualism in evil, and not so much in Kender. They're far more concerned with the outside world than with themselves. In general.
#11 Nived Nov 05, 2003 12:13:56	If innocence and ignorance of evil is what kept Kender out of the Abyss.... And the fact the Abyss probably wanted nothing to do with Kender anyway... Does that mean, in the 5th age, with aflicted Kender whom are not innocent or ignorant of the influance of Evil... Are there afflicted Kender in the Abyss?
#12 zombiegleemax Nov 09, 2003 16:52:35	In order for something to be evil, a concious choice, knowing that it is wrong must be made. Kender dont do things out of malice but out of being nosey.
#13 zombiegleemax Nov 11, 2003 12:28:32	This whole thread reminds me of what wise old Yoda the Muppet (TM) said in Star Wars Episode I. It was hokey, but it's not a bad little analysis of Evil. And it sheds light on the kender. Fear absolutely leads to evil. You're afraid for yourself...if you give in, you become selfish, selfishness can lead to lashing out at others...you get the idea. Fear is the root of all evil, more or less. And kender...just aren't afraid. Why? Maybe it's a gift from the gods. Maybe it's nutured in them. Either way, they don't fear anything. Not death. Certainly not the loss of material possessions...which explains the whole handling thing. The concept of "possession" is born of fear...fear that we won't have what we need on hand to survive and thrive. If kender aren't afraid of that, then possessions become transitory...which is why I gave my +2 Cloak of Resistance to a shivering gully dwarf last week. Hell, he needs it more than me. I'll be fine. I'll find another cloak somewhere. The one that noble's wearing looks nice. He probably has a bunch. Hmmm.... Perfectly altruistic and eminently practical. A kender would give you the shirt off his back because it's the right thing to do. And most kender believe everybody else should feel the same way, which is why they take what they need when they need it, and leave what they don't need behind, in case someone else needs it. Kender aren't ignorant of evil by any stretch. They know it's there. But they simply can't understand it...why do all that? You can live quite happily without subjugating others or committing atrocities. There's stuff all around you to use to survive and thrive if you need it. Why hurt others to get what you want? I don't think they're innocent, either. They know right from wrong, and sometimes there are little wrongs that have to happen for a greater right...hopefully. They have a strong sense of morality. But because they don't fear, there's no temptation to slide into evil. Or Evil, as they case may be. In a way, it's a very Zen outlook. Just with bad puns and the occasional taunt.
#14 zombiegleemax Nov 13, 2003 17:28:47	Kender, like children, understand that there is evil (Eeeeeevil!!!) in the world but don't understand why someone would participate in it. An extremely poor analogy I think but sort of relevant. When I was 8, I was watching ice hockey and the teams got into a fight. I wanted to be a hockey player but couldn't understand why they would fight like that and deceided if i became a hockey player I wouldn't fight. The fighting is harmful to both players and they get thrown in the box. I think kender have the same logic. evil (Eeeeevil!!!!) is pointless. They can make choices contrary to the whole kender are entierly innocent and thus are deviod of choices between good and evil (Eeeevil!!!). They just see that there is no point to it. I may have a bias towards kender but oh well. Kender seem to be true socialists. Tas
#15 zombiegleemax Nov 13, 2003 17:37:43	Kender seem to be true socialists. Not relevant I know. Just felt like mentioning cause that has to do with their logic pretty inderectly. Tas
#16 platinumwarlock Nov 13, 2003 20:59:38	Something you may want to keep in mind: Both Kender and Dwarves were bone of the Graystone, an artifact forged by Neutral gods and containing Chaos itself (himself?) In that sense, they probably have an inborn alignment towards Neutrality (and, in D&D, Chaotic Neutrality). Similarly, Dwarves would serves as the counterpoint to this, resisting Chaos in all its forms, and becoming essentially Lawful Neutral. Now, we do have to deal with the very large issue of free choice. While in many cases, beings do have free choice, in Dragonlance, that choice is often supersceded. When saying this, I particularly think of Sturm and how the Forestmaster speaks of him in Chronicles. Not all individuals get to choose their destiny--some have it preordained, like Sturm. As such, you can have a general statement like "Kender don't go the Abyss", but you may always have exceptions like Tasselhoff who end up there anyway.