“You can’t just go around murdering people. There are RULES, Nimona.”
Supremely significant to understanding the importance of this quote is that the speaker was just identified a page or two earlier by Nimona as “Ballister Blackheart, the biggest name in supervillainy.” Nimona is a self-professed enormous fan of his work. The very name itself strongly suggests a path of villainy. And yet, Nimona’s suggested strategy of engaging general chaos in the form of widespread acts of arson, killing the king, and usurping the throne is met with the unexpected admonition about following rules. Nimona is bewildered, insisting that an elemental aspect of the entire ideological foundation of villainy is that rules are meant to be broken and followed. Ballister’s subversion of Nimona’s expectations set up the ironic framework by which the entire book operates. Rules do exist, but very often those rules are written not in the service of equality and fair play, but for the exact opposite reason. Many of the institutions guiding the rules of society actually operate in ways that are counterintuitive to the guiding philosophy of their rules. This ironic inversion of expectations becomes essential to the plot.
“Jaderoot? The Institution’s using jaderoot? It’s a very rare, very poisonous plant, and it’s pretty much only used in dark sorcery. The Institution outlawed it a long time ago. And yet these plans suggest they’ve somehow got a large amount of it.”
The entity to which Ballister is referring here is officially known as the Institution of Law Enforcement & Heroics. With a name like that, citizens naturally assume it is a force for good. And yet, accumulating a huge stockpile of something they themselves have declared to be so dangerous seems an unlikely strategy for an organization that actually is a force for good. The very fact that a man admired for his super-villainy is concerned about the potential proliferation of something as dangerous as jaderoot does not seem to jibe with the standard duality of good versus evil. At every point along the narrative trek of the novel, this ironic gap becomes an essential part of the story. The book explores the possibility that agencies of evil sometimes engage in actions that ultimately produce positive consequences. Likewise, so do agencies of good often produce negative consequences. This ironic divide is centered within the story upon Ballister’s discovery that the Institution for Law Enforcement and Heroics seems to be doing a very bad thing.
“Go back to bed. The monster injured you too. You need your rest.”
“Don’t call her that.”
“M’lord?”
“She’s not a monster.”
When Nimona first introduces herself to Ballister she suddenly changes from a female human being to a shark, informing him that she is a shapeshifter. He replies that she might have mentioned this fact before demonstrating it but takes it in stride and admits that such a talent could prove useful in her bid to become his sidekick. His initial reaction had been to reject this desire on the basis that he has no need for a sidekick. What he meant, obviously, was that he has no need for a sidekick who can’t transform their physical being. The idea of transformation and appearing to be one thing while actually being something else is of great thematic importance. The “monster” which is being referred to here is Nimona and Ballister is very condemnatory because he knows this doctor has no real knowledge of Nimona and therefore is in no position to pass such a judgment. The theme of not actually being what other people assume is given a twist when it turns out that the doctor is actually Nimona in disguise after shifting shape. The castigation of Nimona as a “monster” by Nimona herself appearing as someone she does not turn the issue of prejudice inside out. The situation effectively raises questions about Nimona’s self-esteem relative to whether she actually views herself as a monster. Ballister adamantly rejects the doctor’s characterization of Nimona as a monster while the whole time it is Nimona making that accusation speaks to the complicated nature of how judging others unfairly can negatively impact their own judgment of themselves.
