Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ChickenDragon123 OP t1_j6axud3 wrote

I'm glad to see this comment, as it's the kind of discussion I wanted to see. I agree with a lot of your points, but I think I may not have done a good enough job explaining myself. Books 4 and 5 of HH are my favorite in the series, precisely because they have more of a internal struggle than any of the other books. When Weber's writing works, it WORKS. But he spends more time in the logistic rooms where characters are no longer characters, but instead vehicles for military policy.

Books 4 and five showed Honor as a Character. She had doubts and asperations. Her morals might have been a bit off base in my opinion, (I still maintain that she murdered Pavel Young, even if he cheated. She intended to leave him dead for what he did to her.) But she was understandable. Her reasoning was sound, and her cause was one I could get behind. Book five really played with her doubts, her fears, and brought all of that into sharper focus, but it never went past that. None of the other books ever delved that deeply into Honor's Psychology. Into her character, and the only ones who stand up to her are the bad guys.

HH as a series leaves Honor missing something. Honor has a mindset similar to Captain America, or Iron man, without anyone who will challenge her ideas. Honor is Polarizing, every one is for or against her, but there's never anyone in the middle. She has a self-assuredness that while deserved, never get's questioned.

Even when murdering Pavel she KNOWS she's doing the right thing.

PS 100% agree with you on safehold. I enjoyed the first book, but man sometimes it feels like being dropped into game of thrones book 4 with all of these characters I need to keep track of.

2

DavesWorldInfo t1_j6b2r7f wrote

> (I still maintain that she murdered Pavel Young, even if he cheated. She intended to leave him dead for what he did to her.)

I'm going to have to categorically disagree with any definition of what happened between Honor and Pavel on the field as murder. I really do.

First, what she did was legal. In the Kingdom of Manticore, dueling is legal. Debating the morality or "rightness" of dueling is a separate discussion I feel. In Manticore, dueling is legal.

Second, I've got the file for FoD open on another screen, but I'd have to literally skim through the whole thing to count to be certain I hadn't missed something. But Young was attempting to destroy her, and doing it via violence. Some of it was legal, some of it clearly wasn't.

He abused the dueling regulations by hiring a ringer; legal, but of questionable morality. Dueling is designed for two people of good standing to settle differences they can't settle via other means. Young hired a professional duelist, a literal killer who does it legally, to kill Paul.

I don't remember just how clear Young was about his ideas for "the full plan", but IIRC his thinking was Honor would go after Summervale for "revenge" and die in that duel. Because Summervale was supposed to be death with a gun, fast and accurate and unstoppable; that's why Summervale had a career as a professional duelist, and why Young had hired him.

Clearly, Honor was better with a gun than anyone expected. Mary Sue, but that's also a separate discussion (and not an interesting one IMO). Honor challenged Summervale and took him out, legally. Young also didn't expect Summervale would have been made to talk and spill Young's involvement, when Honor's subordinates forced Summervale to reveal the whole scenario when they 'questioned' him.

So now Honor knows Young orchestrated the whole thing. Young immediately begins using politics and the dueling code to avoid her being able to challenge him. The setup was a challenge (to duel) has to be issued in person, so he moved Heaven and Earth trying to ensure she'd never be in a room with him.

He, and others in the Navy and Government, started trying to force Honor to either accept orders and be shipped out to a duty station (away from Young), or resign and continue seeking to challenge him. Then Young hired mercenaries (common criminal hitmen IIRC) to attempt to assassinate Honor in public.

At that point Honor (and Weber, in a twist I rather enjoyed) took advantage of the fact that while she despised politics, she actually did have the legal right to be seated in the House of Lords. Which was where Young was hiding from her, thinking she couldn't go. Where she was finally able to challenge him.

The entire setup was Young was trying to hide behind politics and position, including his position in society. He couldn't decline the challenge without suffering political damage (another discussion about dueling, not the story) so he was 'forced' to accept.

Then, at the duel, he broke the dueling rules. Which were quite simple; stand back to back, walk thirty paces, and stop. When the master of the field says turn, they can both turn and fire a single shot at the other.

After that one shot was exchanged, Young would be able to "honorably" declare honor had been satisfied without political damage. Except he felt Honor would kill him with that single shot. So he panicked, acted without honor, and attempted to murder her by turning early and shooting before the master of the field had declared turn.

The very story states Young's life was forfeit when he broke the rules. The master of the field, using a space gun, was in the process shooting him as penalty for violating the dueling rules. Honor was hit by Young's shot, seriously wounded. Yet (Mary Sue, gotta love Mary Sues) even wounded she manages to roll back to her feet and shoot Young three times in the chest before the master of the field could get his own shots off.

Young was dead the moment he fired at Honor early. The master of the field was empowered to kill him for that, and did fire. Honor was entitled to defend herself from someone who broke the rules of the duel in an attempt to murder her before being killed himself for his actions.

The Kingdom of Manticore didn't charge her with murder. None of Young's political allies were able to charge her with murder. They used political maneuvering to dismiss her from the House of Lords and active service because they're evil villains who just seek to torture and punish all who dare oppose them, but that was the extent of the penalties.

The fact that she got her own shots off in self defense against Young doesn't make her returning fire murder. It really doesn't. I strongly reject any contention that it does. Of course each reader is always encouraged to have their own reactions. Mine will never include characterizing Honor as a murderer. Ever.

3

ChickenDragon123 OP t1_j6c9c99 wrote

Okay, In universe you're right. She isn't a murderer, at least not legally. In real world law? I can't think of a juristiction she wouldn't be charged with murder. Ethically, I also think she commited murder. Was that murder justified? I think yes. Pavel Young is the sort of person that I don't want existing. He was a coward, a traitor, a sexual predator, abusive, and a murderer himself.

However, Honor forced the confrontation. No one doubted she was going to kill Pavel if she had the chance. Unless you can find me a sentence where she specifically says she isn't going to kill him, I'm going to say she was going to kill him. He abused her, physically, emotionally and sexually. He killed her fiance, and he evaded justice. She was going to kill him. She intended to kill him. She forced him socially into a position where she could kill him. He wasn't actively trying to kill her at that point. She went after him. Again, I think she was justified somewhat, but she meant to kill him.

The fact he cheated in the duel doesn't make it self defence. If I lure you into an ambush intending to shoot you but you pull the trigger first, I don't get to claim self defence. It doesn't matter how terrible a person you are, I was planning on killing you.

Now, Honor can claim Justice all she wants. To some extent I even believe her. I think she would let the courts have handled it if she had been given the opportunity. But they didn't. She didn't kill Pavel reluctantly. She wanted it. You cannot tell me that vengeance didn't play a role. What do we call a killing that isn't self defence, an accident, or an act of war? Murder.

If I'm on that jury, I'm going for nullification. I'm saying she didn't do it, even though she clearly did. I want her to get away with it. But, I also recognize Honor murdered that dude.

1

DavesWorldInfo t1_j6ccmav wrote

Remember the initial setup for the entire story. In the previous novel (Short Victorious War), Young had deserted out of sheer, inexcusable cowardice. Against direct orders. The only people who didn't see, or admit, that Young ordered not just his ship out of formation, but the squadron of other ships he was leading as well, to flee was because of cowardice and panic were his political allies. Young's own first officer saw him, the captain of Warlock, as a coward and deserter.

His ordering of his squadron out of formation, and then continuing to flee the formation against orders to return while the fleet was engaged against overwhelming odds, got Manticorian spacers killed. Warlock's absence weakened missile defense nets. It caused confusion and chaos in the tactical situation. These things are directly responsible for the death of Naval Personnel.

The first section of the story deals with how Young's political connections are shielding him from the consequences of this action. Desertion and cowardice in time of combat is a firing squad offense in the Royal Manticorian Navy. In most real world militaries it is as well. For what he did at First Hancock he was facing the death penalty.

Yet and his political allies abused their power to spare him of this penalty. To the detriment of the RMN and the Manticorian government. One of the reasons militaries punish what he did (desertion in battle) so harshly is the damage it does to the overall fighting spirit of the entire service. When soldiers/spacers know they can cut and run without consequence, some will. It'll happen more often. Which gets people killed. Which loses battles. Which loses wars.

This point is made throughout the trial deliberations as the factions (Navy vs Young's Allies) argue over whether or not Young should be punished (killed). It's not that the Navy wanted Young to die, it's that he needed to because sparing him told the rest of the Navy "desertion and cowardice that gets Naval Personnel killed won't be punished."

After merely being dishonorably discharged, Young hates Honor more than he already did. He resented her previously because he was a noble, and she wasn't. Yet she had a brilliant career, and was getting promoted past him. He was a small, petty man who wanted revenge. He didn't see that his own personal failings were the source and cause of his stalled (and then ruined) career. He just decided Honor was to blame because if she'd never showed up in his life, he would've risen just as a noble should because that's his noble birthright; to ascend and be lauded.

So he plotted to kill her.

When Honor challenged him to the duel, she didn't just say "you killed my lover/friend."

> "My Lords and Ladies, there is among you a man who has conspired at murder rather than face his enemies himself. A would-be rapist, a coward, and a man who hired a paid duelist to kill another. A man who sent armed thugs into a public restaurant only two days ago to murder someone else and failed in his purpose by the narrowest margin." ...

> "My Lords and Ladies, I accuse Pavel Young, Earl North Hollow, of murder and attempted murder. I accuse him of the callous and unforgivable abuse of power, of cowardice in the face of the enemy, of attempted rape, and of being unfit not simply for the high office he holds but for life itself. I call him coward and scum, beneath the contempt of honest and upright subjects of this Kingdom, whose honor is profaned by his mere presence among them, and I challenge him, before you all, to meet me upon the field of honor, there to pay once and for all for his acts!"

Emphasis mine.

Honor used the dueling laws for arguably one of the very purposes they exist (in the story and in real world nations that had them). Young had wrapped himself in political advantage to gain power and avoid consequences. He sought to use his position to abuse and shirk his responsibilities. Dueling was, and is, a way to "even the scales." Officers in England on occasion challenged other officers to duels over the same kinds of things Young was doing, and for the same reason Honor did; to even the scales and impose consequences where the system had failed to.

She didn't just seek revenge for herself, though she definitely wanted that. She also sought revenge for fellow crew members and officers of the RMN. She sought to correct the error of the story's initial tribunal that issued a flawed verdict that spared Young and allowed him to escape the deserved consequences of his action.

He got people killed. They died because of his cowardice. They died because he planned it. They died because he didn't care to discharge his responsibilities as an officer and member of the House of Lords in an honest and forthright manner. They died because he felt his life and his plans for his life mattered more than their lives did to them.

I submit that, if anyone "ever needed killing", Young is on that list.

Honor is not a murder. Young deserved to die many times over. Many. She was justice come knocking. Not just for herself. For the Navy that was too weak to impose it themselves.

3