A Treatise on the Philosophy of Taking
Among the many exchanges between Qet and Viranue, none has sparked more intellectual curiosity than the philosophy of taking. To us in Qet, steeped in chivalric ideals and the virtues of the Twelve, the concept of taking is often viewed with ambivalence, if not outright suspicion. Yet, as a scholar of the College of Valeheart and a citizen of a kingdom that has benefitted greatly from Viranue’s wisdom and strength, I believe it is both necessary and prudent to explore this philosophy with balance and reason.
The Patriarchal Lens: Giving and Receiving
In patriarchal societies such as ours, the roles of men and women are traditionally framed in terms of giving and receiving. Men are the givers—of strength, protection, and provision. Women are the receivers—of care, sustenance, and guidance. This division, while long-standing, is imbued with a subtle but pervasive hierarchy. Giving is seen as active, potent, and authoritative, while receiving is often cast as passive, servile, and dependent.
Yet, this binary dynamic reveals an inconsistency when we consider interactions between equals—specifically, men negotiating with men. When two knights sit across a table to resolve disputes, or when two merchants haggle over goods, the language shifts. It is no longer about giving and receiving but about giving and taking. Here, taking is not seen as passive or servile; it is treated as an active, potent counterpart to giving. Both giving and taking are equally necessary and equally valued in the negotiation of equals.
This contradiction—that taking is noble among men but servile when applied to women—offers a gateway to understanding the Viranuean philosophy of taking. It challenges the notion that taking is inherently lesser and compels us to examine the role of action and agency in human interactions.
Taking: A Force of Agency and Equality
Viranue’s philosophy, as I understand it, elevates the act of taking to a principle of purpose and responsibility. It is not merely the act of acquiring but the act of claiming what is rightfully earned, transforming it into something greater, and bearing the responsibility that comes with it. Taking, in this sense, is not a passive act of submission but an active assertion of agency.
The Viranueans would argue that the true flaw of patriarchal systems lies not in their reverence for giving but in their diminishment of taking when it is performed by women. A woman who takes is labelled as grasping, impertinent, or unwomanly. Yet a man who takes—whether he claims a battlefield victory or negotiates an alliance—is celebrated for his strength and decisiveness. Why, then, should taking lose its dignity simply because of the gender of the taker?
In reframing taking as an act of agency, Viranue does not diminish giving but positions the two as complementary forces. Giving is not diminished when the receiver actively takes, just as a knight’s offering of protection is not diminished when the recipient actively entrusts themselves to his care. Taking, when purposeful and responsible, is no less virtuous than giving.
Negotiation Among Equals
This brings us to the matter of equality. Among men, the act of taking in negotiation is not viewed as servile but as the natural counterpart to giving. A knight who takes the loyalty of his bannermen does so not out of subservience but as a necessary part of his role as their leader. A merchant who takes a fair deal does so with the same dignity as the one who gives it. This dynamic—of give and take—reflects a mutual respect and recognition of agency.
If we extend this principle to include women, as Viranue has done, we begin to see a framework where taking becomes a universal expression of strength and purpose. In this light, the act of taking transcends gender and becomes a principle of equality. It acknowledges the agency of the taker, whether they be man or woman, and honours the responsibility inherent in the act.
Taking as Responsibility
Perhaps the most compelling aspect of the Viranuean philosophy is its emphasis on responsibility. To take is not simply to acquire; it is to bear the weight of what has been claimed. A leader who takes the loyalty of their people must guide them with wisdom and strength. A hunter who takes the life of an animal must honour it by using every part to sustain their community. Taking, in this sense, is an act of service as much as it is an assertion of agency.
This notion finds resonance even within Qetish ideals. The Code of Chivalry teaches that to protect is to take responsibility for the lives of others. A knight who pledges their sword to defend the weak does not merely give their strength; they take the burden of safeguarding those lives. This act of taking is not selfish or dishonourable; it is the very essence of knightly virtue.
A Partnership of Ideals
As a scholar and as a citizen of Qet, I do not propose that we adopt the philosophy of taking wholesale. Our traditions are rooted in the virtues of the Twelve and the chivalric ideals that have guided us for generations. Yet, there is wisdom to be found in the Viranuean perspective. By embracing the active and potent nature of taking, we may find new ways to harmonize our ideals of giving and receiving.
The partnership between Qet and Viranue has already demonstrated the strength that comes from blending our philosophies. The precision and agency of Viranuean hunters complement the indomitable might of Qetish knights. Together, we shield our lands from the chaos of the Frostwilds and the ambitions of Kirtoth. Perhaps, in time, we may also find a deeper harmony in our understanding of giving and taking, forging a legacy that honours the strengths of both nations.
Conclusion
The philosophy of taking, as practiced by Viranue, challenges us to rethink our assumptions about agency, responsibility, and equality. It invites us to see taking not as an act of servility but as an active and purposeful counterpart to giving. In this balance, there is strength, dignity, and the potential for a more just and harmonious society.
As we continue to learn from our allies and reflect on our own traditions, let us remember that wisdom is not the province of one culture alone. By engaging with the ideas of others, we may refine our own and build a future that honours the best of all that we are.
Ardon Falstead,
Scholar of the College of Valeheart
Comments