My Problem With Essek- The Examination of Science Ethics in Fiction
I’m a Critical Role Fan.
That may be the most unsurprising statement for many folks who know me and the show, but for those unfamiliar, I play the tabletop role playing game, Dungeons and Dragons (D&D). Online, there are gamers who play the game as a tool for improvised storytelling. You can have hundreds of hours of content where these players record their session of D&D that can then be viewed by all of their followers. These are called Actual Plays, or AP’s.
One of the major (and probably biggest, though I don’t know the stats) AP’s out there is Critical Role, where “A bunch of nerdy-ass voice actors sit around and play Dungeons and Dragons.” Their first streamed D&D game was even turned into the widely successful cartoon series, “Vox Machina.” I got hooked by their second season, which was a new cast of characters called the Mighty Nien (which is also becoming its own TV show!).
So, before I continue, I want to say that this is coming from someone who thoroughly enjoys the stories told by Critical Role. I’m a “critter” through and through. However, I can still enjoy a piece of media and be highly critical of it at the same time. And bear with me; this analysis of a D&D game is more of a leaping-off point to discuss issues of STEM portrayal in media.
Also, due to time constraints and the nature of how my Ph.D. is going at the moment, this post may seem a bit more “rambley” than usual.
Background On Essek Thelyss So We’re All on The Same Page
I should be clear that there are major, MAJOR spoilers for both Critical role season 2 and 3 in this post.
The setting the Mighty Nien find themselves in is a war between two countries, one of which is the home country for several of the player characters. Partway through the series, the group make it to the opposite country and return a missing artifact. Turns out said artifact was the reason the war started in the first place. Much joy abounds.
Next, the group meets an elf named Essek Thelyss, whom they take a liking to despite his haughty air. They work with him a bit to learn and craft spells, and they use him to teleport to parts of the continent.
I should note that Essek, despite being a mage acting as head spy, is extremely academic-coded. He really cares about his magic research.
In fact, he cares so much about his magic research that prior to the start of the story, Essek was the one who originally stole the aforementioned artifact and handed it over to an evil assembly of mages in order to study it. This action kicked off the aforementioned war that shapes the story’s setting.
So to summarize: This researcher-coded mage started a war. For research purposes.
What was this research, you ask? Good question: the wiki doesn’t disclose what it is, and I can’t comb through the 556 hours of story to find that sliver of knowledge (if it exists). To be honest, I doubt we’re actually given anything beyond vague “research.”
Before We Continue…
I hardly speak for other scientists, let alone scientist fans of Critical Role. I can only speak for myself with my own lenses as both a fantasy enthusiast, avid reader, and scientist. What you see in this blog post is more of a soul-searching moment for me as I explore why I didn’t like this character.
Also, there are a lot of reasons to like this fictional character. He is complex, morally ambiguous, and very loyal to the players. Many fans see him as a queer character with a redemption arc that is to be celebrated. I wish I could join them in this perspective. My issues with this character with only him, and do not reflect on anyone who can appreciate his role in Critical Role’s stories.
The ‘Corrupt Researcher’ Trope
I don’t know if this is actually the official name of the above trope but you’ve seen it before. Think Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Think Dr. Frankenstein. Think Johannes Cabal from Jonathan Howard’s “Johannes Cabal, The Necromancer” book. The scientists from Jurassic Park.
Does Essek fall into the “corrupt researcher” trope? 100%. Fits it like a glove.
Story-telling is an act of reflecting cultural beliefs back onto us, the listeners; in doing so, we can internalize these truths. This is one of the reasons why tropes can perpetuate harmful stereotypes, and why people strive to critique these types of stereotypes. And I would argue that this “corrupt researcher” trope, though it certainly has its place when used right, tends to be used for more harm than good.
The Trope And Scientists
I should tell you that this post has been a year in the making. I discussed my initial ramblings with one of my brothers as we were hiking. When I got to the part about “giving up the artifact for research that ultimately started a war,” my brother (who is in STEM) groaned. Yet another mage sacrificing people in the name of research. When I was explaining Essek’s character to my fellow grad student, she gave me a puzzled scowl. “Haven’t they heard of ethics?”
Mages, wizards, and alchemists in fantasy are “academia-coded,” in which they are a stand-in for researchers in fantasy worlds. What kind of academic researchers varies from story to story, but I interpret them as being STEM researchers.
Has academia abused the laymen community? Absolutely (see “Science Ethical Violations and War Crimes” below). I’m also of the opinion that any higher-up institution that gatekeeps anyone but white, middle-aged men is primed to abuse other communities. I’m including politics, academia, medicine, etc. And there are ways to critique these power imbalances in media, which the “corrupt researcher” trope has the opportunity to do.
It’s… usually not though. Usually, the trope is used to perpetuate distrust of STEM spaces. Think of all of the fantasy media that has an evil mage (again, usually “researcher-coded” or even blending into the “mad scientist” trope) sacrificing the world and the people in it for forbidden knowledge. Or perhaps a minor villain magic user who does magical research. It hurts that I see my profession shown more as acceptable villains in the media I consume. It hurts to see the “scientist = apathetic” story told over and over again.
However, as these academic spaces become more diverse, many of these areas of abuse are being more and more challenged. I think that’s what I’d like to see more of with the “corrupt researcher” trope: having the abusive academic being held accountable by the fantasy world’s scientific community.
Going back to our case study of Essek, that’s not ultimately what happens. No one holds him accountable, not even the other scholars of the group.
Science Ethical Violations
We’re moving away from trope talk to discuss times scientists have committed acts that are, quite frankly, horrific. This is where in history, people sacrificed innocent lives for the sake of “research,” and sometimes even got away with few repercussions.
I bring our attention to these because these are what we learned about in my ethics class in graduate school. These are some of the major harms done by the scientific community that has caused genuine strain between STEM and the community that it’s meant to serve. The distrust for the scientific community is unfortunately anchored in painful crimes. I also bring these up to show what has shaped our modern code of ethics that we, as scientists, are expected to follow.
The Nuremberg Trials covered unethical human experimentation, such as blood coagulation experiments and freezing experiments. Due to how extensive the list is, I’ll give you the link here to read up on for further information. A lot of what came out these trials led to our modern international code of ethics. Some of these people involved in leading these experiments were somehow acquitted.
The Tuskegee Syphilis Study was where the United States Public Health Service exposed African-Americans in Alabama to syphilis, starting in 1932, without their informed consent, and then let the study continue for 40 years without treating any of the infected individuals. Read that again: for 40 years. This unsurprisingly caused massive distrust in the scientific community. And according the wiki article, this “research” wasn’t even scientifically viable, as “the results would be meaningless.”
In the 1960’s, Chester Southman injected cancer cells into multiple patient groups, including prisoners, to see how their immune systems would handle it. Did the patients actually give informed consent? It’s a little dubious when you read the wording, so I’d say “no.” When the study became public, it was considered a scandal.
And what did he get? Medical License Probation. Not even a true suspension. And then he was elected president of the American Association for Cancer Research.
Now, for a modern day example: In 2018, the scientist He Jiankui edited genes of human embryos using the tool CRISPR to make the resulting children resistant to the HIV virus.. I remember when this story was first coming out, scientists were baffled at the scientific efficacy of his research. As stated in the article, He was arrested for “three years for illegal medical practice, along with two members of his team.” Instead of receiving applause, He received public outcry from the scientific community and more. At least he got 3 years in prison, but last I heard, he’s back to researching.
If you’re getting a hint of anger in this part of the post, that’s because simply typing out these quick summaries is making my blood boil. There has been a push for better ethics in STEM, especially since the fields are becoming less and less white, male dominated. But actions like these not only harm innocent people, but absolutely destroy trust in the scientific community. From my current experiences in STEM, there’s been a massive push for community outreach, to rebuild those connections and recentering the communities we’re meant to serve. Why don’t I get to see that in my media? Why do I have to watch some fantasy version of real-life atrocities committed by abusers in my field?
Back to our case study: Did Essek commit war crimes by our standards? I honestly don’t know. I personally consider it a war crime, but legally, I’m not sure. What’s important here is that during a time in real life where there are those in the scientific community trying to call out and improve the ethics of the STEM field, where there are those attempting to rebuild trust between the scientific community and the general public, this fictional character gets the same treatment as Chester Southman. He’s spent no jail time in game. He’s still performing research in the most recent season of Critical Role. And did I mention that a member of the Cobalt Soul, a group that is supposedly dedicated to rooting out corruption and abuse, is allowing Essek to continue to work in an academic setting?
In fiction, it’s all done in the name of “research.” And it’s just accepted. No questions asked, no pushback. Yes, the above examples show that people will use research as a tool to impose or reinforce power imbalances on marginalized communities, but is there a communally accepted truth that scientists or science-coded characters lack empathy and therefore will sacrifice people for “research”?
Abuse in Academia
I know he’s a fictional character. I know. But Essek is a symbol that keeps on giving, such as representing general abuse in academia.
There are entire nature articles discussing abuse in academia, like this one on how to stand up to a bully supervisor or how to “blow the whistle on an academic bully.” I encourage you to read the story of a scientist named David Marchant who sexually harassed his female students while they were on research expeditions.
Something I’d like to emphasize for a moment: the people being abused in this case are other scientists. The bullies are the scientists who get away with certain actions because they’ve contributed enough to the scientific community. Or they’re fantastic researchers who get a free pass on bullying merely because they pump out high-quality papers. I’d like to note that in the Science article I linked above, there is this statement about one of the women who was considering reporting abuse against David Marchant:
“Doe’s letter alleges that [the department chair], noting Marchant’s ‘sizable’ reputation and funding, ‘asked [her] if it wouldn’t just be easier for [her] to complete [her] degree and leave… [she] left without recourse.”
And once more, back to our case study. To me, Essek abused his position as an academic to initiate a war, and gets a pass by the cast and the fandom because he helped in the final battle and said “sorry.” No further actions needed.
The Villainization of Knowledge
The “corrupt researcher” also plays into the “forbidden knowledge” trope, a trope that I truly despise. In fact, the example of Essek plays into the forbidden knowledge twice, firstly by having the artefact he hands over be one of religious importance. There’s a whole essay to be written about the ethics of handling research concerning holy or sacred practices, all of which is disregarded by scientist-coded character. Secondly, the fact that his motivation of “vague research” is accepted as proper motivation implies that whatever he was researching is too forbidden to mention. Yes, it saves the storytellers from having to come up with a reason, but there’s very much an underlying message of, “there are some things you should not pursue.” Heck, the fact that the only people who wanted to study said artefact were objectively evil drives this point home.
(Were there really no good-guy researchers Essek couldn’t have teamed up with? Were there no kind mages working on the proper grants to respectfully study the thing? Only the obviously evil people were available? And we as viewers just accept this as a viable motivation/explanation?)
Here may be my most controversial take here but: I don’t think any knowledge is forbidden. I think how you obtain and use said knowledge is far more important. Using our case study, it’s not wrong to want to know—or even know—what a religious artifact does. It’s wrong, however, to steal it and then start a war over it.
But stories love to play into the idea that the knowledge itself should be unobtainable, and that reaching for it is an act of transgression. It reminds me of Pandora opening the box, or of Eve biting into the apple. Curiosity is (apparently) the greatest sin, and therefore should be quenched with unquestioning obedience.
Again, linking it back: it’s not that Essek opened Pandora’s Box and was obtaining knowledge “not meant for morals,” it’s that he knowingly sacrificed innocent lives to satisfy his curiosity, rather than work within his own community to get a peek at the box’s contents. Maybe if he’d taken an ethics class or talked to anyone from anthropology, he’d know how to properly study the artifact.
But I doubt we’ll ever get to see scientist-coded characters actually following ethics. I can’t think of a time a fictional character like that actually went through the proper channels and respected the communities they were working with.
We need to acknowledge the surge of anti-intellectualism that has grown in recent years. The defunding of libraries, schools, and research has surged recently. During the pandemic, researchers faced backlash from the public for studying COVID-19. If you live in the United States, you know the rise of “anti-vaxers” and the claims that vaccines cause cancer/autism (Spoilers: vaccines can’t do that). One of the reasons this may be happening is that knowledge provides autonomy. The more one keeps knowledge from an individual, the less the individual can rely on their own judgment.
This is why I want people to push back when we see this trope rearing its head in our media.
The “forbidden knowledge” combined with the “corrupt researcher” trope drives home the idea that only evil-intentioned people question the world around them. Only corrupt people really want to examine how and why things work. Curiosity is the true villain. I know it’s not true—I’m a creature of nothing but curiosity, hence the blog— but not seeing this ever challenged in my media is disheartening while I see the rise of villainizing knowledge.’
(And I don’t have time to get into the discussion of Essek embodying the harmful “scientist who hates/disrespects religion” trope. My short take is: It’s a false dichotomy that further harms the rapport between STEM and religious communities, and is used by certain people to stoke distrust between the two groups. There are so many religious scientists out there, and even more who, while not religious, still respect it. To reiterate my previous point, it’s not a good or even complex motivation for a scientist-coded character. Challenge it when you see it.)
Where Does That Leave Me?
Am I projecting? Oh yes. No doubt about it.
It leaves me seeing what has unintentionally become a symbol of academic/STEM abuse everywhere, such as the merchandising, short-form videos, and fanart.
At least Victor Frankenstein got put in his place, being found as the true monster of the story rather than his creation. At least Dr. Jekyll realized how much his experiments had messed up everyone around him and put an end to it (rather gruesomely). Heck, even Critical Role had academic characters in their “Calamity” mini-series paid for their hubris. I’ve come to the conclusions that, had Critical Role’s Essek had experienced true consequences for his actions that addressed the abuse of his academic position, I think I would have no issue with him as a character.
Recently, Essek showed up in Critical Role’s campaign 3 sessions. He showed up to the tune of thunderous cheers.
I sat at my computer, horrified. Not only has this war criminal researcher not been brought to justice by his scientific community (or any community), but he has also been allowed to keep researching?! We’re allowing the corrupt researcher to keep working rather than giving him a true comeuppance?
I don’t get the catharsis of this abusive researcher being taken to court. I don’t get the satisfaction of seeing a scientist-coded character getting barred from his studies and having his vague research, that he sacrificed innocent lives for, ripped out of his hands. Instead, I get to watch a character that symbolizes the worst of my profession continue on in the media I love as my representation.
I know this character is fictional… but he’s also too close to reality for my taste.
Where Does that Leave Us?
Alrighty. Got that out of my system.
I’ll leave us with some final thoughts on how the aforementioned tropes within the fantasy genre.*
The “corrupted researcher” or “forbidden knowledge” tropes have their place. Jurassic Park (though scifi and not fantasy) is one of the few books that I’d say does a decent job of using these tropes to ultimately criticize capitalism. It’s not perfect, but it’s at least attempting to criticize greed over curiosity. However, their current versions in the fantasy genre do not, in my opinion, tend to tackle the topics appropriately.
Shake things up, writers. I want to see the fantasy version of the scientific community collectively bring down those who use their academic positions to harm others. I want those who abuse their academic positions to be actively called out and facing repercussions. I want to have someone challenge the “sacrifice for research” trope, responding with “in what field would that inhumane practice be accepted?” or even a “was the research worth it?” Maybe even point out that the researcher could have obtained the information in a far more ethical way.
I want to see researchers in fantasy, whether it be mages or non-magical folk, not curse the world to ruin because of their curiosity. I want to see these characters reach for “forbidden knowledge” and have it be a positive outcome, bringing more autonomy to their communities. I want characters who go through all of the necessary hoops to do research on a precious artifact; having an ethically sound grant is an adventure in itself. I want civilizations that experimented and developed technologies to not doom themselves because “they’ve flown too close to the sun/deities.” I want scientist-coded characters to show the greatest respect to every cultural and religious practice they encounter. I want more of these characters who celebrate the wonder there is to explore in the world, even if that wonder happens to be magic in the story, and not sacrifice anyone in their exploration.
*Not specifically science fiction; that genre tends to handle the aforementioned tropes very differently based on my catalog of scifi books. That discussion would be a whole other blog post/essay, and I’ve already rambled long enough!