Essay: Foucault and the Circle of Magi (Dragon Age: Origins)
This essay will look at the Circle of Magi alongside Foucault’s* theories about the asylum. My argument is that the Circle functions in a similar way to how Foucault saw the asylum working - that is, it is designed to create docile mages that accept the justification for their imprisonment, and end up policing themselves.
I will go through some of Foucault’s original writing, explain my understanding of it, and give examples of where I think it is played out in the Dragon Age universe.
All references are from The Foucault Reader, edited by Paul Rabinow.
I’m more than happy to take any feedback. :)
* If you haven’t heard of Foucault before, he was a French philosopher who wrote a lot of stuff about power. His basic theory was that the most insidious form of power is not physical strength, but the ability to get people to watch and judge themselves based on your criteria. Here’s his Wiki page.
A Prison of Morality
Let’s start with Foucault’s description of the invention of the asylum:
“The creation of the [asylum] was… a new solution. For the first time, purely negative measures of exclusion were replaced by a measure of confinement; the [undesirable] person was no longer driven away or punished; he was taken in charge, at the expense of the nation but at the cost of his individual liberty. Between him and society an implicit system of obligation was established: he had the right to be fed, but he must accept the physical and moral constraint of confinement.” (p.130)
Before the asylum, those who were not perceived as ‘normal’ were ignored, abused, or killed. The invention of the asylum gave them a place where they were relatively safe - they had shelter, food, and warmth. They could survive, relatively unmolested. The cost for this, however, was to accept their imprisonment - accept it not only physically, but also morally. That is, they had to understand that their imprisonment was for their own good as well as the good of others.
Let’s look at how it is described during the opening to the mage origin:
“On a cliff overlooking the dark waters of Lake Calenhad stands the tower fortress that is home to the Circle of Magi. This tower is the only place in Ferelden where mages may study their art among others of their kind. Within the high stone walls, the Circle practices its magic and trains apprentices in the proper use of their powers. But the Circle Tower is as much as prison as a refuge, the ever vigilant Templars of the Chantry watch over all mages, constantly alert for any sign of corruption.” (my emphasis)
The Circle of Magi clearly functions as a way of removing mages from everyday society, and limiting the use of magic - which I see as a disruptive force - to a place where it cannot be seen by normal citizens. Although it gives mages shelter, food, warmth, and even companionship with others of their own kind, they are nonetheless imprisoned because they cannot leave or live a free life.
But why does anyone stand for this? Mages are powerful, why do they allow it? And why does the rest of society think that this is a just way of treating fellow beings?
An excursion back to Foucault for a moment, where he continues with the idea that the asylum is fundamentally a moral domain:
“The asylum is a religious domain[…] a domain of pure morality, of ethical uniformity… the asylum must represent the great continuity of social morality[…] The asylum reduces differences, represses vice, eliminates irregularities. It denounces everything that opposes the essential virtues of society[…] The asylum sets itself the task of the homogeneous rule of morality, its rigorous extension to all those who tend to escape from it.” (pp.148-149)
Let’s compare this with the Chantry’s view on mages. The introduction to Dragon Age places the Chantry’s opinion on mages front and centre:
“The Chantry teaches us that it is the hubris of men which brought the darkspawn into our world. The mages had sought to usurp heaven, but instead they destroyed it. They were cast out, twisted and cursed by their own corruption. They returned as monsters, the first of the darkspawn. They became a blight upon the lands, unstoppable and relentless[…]”
The Chantry lays the blame for evil entering the world (in the form of darkspawn) squarely on the shoulders of mages. This lays the groundwork for the existence of the Circle by basing our entire understanding of mages in one immoral act that allegedly occurred in the past. From the start, we are judging mages with a moral eye. And this same theology is taught to the mages within the Tower - during the mage origins, you meet young apprentices being taught the Chant of Light in the library.
Furthermore, however, mages are constantly open to corruption through their connection with the Fade. During the Harrowing, Greagoir clearly articulates the moral reasons for your imprisonment in the Circle:
“Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him. Thus spoke the prophet Andraste as she cast down the Tevinter Imperium, ruled by mages who had brought the world to the edge of ruin. Your magic is a gift, but it is also a curse. For demons of the dream realm, the Fade, are drawn to you and seek to use you as a gateway into this world.”
Greagoir starts by grounding your imprisonment in the action of mages from the Tevinter imperium, but ties this to the present through the constant potential for corruption. You are faced by your own ever-potential immorality.
If we agree that both the asylum and the Circle are prisons based in morality, we can now start looking at how they function to convince the inmates of their own immorality. Foucault proposes that there are techniques used in the asylum to basically brainwash inmates into believing that their imprisonment is for their own good, and for the good of society. The techniques that I’m going to focus on are:
Recognition by mirror is a technique used to convince the insane of their own madness, or mages of their own inherent potential for corruption. Foucault writes:
“Madness is made to observe itself, but in others: it appears in them as a baseless pretense - in other words, as absurd[…] The rift between presumption and reality allows itself to be recognised only in the object[…] Madness, as simple delirium, is projected onto others; as perfect unconsciousness, it is entirely accepted.” (p.153)
The premise of the technique is simple - if you are placed in a position where you judge another of your kind as insane (in the case of the asylum) or open to the potential of corruption (in the case of the magi), then you are ultimately judging that you yourself are insane or potentially corrupt.
In Foucault’s asylum this was done by pointing out the madness of others to the insane. This was particularly effective where they shared the same delusion. By accepting the insanity of others, you introduce the idea that people can be insane - and over time this works on your subconscious to make you realise that YOU could be insane.
My argument is that a similar process takes place in the Circle through the Harrowing.
Let’s recap the Harrowing. You are sent into the Fade. You kill a few wisps, and then you meet the first denizen - Mouse, who was once an apprentice just like you. Here’s your first conversation with him:
“Someone else thrown to the wolves, as fresh and unprepared as ever. It isn’t right that they do this, the Templars. Not to you, me, anyone…. Oh, it’s always the same, but it’s not your fault. You’re in the same boat I was, aren’t you?”(my emphasis)
Mouse immediately makes the connection between you and him: you’re both the same; young apprentices at the mercy of Templars. Once this connection has been made, Mouse begins to make the arguments that you yourself might make against the Chantry and the Templars’ oversight of the Circle. When you ask why Templars would put you through the Harrowing, Mouse replies:
“Because they’re sadistic bastards, that’s why, and I’m not talking about demons. Everyone must face the Harrowing because there’s a small chance a mage might become possessed and become an abomination. Thrown to the mercy of the demon when you’re at your weakest, for the safety of all!”
If you insist that abominations - the spectre of potential corruption that justifies mage imprisonment - are a danger, Mouse replies:
“But how many mages have met their fate in tests like this over the centuries? Don’t those lives matter as well? It’s either that or they turn you into a freak, a Tranquil who can’t be possessed but who also can’t feel anything, ever. The Circle is a prison, you have choices between joining and suffering various deaths of body or spirit. Remember that.”
Here, Mouse is acting as a spokesperson for your character’s internal doubts about their treatment in the Circle. You might find yourself agreeing, you might not - but the point is that Mouse has vocalised these arguments.
Later on, of course, you find that Mouse has been corrupted - he had a deal with the rage demon exchanging the souls of hapless apprentices for his own safety.
And then, in the moment of your victory against the rage demon - just when you think that you have proven that you are strong enough to avoid the demons - you find that you have been tricked by Mouse, who tells you that:
“The real dangers of the Fade are preconceptions, careless trust… pride.”
YOUR preconceptions, YOUR careless trust, YOUR pride. Mouse thought that he was strong enough to resist the demons. You thought that you were strong enough to resist the demons. By exposing you to Mouse’s corruption, you have been exposed to the potential of your own corruption. If you accept that all other mages are a threat because of this potential, you tacitly accept the reason for the Circle’s existence. You start to accept your own imprisonment.
The Harrowing does not just test your resolve - it weakens your faith in others’ ability to resist demons, and drives home the potential for all mages to become corrupted. This ultimately makes your character more likely to accept the justification for their confinement.
This revelation is reinforced by perpetual judgement.
Perpetual Judgement
“Madness is ceaselessly called upon the judge itself. But beyond this, it is at every moment judged from without… To be efficacious, this judgement must be redoubtable in aspect; all the iconographic apanage of the judge and the executioner must be present in the mind of the madman, so that he understands what universe of judgement he now belongs to. The décor of justice, in all its terror and implacability, will thus be part of the treatment…. Everything was organised so that the madman would recognise himself in a world of judgement that enveloped him on all sides; he must know that he is watched, judged, and condemned; from transgression to punishment, the connection must be evident, as a guilt recognised by all…” (p.154-155)
Returning to the description of the Circle in the mage origin again:
“But the Circle Tower is as much as prison as a refuge, the ever vigilant Templars of the Chantry watch over all mages, constantly alert for any sign of corruption.” (my emphasis)
Wherever you go, the Templars are there. Helmed, faceless - the physical representations of a law that you are living within. And those Templars are not just for show; they have power - they are both judge and executioner in the world in which you live. This is demonstrated in the Harrowing, when Greagoir tells you the consequences of failing:
“Know this, apprentice. If you fail, we Templars will perform our duty. You will die.”
And again, in the Fade, when Mouse tells you what happened to him:
“It’s fuzzy, that time before. They wake you up in the middle of the night and drag you to the Harrowing chamber, and then - the Templars kill you if you take too long, you see. They figure you failed and they don’t want something getting out. That’s what happened to me, I think.”
Templars are empowered by the law of the land to judge the corruption of mages, and to execute them or make them Tranquil if necessary. Mages have no escape, no right of appeal - no higher law to turn to. This is similar to the powers given to the asylum, as Foucault describes:
“The asylum as a juridical instance recognised no other. It judged immediately, and without appeal. It possessed its own instruments of punishment, and used them as it saw fit.” (p.155)
By living within this environment constantly - helmed Templars keeping watch everywhere you go, Templars who have the legal right to kill you or lobotomise you if they judge that you have become corrupt - you start to accept that it is necessary. Otherwise, why would the law of the land allow it? When you combine constant legal judgement with the technique of recognition by mirror, this starts to make sense. It becomes a justification. Abominations are dangerous. The law recognises this. I recognise this.
But do mages really think this way? Let’s go through a couple of examples…
Docile Mages: Wynne and Keili
Wynne, relatively high in the internal hierarchy of the Circle, is a perfect example of a docile mage. She has accepted the rationale behind the Circle. Given the length of time she has lived within the Circle, and her own acceptance of a position of power within the Circle hierarchy, this is not surprising.
When she talks to Alistair about the fact that he is Templar-trained, she expresses her support for their existence:
“The Templars serve a function, and a necessary one. If what has happened at the tower proves anything, it is that we mages can be dangerous… even to ourselves.”
She reiterates this point of view to Morrigan. Morrigan refers to the Circle as a ‘leash’ that she wears, and Wynne responds:<
“There are good reasons for the world to fear mages, even despite our best intentions.”
Wynne is not blind to the problems within the Circle, but she has become afraid of herself - of her own potential for corruption. This is most evident during a conversation with the Warden:
“The first time I saw an abomination, my blood turned to ice. It was months before the nightmares stopped. It was the knowledge that I could easily become one of them that frightened me most… One slip… all it takes is one slip, and everything you are is simply gone… replaced by madness.” (my emphasis)
Wynne has well and truly ‘recognised herself by mirror’ and accepted her own potential for corruption, as well as the potential for all mages around her.
Another mage who accepts the reasons for their confinement is Keili, whom you meet in the Chantry in the Tower during the Mage Origin. Keili expresses an extreme level of acceptance of the justification for their imprisonment, representing an extremely successful brainwashing:
“I recite the Maker’s blessing every day. It brings me peace in troubled times[…] It gives me hope that one day, the Maker will hear us. That maybe I’ll be forgiven, and my curse will be lifted… Magic causes such misery. It’s dangerous and vile and wicked. The Chantry must protect the world from us. Being born with something so terrible must be a punishment. I wish I could be rid of it.” (my emphasis)
And later, during the Tower quest, Keili continues to express her - brainwashed - view that magic is something dangerous and immoral:
“I keep thinking this is our punishment for being mages. That’s why the Templars have to… do away with us. Their swords are like… the sword of mercy that sent Andraste back to the Maker. We should let the Templars come. Only then can we be cleansed of our wickedness.”
Like I said above, Keili is an extreme example - but this represents the ‘message’ that is being given to mages in its purest form.
But all mages can’t believe this, right? What about Anders?
Foucault has something to say about this too.
Anders: A Non-Docile Mage
“But the [asylum] thereby generates an indifference; if the law does not reign universally, it is because there are men who do not recognise it, a class of society that lives in disorder, in negligence, and almost illegality… In one and the same movement, the asylum becomes… an instrument of moral uniformity and of social denunciation.” (p.149)
Not everyone is successfully brainwashed by the techniques used in the asylum. In some individuals, it pushes them the opposite way - towards extreme activism. Individuals who were not susceptible to the asylum’s power were removed from the rest of the population, so that they could not easily influence them:
“There were however, madmen who escaped from this movement and resisted the moral synthesis it brought about. These latter would be set apart in the heart of the asylum, forming a new confined population, which could not even relate to justice.” (p.157)
Now, let’s look at Anders. Anders is by no means entirely excluded from the brainwashing. When the party meets Wynne during Awakening, Anders expresses disbelief in the possibility of mages existing without the Circle:
Wynne: “The Libertarians wish to pull away entirely from the Chantry. And if they get enough support…”
Anders: “Pull away entirely? That’s madness. I hate Chantry oversight as much as the next mage, but they can’t just decide to leave. This is a recipe for disaster!”
Regardless, Anders is one of the freest mages we’ve witnessed in Ferelden. The Templars’ response? Solitary confinement, with the possibility of a swift judgement and execution. He tells you in Awakening:
“I escaped from the tower seven times. After the last time, they put me in solitary confinement for a year. Eventually, I’m sure they would have branded me a maleficar, true or not, and executed me.”
As Anders was proving to be resistant to the Chantry’s attempts to brainwash him in the Tower, they removed him from the population and put him in solitary confinement - for a year. This was not only because of his escape attempts, but also because of his fundamental disbelief in mage’s inherent immorality. As he continues in the same conversation:
“You know as well as I do, the problem is that mages are tolerated, barely. It’s like you need permission to be alive. There’s nothing a mage can do to prove himself. Everyone needs to be protected from you, the end. The Tevinter Imperium has a better way, but we know how that argument flies around here.”
Anders fundamentally rejects that mages are inherently immoral. He doesn’t disagree that there is potential for corruption, but argues against the blanket judgement of mages as inherently immoral. He’s removed from the population so that he can’t spread these dangerous ideas.
Anders represents a failure of the Circle, or the asylum, to achieve its ends. It’s no surprise that in Awakening he is branded a murderer by the Templars, who have no proof - they want him out of the way!
Conclusion
Foucault says that:
“Power produces; it produces reality; it produces domains of objects and rituals of truth. The individual and the knowledge that may be gained of him belong to this production.” (p.205)
Over the course of this essay I have tried to demonstrate how the Circle has many of the same characteristics as the asylum, as described by Foucault, and that its overall aim is to convince mages of their own potential for corruption - and for them to therefore accept their domination by the Chantry and the Templars.
The success of the Circle in achieving this is evident in Wynne, who argues for the existence of the Circle and the Templars. Because Wynne is so thoroughly brainwashed, she is allowed to leave the Circle and journey with the Warden.
Anders represents the failure of the Circle. Although he’s been exposed to the same messages, he has largely resisted them - and as a result, he is isolated from the other mages so that his dangerous ideas can’t catch on.
Both the success and failure of the Circle demonstrates its ultimate goal - to create docile mages who believe in their own corruption (shown in an extreme example by Keili). Circle Mages ultimately end up collaring themselves through their belief in the justification for the Circle, and a potentially powerful force in society - magic - is contained.
Thanks for reading, and feel free to leave me any feedback!
I will go through some of Foucault’s original writing, explain my understanding of it, and give examples of where I think it is played out in the Dragon Age universe.
All references are from The Foucault Reader, edited by Paul Rabinow.
I’m more than happy to take any feedback. :)
* If you haven’t heard of Foucault before, he was a French philosopher who wrote a lot of stuff about power. His basic theory was that the most insidious form of power is not physical strength, but the ability to get people to watch and judge themselves based on your criteria. Here’s his Wiki page.
A Prison of Morality
Let’s start with Foucault’s description of the invention of the asylum:
“The creation of the [asylum] was… a new solution. For the first time, purely negative measures of exclusion were replaced by a measure of confinement; the [undesirable] person was no longer driven away or punished; he was taken in charge, at the expense of the nation but at the cost of his individual liberty. Between him and society an implicit system of obligation was established: he had the right to be fed, but he must accept the physical and moral constraint of confinement.” (p.130)
Before the asylum, those who were not perceived as ‘normal’ were ignored, abused, or killed. The invention of the asylum gave them a place where they were relatively safe - they had shelter, food, and warmth. They could survive, relatively unmolested. The cost for this, however, was to accept their imprisonment - accept it not only physically, but also morally. That is, they had to understand that their imprisonment was for their own good as well as the good of others.
Let’s look at how it is described during the opening to the mage origin:
“On a cliff overlooking the dark waters of Lake Calenhad stands the tower fortress that is home to the Circle of Magi. This tower is the only place in Ferelden where mages may study their art among others of their kind. Within the high stone walls, the Circle practices its magic and trains apprentices in the proper use of their powers. But the Circle Tower is as much as prison as a refuge, the ever vigilant Templars of the Chantry watch over all mages, constantly alert for any sign of corruption.” (my emphasis)
The Circle of Magi clearly functions as a way of removing mages from everyday society, and limiting the use of magic - which I see as a disruptive force - to a place where it cannot be seen by normal citizens. Although it gives mages shelter, food, warmth, and even companionship with others of their own kind, they are nonetheless imprisoned because they cannot leave or live a free life.
But why does anyone stand for this? Mages are powerful, why do they allow it? And why does the rest of society think that this is a just way of treating fellow beings?
An excursion back to Foucault for a moment, where he continues with the idea that the asylum is fundamentally a moral domain:
“The asylum is a religious domain[…] a domain of pure morality, of ethical uniformity… the asylum must represent the great continuity of social morality[…] The asylum reduces differences, represses vice, eliminates irregularities. It denounces everything that opposes the essential virtues of society[…] The asylum sets itself the task of the homogeneous rule of morality, its rigorous extension to all those who tend to escape from it.” (pp.148-149)
Let’s compare this with the Chantry’s view on mages. The introduction to Dragon Age places the Chantry’s opinion on mages front and centre:
“The Chantry teaches us that it is the hubris of men which brought the darkspawn into our world. The mages had sought to usurp heaven, but instead they destroyed it. They were cast out, twisted and cursed by their own corruption. They returned as monsters, the first of the darkspawn. They became a blight upon the lands, unstoppable and relentless[…]”
The Chantry lays the blame for evil entering the world (in the form of darkspawn) squarely on the shoulders of mages. This lays the groundwork for the existence of the Circle by basing our entire understanding of mages in one immoral act that allegedly occurred in the past. From the start, we are judging mages with a moral eye. And this same theology is taught to the mages within the Tower - during the mage origins, you meet young apprentices being taught the Chant of Light in the library.
Furthermore, however, mages are constantly open to corruption through their connection with the Fade. During the Harrowing, Greagoir clearly articulates the moral reasons for your imprisonment in the Circle:
“Magic exists to serve man and never to rule over him. Thus spoke the prophet Andraste as she cast down the Tevinter Imperium, ruled by mages who had brought the world to the edge of ruin. Your magic is a gift, but it is also a curse. For demons of the dream realm, the Fade, are drawn to you and seek to use you as a gateway into this world.”
Greagoir starts by grounding your imprisonment in the action of mages from the Tevinter imperium, but ties this to the present through the constant potential for corruption. You are faced by your own ever-potential immorality.
If we agree that both the asylum and the Circle are prisons based in morality, we can now start looking at how they function to convince the inmates of their own immorality. Foucault proposes that there are techniques used in the asylum to basically brainwash inmates into believing that their imprisonment is for their own good, and for the good of society. The techniques that I’m going to focus on are:
- Recognition by Mirror; and
- Perpetual Judgement.
Recognition by mirror is a technique used to convince the insane of their own madness, or mages of their own inherent potential for corruption. Foucault writes:
“Madness is made to observe itself, but in others: it appears in them as a baseless pretense - in other words, as absurd[…] The rift between presumption and reality allows itself to be recognised only in the object[…] Madness, as simple delirium, is projected onto others; as perfect unconsciousness, it is entirely accepted.” (p.153)
The premise of the technique is simple - if you are placed in a position where you judge another of your kind as insane (in the case of the asylum) or open to the potential of corruption (in the case of the magi), then you are ultimately judging that you yourself are insane or potentially corrupt.
In Foucault’s asylum this was done by pointing out the madness of others to the insane. This was particularly effective where they shared the same delusion. By accepting the insanity of others, you introduce the idea that people can be insane - and over time this works on your subconscious to make you realise that YOU could be insane.
My argument is that a similar process takes place in the Circle through the Harrowing.
Let’s recap the Harrowing. You are sent into the Fade. You kill a few wisps, and then you meet the first denizen - Mouse, who was once an apprentice just like you. Here’s your first conversation with him:
“Someone else thrown to the wolves, as fresh and unprepared as ever. It isn’t right that they do this, the Templars. Not to you, me, anyone…. Oh, it’s always the same, but it’s not your fault. You’re in the same boat I was, aren’t you?”(my emphasis)
Mouse immediately makes the connection between you and him: you’re both the same; young apprentices at the mercy of Templars. Once this connection has been made, Mouse begins to make the arguments that you yourself might make against the Chantry and the Templars’ oversight of the Circle. When you ask why Templars would put you through the Harrowing, Mouse replies:
“Because they’re sadistic bastards, that’s why, and I’m not talking about demons. Everyone must face the Harrowing because there’s a small chance a mage might become possessed and become an abomination. Thrown to the mercy of the demon when you’re at your weakest, for the safety of all!”
If you insist that abominations - the spectre of potential corruption that justifies mage imprisonment - are a danger, Mouse replies:
“But how many mages have met their fate in tests like this over the centuries? Don’t those lives matter as well? It’s either that or they turn you into a freak, a Tranquil who can’t be possessed but who also can’t feel anything, ever. The Circle is a prison, you have choices between joining and suffering various deaths of body or spirit. Remember that.”
Here, Mouse is acting as a spokesperson for your character’s internal doubts about their treatment in the Circle. You might find yourself agreeing, you might not - but the point is that Mouse has vocalised these arguments.
Later on, of course, you find that Mouse has been corrupted - he had a deal with the rage demon exchanging the souls of hapless apprentices for his own safety.
And then, in the moment of your victory against the rage demon - just when you think that you have proven that you are strong enough to avoid the demons - you find that you have been tricked by Mouse, who tells you that:
“The real dangers of the Fade are preconceptions, careless trust… pride.”
YOUR preconceptions, YOUR careless trust, YOUR pride. Mouse thought that he was strong enough to resist the demons. You thought that you were strong enough to resist the demons. By exposing you to Mouse’s corruption, you have been exposed to the potential of your own corruption. If you accept that all other mages are a threat because of this potential, you tacitly accept the reason for the Circle’s existence. You start to accept your own imprisonment.
The Harrowing does not just test your resolve - it weakens your faith in others’ ability to resist demons, and drives home the potential for all mages to become corrupted. This ultimately makes your character more likely to accept the justification for their confinement.
This revelation is reinforced by perpetual judgement.
Perpetual Judgement
“Madness is ceaselessly called upon the judge itself. But beyond this, it is at every moment judged from without… To be efficacious, this judgement must be redoubtable in aspect; all the iconographic apanage of the judge and the executioner must be present in the mind of the madman, so that he understands what universe of judgement he now belongs to. The décor of justice, in all its terror and implacability, will thus be part of the treatment…. Everything was organised so that the madman would recognise himself in a world of judgement that enveloped him on all sides; he must know that he is watched, judged, and condemned; from transgression to punishment, the connection must be evident, as a guilt recognised by all…” (p.154-155)
Returning to the description of the Circle in the mage origin again:
“But the Circle Tower is as much as prison as a refuge, the ever vigilant Templars of the Chantry watch over all mages, constantly alert for any sign of corruption.” (my emphasis)
Wherever you go, the Templars are there. Helmed, faceless - the physical representations of a law that you are living within. And those Templars are not just for show; they have power - they are both judge and executioner in the world in which you live. This is demonstrated in the Harrowing, when Greagoir tells you the consequences of failing:
“Know this, apprentice. If you fail, we Templars will perform our duty. You will die.”
And again, in the Fade, when Mouse tells you what happened to him:
“It’s fuzzy, that time before. They wake you up in the middle of the night and drag you to the Harrowing chamber, and then - the Templars kill you if you take too long, you see. They figure you failed and they don’t want something getting out. That’s what happened to me, I think.”
Templars are empowered by the law of the land to judge the corruption of mages, and to execute them or make them Tranquil if necessary. Mages have no escape, no right of appeal - no higher law to turn to. This is similar to the powers given to the asylum, as Foucault describes:
“The asylum as a juridical instance recognised no other. It judged immediately, and without appeal. It possessed its own instruments of punishment, and used them as it saw fit.” (p.155)
By living within this environment constantly - helmed Templars keeping watch everywhere you go, Templars who have the legal right to kill you or lobotomise you if they judge that you have become corrupt - you start to accept that it is necessary. Otherwise, why would the law of the land allow it? When you combine constant legal judgement with the technique of recognition by mirror, this starts to make sense. It becomes a justification. Abominations are dangerous. The law recognises this. I recognise this.
But do mages really think this way? Let’s go through a couple of examples…
Docile Mages: Wynne and Keili
Wynne, relatively high in the internal hierarchy of the Circle, is a perfect example of a docile mage. She has accepted the rationale behind the Circle. Given the length of time she has lived within the Circle, and her own acceptance of a position of power within the Circle hierarchy, this is not surprising.
When she talks to Alistair about the fact that he is Templar-trained, she expresses her support for their existence:
“The Templars serve a function, and a necessary one. If what has happened at the tower proves anything, it is that we mages can be dangerous… even to ourselves.”
She reiterates this point of view to Morrigan. Morrigan refers to the Circle as a ‘leash’ that she wears, and Wynne responds:<
“There are good reasons for the world to fear mages, even despite our best intentions.”
Wynne is not blind to the problems within the Circle, but she has become afraid of herself - of her own potential for corruption. This is most evident during a conversation with the Warden:
“The first time I saw an abomination, my blood turned to ice. It was months before the nightmares stopped. It was the knowledge that I could easily become one of them that frightened me most… One slip… all it takes is one slip, and everything you are is simply gone… replaced by madness.” (my emphasis)
Wynne has well and truly ‘recognised herself by mirror’ and accepted her own potential for corruption, as well as the potential for all mages around her.
Another mage who accepts the reasons for their confinement is Keili, whom you meet in the Chantry in the Tower during the Mage Origin. Keili expresses an extreme level of acceptance of the justification for their imprisonment, representing an extremely successful brainwashing:
“I recite the Maker’s blessing every day. It brings me peace in troubled times[…] It gives me hope that one day, the Maker will hear us. That maybe I’ll be forgiven, and my curse will be lifted… Magic causes such misery. It’s dangerous and vile and wicked. The Chantry must protect the world from us. Being born with something so terrible must be a punishment. I wish I could be rid of it.” (my emphasis)
And later, during the Tower quest, Keili continues to express her - brainwashed - view that magic is something dangerous and immoral:
“I keep thinking this is our punishment for being mages. That’s why the Templars have to… do away with us. Their swords are like… the sword of mercy that sent Andraste back to the Maker. We should let the Templars come. Only then can we be cleansed of our wickedness.”
Like I said above, Keili is an extreme example - but this represents the ‘message’ that is being given to mages in its purest form.
But all mages can’t believe this, right? What about Anders?
Foucault has something to say about this too.
Anders: A Non-Docile Mage
“But the [asylum] thereby generates an indifference; if the law does not reign universally, it is because there are men who do not recognise it, a class of society that lives in disorder, in negligence, and almost illegality… In one and the same movement, the asylum becomes… an instrument of moral uniformity and of social denunciation.” (p.149)
Not everyone is successfully brainwashed by the techniques used in the asylum. In some individuals, it pushes them the opposite way - towards extreme activism. Individuals who were not susceptible to the asylum’s power were removed from the rest of the population, so that they could not easily influence them:
“There were however, madmen who escaped from this movement and resisted the moral synthesis it brought about. These latter would be set apart in the heart of the asylum, forming a new confined population, which could not even relate to justice.” (p.157)
Now, let’s look at Anders. Anders is by no means entirely excluded from the brainwashing. When the party meets Wynne during Awakening, Anders expresses disbelief in the possibility of mages existing without the Circle:
Wynne: “The Libertarians wish to pull away entirely from the Chantry. And if they get enough support…”
Anders: “Pull away entirely? That’s madness. I hate Chantry oversight as much as the next mage, but they can’t just decide to leave. This is a recipe for disaster!”
Regardless, Anders is one of the freest mages we’ve witnessed in Ferelden. The Templars’ response? Solitary confinement, with the possibility of a swift judgement and execution. He tells you in Awakening:
“I escaped from the tower seven times. After the last time, they put me in solitary confinement for a year. Eventually, I’m sure they would have branded me a maleficar, true or not, and executed me.”
As Anders was proving to be resistant to the Chantry’s attempts to brainwash him in the Tower, they removed him from the population and put him in solitary confinement - for a year. This was not only because of his escape attempts, but also because of his fundamental disbelief in mage’s inherent immorality. As he continues in the same conversation:
“You know as well as I do, the problem is that mages are tolerated, barely. It’s like you need permission to be alive. There’s nothing a mage can do to prove himself. Everyone needs to be protected from you, the end. The Tevinter Imperium has a better way, but we know how that argument flies around here.”
Anders fundamentally rejects that mages are inherently immoral. He doesn’t disagree that there is potential for corruption, but argues against the blanket judgement of mages as inherently immoral. He’s removed from the population so that he can’t spread these dangerous ideas.
Anders represents a failure of the Circle, or the asylum, to achieve its ends. It’s no surprise that in Awakening he is branded a murderer by the Templars, who have no proof - they want him out of the way!
Conclusion
Foucault says that:
“Power produces; it produces reality; it produces domains of objects and rituals of truth. The individual and the knowledge that may be gained of him belong to this production.” (p.205)
Over the course of this essay I have tried to demonstrate how the Circle has many of the same characteristics as the asylum, as described by Foucault, and that its overall aim is to convince mages of their own potential for corruption - and for them to therefore accept their domination by the Chantry and the Templars.
The success of the Circle in achieving this is evident in Wynne, who argues for the existence of the Circle and the Templars. Because Wynne is so thoroughly brainwashed, she is allowed to leave the Circle and journey with the Warden.
Anders represents the failure of the Circle. Although he’s been exposed to the same messages, he has largely resisted them - and as a result, he is isolated from the other mages so that his dangerous ideas can’t catch on.
Both the success and failure of the Circle demonstrates its ultimate goal - to create docile mages who believe in their own corruption (shown in an extreme example by Keili). Circle Mages ultimately end up collaring themselves through their belief in the justification for the Circle, and a potentially powerful force in society - magic - is contained.
Thanks for reading, and feel free to leave me any feedback!