So it's been a couple months since season 1 finished, and within discussions the criticisms I most often see with Essek's character in the animated series seem to narrow down to is feeling like he is being ridiculously stupid to serve the plot (i.e. telling Trent Ikithon anything about his mother's illness and teaching him to use the Beacon), decisions regarding his spy work (framing Verrat), and feeling as though his mother's illness added a twist to his motivations that seems fabricated to make him a more sympathetic villain. I do not agree with any of these criticisms and I want to explain why. (Besides the last one because that is entirely comprised of comparisons to the campaign and I want this analysis to stay focused on the animated series. I kind of get into it here though.)
Basically, I'm gonna make these counterarguments as an excuse to yap about Essek's character.
Quick disclaimer: I have watched the campaign, it is definitely influencing my opinions on Essek, but this will be animated series focused and spoiler free. Show only watchers you are safe here and I love you.
Criticism 1: Essek is too stupid
To start this off I am going to say this: yeah, he is being stupid. More unwise, really, but that distinction is impertinent. However, I do not believe this is detrimental to the story (in fact, I think it adds to it) and I also think it is completely in character. Not to mention, for those who argue he is far dumber than he was in campaign, this is congruent with the campaign's canon. This is not a change for the animated series specifically, at least the overarching narrative of it isn't.
For people familiar with the campaign, I do think it's important to take into account that when we are introduced to Essek's character it is much later into the story. We are basically getting the chance to find out how he ended up where he did when we meet him in campaign. We are also seeing this for the first time because we don't even find out the specifics of his deal made with the beacons. We just know it was him who did it. What we do know is that he has effectively trapped himself in a political hellscape, inadvertently caused a war (and is taking measures to try and end the war, which is something that is already beginning to play out in the animated series), and he acknowledges that he was in completely over his head (something he has realized in the animated series as well, but he's in too deep to turn it around at this point).
I think I cover everything else argued to be lazy-writing-Essek-Is-Stupid later in this analysis, so I will cover the Big Thing as I see it.
Why did he tell Trent about his mother's illness? Why did he teach him how to use the Beacon?
Well, first, let's consider the Beacon deal in the first place. Essek is obviously not allowed to study it extensively within the dynasty. I would presume he has attempted to do so in the past, only to be shut down or possibly even criticized for being heretical. I'm not going to get deep detail into Essek's relationship with the Luxon's faith and how the dynasty's theocracy culturally has shaped him, but it is important to note that he is ostracized socially for his lack of faith. He does not believe the Luxon is a god. In their society, he is an atheist to their religion specifically (as there are other gods that have provable existence within this world, so calling him an atheist is technically incorrect).
It is one of the first things The Bright Queen brings up to him. It is one of the first things they want us as the audience to know about him as a character. It is a defining trait for him for a reason. It is a huge motivator for his choices.
His relationship with his mother has tension due to his lack of faith, though Deirta's behavior toward it seems to be more pitying/borderline demeaning (constant reminders of how young he is, being called a child despite not being one due to his young age being exacerbated by his first life).
Verrat, the only other we see to be close to him, is also consecuted and believes in the Luxon. There seems to be a tenuous acceptance of his atheism by him, but he does not shy away from his own faith around Essek.
The point being, Essek is constantly shrouded by religious expectation that in the most extreme settings (death rituals) disturbs him and makes him uncomfortable. At it's worst, his blasphemy is met with hostility (his mother slapping him), but it is at the very least not arguable in any setting and is immediately shut down or spoken over.
He makes a deal with Trent Ikithon, presumably because he is an archmage and a renowned wizard like him. He knows the empire will be willing to study the beacon without religion superseding authority. He can speak freely without worrying of consequence for being heretical. In fact, Ikithon criticizes him for speaking of the Luxon in more religious context, which Essek confirms as proof that they will work well together. This, to me, reads as a subtle way of showing us Essek habitually speaking on Dunamancy with a level of faux faithful decorum rather than speaking his mind. Being able to do so free of consequence is new to him!
The deal is directly said to be Essek giving knowledge on Dunamancy to Trent in exchange for preserving a soul. Essek makes the mistake of making his reasoning for this clear to a man like Ikithon, yes, but if he doesn't know what they are studying, why they are studying it, and what the intended outcome is, then Essek would not be making much progress in his research and he is trying to get it done as quickly as possible. It's an unfortunate case of Essek handing it into the hands of a very corrupt political power, which, yes, he should have considered (I'm sure he did, the risk to him was worth it, but I don't think he knew the extent of those risks until the consequences began rearing their heads).
Ikithon, being a manipulative piece of shit that he is, does not immediately reveal to Essek why he is interested in studying the Beacon. Essek is, presumably under the false impression, that Ikithon is simply interested in studying what the Luxon truly is just as Essek has been. He's under the assumption he has found a like-minded wizard who is interested in the fact.
So when Trent tires him out, tests the waters by killing a man for their research (for the sake of extra counterarguments: this is a man who seems to be prisoner. Trent has government authority to some degree, there is plausible deniability that the prisoner was set for a death penalty regardless), Essek is more vulnerable to discussing his mother's ailment.
Essek has, quite literally, nobody who he can be completely 100% honest with. He is ostracized. He is shadowed by a religion he does not believe in. His mother cannot be spoken to pragmatically, he's unsure if he can trust anybody with his mother's illness, he doesn't trust anyone. He's completely in over his head. He has no idea what he's getting himself into. He is desperate, he is lonely, and he is young/naive. But he is not a child.
Trent feigns interest and sympathy for his mother, yes we as the audience know it is not genuine. He also is possibly the first person in Essek's life to validate his distrust in his government by admitting he has his own doubts about the empire.
It's the first time he is handed that kind of sympathy. It also is objectively, under normal circumstances, a smart move to have them both be able to use the Beacon if they are to research it together. It shares the load of using it. There is logic behind doing it that is there. Trent also carefully phrases it in a more altruistic manner.
Once he teaches Trent how to use the Beacon there is instant regret because he realizes very quickly the kind of man he is really dealing with, but the next time Trent speaks to him, he has dialed it back considerably. He assures Essek that he is a man of his word and thanks Essek for his attentiveness when it seems like the Beacon's power is getting out of his control.
For most of their time together, Trent is putting on a facade of kindness and care. He is treating Essek in the exact same way he teaches his students. He's pushing boundaries, assessing the desperate circumstances Essek is in, calculating what he can get away with, where he needs to soften his approach. This is the man who runs the Volstrucker program. Part of his job is grooming children and young adults. Essek is just one of the many, many victims to this.
Campaign watchers have even more understanding of how isolated and lonely Essek was. No spoilers campaign enjoyers will know what I mean when I say 12 PERSUASION. It checks out!
Criticism 2: Framing Verrat makes no sense/Verrat Realizing it was Essek who stole the Beacon makes no sense
There's a couple things here.
Number 1: The Bright Queen has Typhros
The show has brought this up multiple times. Verrat and Essek discuss her erratic and impulsive behavior. We as the audience know she has Typhros because of her nose bleeding after Deirta's execution. She is clearly not acting in a manner that she typically does, at least not in Verrat's opinion. Ignoring all outside of show canon knowledge we have on Typhros, through Essek's mother we can clearly see episodes can cause confusion, destructive action (throwing the model boat off the table in a moment of panic), and inhibit rational decision making.
It is, in many ways, comparable to Dementia. It is safe to assume, despite The Bright Queen's composure, she is not always in her right mind and is therefore susceptible to the illness' symptoms.
Naturally, no matter how aware of the origin Essek is (frankly I don't think he knows, I imagine he would not be able to hide his anger if he found out the hypocrisy of the queen being an exception to execution), The Bright Queen's behavior (notably her impulsiveness and impatience regarding the Beacon) is something he can take advantage of. And he does. As far as she is concerned, he is a spy. It is his job to find possible leads on how the Beacon was stolen, traces of traitors, intel, etc. He is entrusted in her closest circle.
Essek also has expressed no interest in a war between the dynasty and the empire. Verrat, despite his concerns, complacently follows her orders and similarly shuts down Essek's concerns with religious backing.
His lack of faith concerns her, absolutely, but is it enough yet for her to suspect treason of this caliber? Or is it more that she is concerned that his priority does not lie with finding the Beacon (as that is his job) over avoiding a war?
I think it is important to consider that she told Essek she was grateful that his mother's execution increased his faith, as immediately after, in her eyes, he began to take his duty much more seriously and finally reported intel on the Beacon's location.
With all of that in mind.
Verrat was the only survivor at the front lines. He never got to tell his side of the story. Only Essek's word was taken. Essek, the queen's spy delegated the task of finding the Beacon now not distracted by his mother's illness. Essek would know that the beacon was at the front lines if he, say, heard rumors the empire was using a suspiciously Beacon-sounding object as a weapon. And Verrat was the only survivor at the front lines. The Bright Queen does not know that Essek was the one who teleported him away. She may not even know he was physically present on the scene.
We don't know the exact lie Essek told, but there's enough information for that to be reasonably suspicious. It is realistic for Essek to twist in his favor. Even more so when The Bright Queen is currently afflicted by Typhros and may or may not be thinking clearly.
For all these reasons, I think it makes sense for The Bright Queen to take his word for it, and even to believe it.
There is also a chance that The Bright Queen knew Verrat was beginning to suspect her condition. She can, at least in this context, trust in Essek's motivations. He may be more willing to hide her affliction if he was willing to hide his mother's. I am unsure how exactly they are going to continue to characterize Leylas, so I'm not confident that was a motive behind her executing Verrat so easily, but it's worth mentioning it could also be a factor here.
Number 2: Verrat knows Essek very well. He has had multiple lives, is a close respected friend of Den Thelyss, and calls Essek's mother his mentor. Presumably, he has known Essek for possibly his entire life, if not most of it.
(Unrelated, but I would even go as far as to say that Verrat may have had a pseudo-parental role in Essek's life, especially with the absence of Essek's father, but that is an analysis for a different time)
Now we get to Verrat discovering Essek stole the beacons. Yes, it is completely reasonable for Essek to have discovered the Beacon was being used at the frontlines as a weapon had he gotten a lead. It was literally his job. So I can understand why some people would think it's strange that Verrat was so quick to accuse him in that moment, but let's look at this from Verrat's very limited perspective and see where his work stops checking out for him to suspect treason.
Essek is ordered to find out anything he can on the Beacon's location. He, presumably, gets a lead on the Beacon's whereabouts and follows it to the frontlines right before a battle. He verifies they have the beacon. Essek teleports behind Verrat, he says nothing of the Beacon, but instead teleports him and only Verrat away. (Teleport in D&D can transport up to 10 people. Maybe this isn't the case in the animated series, regardless Essek is a very powerful wizard and he made 0 effort to save anybody else). They watch as the Beacon is used to kill the entire fleet.
NOW. The Beacon in the dynasty is a culturally protected artifact and seems to be used only for religious ceremonies. We can concur from the fact that Essek had to go to the Assembly to research it that access to the Beacons is almost never given outside of these ceremonies. If it is, it would be incredibly limited and safeguarded.
It is, to me, safe to assume, nobody would ever have seen the Beacon used as a weapon in such a manner. Not even Essek approaches research on the Beacon with hypotheticals of how it can be used as a weapon, and even heretic non-believer in the Luxon god Essek is completely appalled and horrified by the insinuation that it would be used as one. It is never used in such a violent manner.
Essek knew it was going to be used as a weapon. He knew enough information to take him and Verrat to a far enough distance so neither of them would be effected by it. Essek gets intel like that.... how? From where? Rumors of the Beacon being used and the magic being perverted by the empire, possible, but enough to warrant him anticipating knowing without a doubt that it would kill Verrat?
So, Verrat, realizing this, wonders: How the actual fuck did Essek know that the empire having the Beacon would result in such a violent one-fell swoop of an entire fleet?
And when he asks, Essek is not able to figure out a lie elaborate enough to cover his bases. HE EVEN LOOKS AWAY IN SHAME! Verrat knows Essek hid his mother's Typhros. Verrat knows Essek is a heretic, unconsecuted and unfaithful to the Luxon. He knows dunamancy is his prowess and probably knows he wants to study it.
So, yeah. He would figure out Essek stole the beacon, I think!
Could Essek have lied his way out of it? Oh, I'm sure in other circumstances. But bear in mind, Essek is also at the throws of everything going on. He's panicking. Essek tends to run from his fears rather than face them. We're seeing that in the show little by little and more and more as it continues. Campaign watchers are much more familiar with his cowardice. This deal is much more out of his control than he ever thought it would be. He's realizing he has absolutely no control whatsoever. He's realizing he just gave the empire a horrific weapon that can wipe out an entire fleet of their soldiers. He went to steal the Beacon back and take it before it could be used as a weapon, but he was too late.
Because he got what he needed. He found a possible cure for Typhros. This deal no longer benefits him. He did not want a war to start. He has lost any trust he may have had in Trent, he knows what game he was playing now. But he was too late to grab it, he went to save Verrat in a panic, and then Verrat figured it out and Essek was put in the precarious position of his own doing of either admitting to treason or possibly getting another chance to save his mother's life, something only he knows how to do.
He takes the latter because at this point it is obvious where his priorities lie. He does not anticipate his mother overhearing. He does not anticipate her execution. He asks her why she would say something, and it becomes clear that his mother is trying to protect him and her dying wish is for him to get the beacon back.
So, he frames Verrat. All the cards line up for him to play it out like that in his favor. He could confess, sure, but he's the one with the most knowledge on the whereabouts of the Beacon, so he is the best suited for getting it back. He probably doesn't trust anybody else to do it. He also probably didn't want to die.
None of these are excuses for what he did, but they are reasons for why framing Verrat was a necessary evil in his eyes.
I think Essek's behavior makes a lot of sense. I think his actions and consequences do a lot of legwork in the story when it comes to the worldbuilding and establishing all of the pieces in the puzzle that is the war between The Kryn Dynasty and The Dwendalian Empire.
Essek is frustrating to watch because we, as the audience, are given multiple perspectives. We know Trent Ikithon is a horrible man. We are shown how corrupt the Empire is constantly. We also understand that Essek is not a good person. His hubris is making him dig his own grave deeper and deeper. He's our front row ticket to watching the sunk-cost fallacy in real time.
That frustration is a good thing! It's because he's well-written that we want to shake him around a little to kick some sense into him.
