logo

65 pages 2 hours read

Brandon Sanderson

The Way of Kings

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 2010

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Themes

Objective Morality Versus Racist Social Hierarchies

Social hierarchy is an important theme in the book and closely resembles the Western Medieval model of society. Alethkar is organized along the lines of a feudal state with one king commanding multiple lords who each have their own army and lands and enjoy varying degrees of autonomy. In Western feudal societies, the most important factor in determining social status was lineage, which determined the inheritance of power, wealth, and titles. In Alethkar, Sanderson takes the notion of family lineage and aristocratic bloodlines to an extreme, with genetics playing a major role. People with light eyes are automatically considered of high social status, as this phenotypical trait evokes the glowing eyes of the legendary Knights Radiant. Those with dark eyes are seen as commoners, regardless of how they got their eye color. In such a world, there is almost no possibility of social mobility. The one exception is when a darkeyes wins a Shardblade in battle and his eye color lightens. There is a brief mention of the possibility of a high-ranking darkeyes marrying into a low-ranking lighteyes family, but that does not seem to be a prevalent trend, as the social hierarchy of Alethkar incentivizes aristocratic families to marry and procreate only with similarly light-eyed people to preserve power and status.

Sanderson directly connects social hierarchy to the ideas of morality and personal responsibility. People with light eyes often feel entitled and behave badly toward their subordinates. People with dark eyes, such as Kaladin, who desire more out of life often end up feeling dissatisfied and unhappy. Being a member of the aristocracy, however, can be limiting in its own right. Dalinar struggles to reconcile his love for his brother’s widow with social convention, and fears the loss of his power for behaving out of sync with Alethi social norms. Dalinar’s perceived eccentricity threatens not only his status, but his life and the lives of his sons when Sadeas betrays him. Similarly, while Sadeas’s betrayal cannot be proven illegal, it is an immoral act. However, since society, as a whole, including both lighteyes and darkeyes, supports and reinforces such a system, as attested by the villagers’ tacit approval of Lord Roshone’s mistreatment of Kaladin’s family, most people go along and do not take responsibility for their actions. Kaladin, his father, Dalinar, and to some extent Jasnah and Shallan, are markedly different from the rest of their societies as they not only know the difference between right and wrong, but behave accordingly, and consciously take responsibility for their choices.

Not all of Roshar bases its social hierarchy on genetics. Some places use age as a deciding factor. No matter the means, however, there is always some way societies choose to split people into different groups. None of the states mentioned in The Way of the Kings is run as a democracy or espouses egalitarian society. Additionally, certain cultures are also associated with distinct physical features. For example, the parshmen and Parshendi have marbled skins, while the Horneaters tend to be tall and red-haired. For the most part, these differences in physical appearance are noted as details of Roshar’s world, without specific connotations. In the case of the parshmen, however, their outer appearance seems to be the main reason they are treated as slaves. Other kinds of people can become enslaved, due to various reasons, but the parshmen are born as slaves. There are also no known free people with their outer appearance, until Gavilar encounters the Parshendi. This situation inevitably leads to comparisons with the way slavery in the New World was predicated on perceived skin color differences.

The parable of the desiccated emperor of Uvara exemplifies the tension in the novel between social norms and moral behavior. Sanderson proposes that people use social structures to justify objectively immoral actions including theft or murder, regardless of their position within the social hierarchy. In The Way of Kings, social norms become a secondary, imposed morality that takes precedence over the more difficult to identify objective morality unless directly confronted. Because of their experiences in the novel, Shallan, Kaladin, and Dalinar are all forced to make such a confrontation.

Resisting Oppressive Gender Norms

Throughout the novel, gender differences, alongside class ones, often narrowly define people and their activities, especially for women. Like in medieval times, women on Roshar are supposed to wear dresses or dress-like clothes that do not show skin, even if they can be close-fitted. Additionally, women’s sleeves tend to be long and hide the hands. In Alethkar, a woman’s left hand, called the safehand, needs to be completely covered. Showing a bare left hand is tantamount to indecent exposure. Related to covering the safehand, specific tasks are assigned to each gender. Women are socially permitted to read, write, paint, and play music (all activities which require only one hand), while men are seen as rulers and warriors. There are some places where women seem to be in positions of power, but in Alethkar all the Highlords are men and it is implied that women are unable to occupy public office. Despite her significant knowledge and abilities, the dowager queen Navani laments her loss of status and identity after the death of her husband. Her daughter, Jasnah, resists social limitation based in gender by pursuing occult arts and scholarship. By contrast, the only socially acceptable way for men to escape gendered roles is to become an ardent, a celibate Vorin priest. However, such a choice seems to effeminate men, allowing them to learn to read and write, rather than to truly break the stereotypes forced upon them.

Despite the limits posed on the characters by their society, the book presents strong protagonists from both genders, whose strength and wisdom are partially based on their willingness and ability to transgress stereotypes. Shallan and Jasnah, for example, take charge of their own destinies, despite the expectation that women marry young and let their husbands make decisions for the entire family. Kaladin and Dalinar are also transgressing expectations by questioning the Alethi way of life and social hierarchy. They are both extremely good warriors, but that eventually becomes secondary to their desire to take care of and protect others—motivations which are considered feminine by Alethi standards. Furthermore, Kaladin is interested in knowledge and can read simple glyphs, something most men would find unacceptable or uninteresting, despite the extraordinary potential of such knowledge.

While gender is an important element on Roshar and adds a deeper dimension to each character’s social position, Sanderson does not deeply probe the essential nature of gender as a social construct. Except for one minor character, Axies the Collector, who can alter his body at will, the concept of gender is very much conflated with physical sex. There is no mention of nonbinary or trans identities, and even if the main protagonists undermine some of their society’s stereotypes, they do so in relatively conventional ways. As with Sanderson’s ambivalent portrayal of morality, Sanderson both gently challenges and reinscribes traditional (and outdated) modes of thinking about gender identity, allowing for social flexibility while failing to engage with gender as a larger concept of its own.

Morality Versus Legality

A recurring theme in the book is the question of whether killing can ever be justified and used to protect others without moral compromise. Kaladin’s father strongly believes that violence is never a positive thing and that the only way to save lives is being a surgeon. In contrast, Kaladin initially believes that killing the enemy is a necessary evil to protect his own people. However, the more he grows into his Radiant powers, the less certain he becomes of that. While he initially hates the Parshendi for starting the war, Kaladin gradually begins thinking of them as people with their own motivations, ambitions, and feelings.

Similarly, Shallan is deeply disturbed by Jasnah’s preemptive murder of their attackers. Shallan’s moral outlook is inconsistent, however, as she herself is very pragmatic and willing to do whatever is necessary for her family, even if it is immoral or illegal. Jasnah, in contrast, believes that killing the criminals will protect others in the long run and does not feel remorse for the murders. Her crime is calculated and cold-blooded. Shallan does not share Jasnah’s resolve; she is only able to commit to stealing from Jasnah when she believes the princess to be morally deficient after the murders. As Shallan begins to consider intent and action separately, she articulates the novel’s ultimate moral point of view: legality does not indicate morality, nor vice versa. Legality is a socially defined construct; morality is a philosophically and—at least in the novel—spiritually defined construct. Mirroring this dichotomy, Dalinar is renowned for his high death count in battle. However, he, too, begins experiencing doubts about the need to kill so many Parshendi, especially when they resemble the Alethi in all but skin color.

The distinction between protecting and killing is often blurred, but ultimately affirmed. The former is done for gain, while the latter is in self-defense. This distinction is also important for the Knights Radiant as one of their vows, uttered by Kaladin, is to “protect those who cannot protect themselves” (1156). Legal killing, such as that done in war or self-defense, is often more morally defensible, even if it cannot be proclaimed to be objectively morally good. The defeat and destruction of truly evil forces may be morally acceptable, but it begs the question of how the moral nature of oneself or one’s opponent is determined.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text