Does Terisa have leprosy 2?

[Skyweir]

Well we needed a MN topic .. I just realised that in the old board I was always concerned that the MN topic pages exceeded the Gap pages!! Just a weird thing I had going back then .. anyway ..

Did Terisa have leprosy too?

[danlo]

Maybe severe identity crisis and inferiority complex constitutes somekind of leprosy of the mind?

[Skyweir]

good thought ..

.. and a very novel approach to the question .. I like it!!

Teresa did experience a numbness regarding herself and her existence .. or rather .. her perception of her non-existence .. I will be back to explore this intuitive and probing concept later ..

[Guest]

No!!!

(You don't really want me to go through all my reasons again do you? )

~MsMary~

[MsMary]

Hmm...I seem to have posted as "Anonymous".

Good thing I am in the habit of signing my posts.

~MsMary~

[Skyweir]

.. Well I say to stimulate some healthy discussion we think of something controversial that might spark some response .. How about ... Eremis was really the victim here .. infact I think that he was just really misunderstood .. He thought that power was all important and for some reason he just wanted it .. He could have been a good guy and anyway he did have a sense of humour .. and that goes a long way ..

ok so rip in if you dare ..

[MsMary]

Yeah, right!!

Eremis was a creep! All he cared about was power and he didn't care who he hurt to get to the top and have the most power. He was the scum of the earth.

~MsMary~

[Skyweir]

but does all that really make him the bad guy?? ...

he just didn't appreciate there was such a thing as life without power .. Really is not this the fault of his parents for not teaching him to revere the simple things in life???

Or maybe even is his society to some degree responsible for depriving him of his share of power??

the man is being crucified for having charisma?? .. oh wait .. who was that other guy who had charisma and craved power and wanted to rule the Universe .. mmm a little Austrian fellow wasnt it?? Do you think Eremis was truly evil?? I believe the Nazi regime was evil incarnate?? But Eremis??

What would qualify as an 'evil' (philosophical) in MN?? VAgel .. was he evil?? That one slaughter was truly disturbing wasnt it?? YOu know the one at the end of aMRT .. I forget where that was .. but it was the epitomy of errgghh *shudder* .. yuk .. wasnt it?

What about Lebbick was he evil?? Or not as nearly scum of the earth that Eremis was asserted to be?? What about Joyse himself ..? does he share or was he in any way culpable in the losses of Mordant etc ..? Or is evil just too strong a word in these circumstances??

Just some additional food for thought .. and for some a bit of bait ..

tuck in if you have the stomach to ..

[danlo]

Lebbick was accosted from all sides; from the memory of the Alend pig who raped and tortured his wife, from his wife's mere existence, by his responsibilites, by Joyce--by the matter of Terisa--by Eremis setting him up w/his mistress--a noble man caught in the middle of some, apparently, very evil machinations. Festen and the Cadwals were a nasty, nasty bunch, Vagel was sick and obsessed w/himself and his discoveries, they and any1 who aligned themselves w/Eremis especially the pervert, Master Gilbur, were inherently evil. Eremis was the worst of them all setting it all up, using people, accusing Geraden of murder, implicating Nyle, routing Domne, destroying the Termigan's stronghold, letting demon children loose on the Perdon, dropping rocks from the sky and on and on--and responsible 4 the horrific slaughter. Ememis was the Foul of MN. Joyce is another matter...life is NOT a game of hopboard!

[Skyweir]

Joyce is another matter...life is NOT a game of hopboard!

very nicely answered ..

[aliantha]

Yes, Danlo, nicely done....

The difference between Eremis and Foul is that nobody would be even remotely willing to sleep with Foul. Foul's evil is in-your-face; Eremis is the master of cunning and manipulation, the slimeball. Eww. Eww eww eww. Just thinking about Eremis makes me want to go and wash my hands....

[MsMary]

I am adding my agreement to your reply, danlo.

I see Eremis as truly evil and manipulative, as I said above, not caring who he destroyed to reach his goals...even his allies!

Lebbick was a basically good man who was trying to do his duty and became a victim of the circumstances. He was set up in so many ways, as danlo points out

(Then again, I am reminded of the musical play "Good." Anyone ever hear of this one? It was about Nazi Germany, about a man who was basically a "good" man, but ended up doing evil as a Nazi because he was "just doing his job"...just doing as he was ordered in order to serve his country.)

~MsMary~

[Skyweir]

Eremis doesn't have that excuse

.. even if it were accepted as a credible excuse in such a situation ie:Nazi Germany/holocuast .. in reality an awful lot of nazis escaped trial/justice .. because they claimed they were just subordinates .. following orders given by their superiors .. the fact that some of them did it very creatively and extemely well/pedantically even .. isnt often scrutinised .. when they claim this as their excuse.

Morally .. the question still remains .. what is the extent of their guilt and involvement in Crimes Against Humanity?

Nazi Germany? evil incarnate? I'm going with a definite yes .. a truly evil regime.

Eremis? Evil incarnate?
.. He was the mastermind .. self-serving .. prepared to use and abuse those who stood in his way .. even mass slaughter .. if need be

.. mmm .. okey day ..

[MsMary]

Eremis doesn't have that excuse

Yes, I agree, Skyweir. But that play did come to mind, for some reason.

~MsMary~

[Skyweir]

actually that play sounds extemely interesting .. and actually it does fit well here in this discussion ..

it embodies that whole dilema of what is good .. and how accountable are those who claim basic goodness in times when they are compelled by external forces to commit evils (philosophical evils).

How would have been to be on the other side of the equation .. where you are a subordinate in such a regime .. and your compliance is 'expected'.

This is a question I find most perplexing .. I guess .. if employed by such a regime you may well have to do things you dont like .. ie:combattants face a wide range of situations they may not like but must perform .. but 'crimes against humanity' .. wow .. something just doesnt sit well in me .. to accept .. 'had no choice .. I was just doing my job' type of rationale

Its difficult .. to walk in anothers shoes and .. fairly judge .. maybe its almost impossible. I remember writing a paper on the subject of 'Cannibalism' .. the consensus of opinion was .. well it comes down to the simple fact .. 'survival of the fittest' .. or 'strongest' as in reality it was more often about.

I could not concur with this rationale .. To me it came down to choice. For example .. we are lost at sea .. no food no water .. and a tasty little cabin boy (it was usually the cabin boy) .. Usually he was the youngest .. the weakest (least able to offer much resistance) .. Yes it was regarded a convention of Maritime Law .. to draw straws/or someother means of selection . In this practice .. I have less criticism .. but all in all ... to me it came down to whoever was chosen .. fair or no .. was selected because those who fed from him .. did so because they held the opinion that their life was of greater value than that of the weakest member .. When another party deems it necessary to 'kill' and does not involve the victim in this deliberation in any way .. imo it is the crime: murder.

However all that may be excusable in situations of early Maritime experience .. where ship wrecks were more common .. but more recently in the Ukraine .. during the end of the cold war .. cases of cannibalism emerged .. as a result of the population starving.

There .. the mother figure (2 cases recorded) .. killed (and roasted in this one case) and ate her 9 month old baby .. and in another case an older child .. and in yet another a spouse .. The woman who had roasted her 9 mth old child had done so only partially and was found with the partially consumed body of the child on the kitchen table and the woman was discovered out of her mind.

Many other there were found having died and survived eating grass, roots .. rats, vermin and anything they could get there hands on .. but not there own biological offspring. Many would far rather watch their offsprings painful demise .. and bury them .. or eat flesh of the deceased body than .. kill to feed their own need.

So there appears to be 2 rationales at play .. and undoubtedly more .. I forget a lot of my original reasoning .. but I recall that to choose another to survive oneself .. was not only a most serious ethical question and dilema but that there were no right accepted under Natural or Universal Law that could support/condone .. such action .. but to be egalitarian .. it does rely heavily upon individual circumstances.

thats why the question of 'evil' and 'good' is an interesting one ..

[danlo]

as in the true story Alive and depicted in the movie of the same name, 4 xample. The last 3 or 4 posts reminded me of Nyle, 4 some odd reason...

[MsMary]

I'm not familiar with that story, danlo.

~MsMary~

[Skyweir]

Alive .. is a story of cannibalism .. well a plane crash really .. and the survivors .. through need ate from the flesh of the deceased .. the Landed in the Andes or some mountain range .. and it was freezing .. so it was like carving frozen meat off a carcass .. and now .. ewwww .. I am grossing myself out ..

way too much detail .. anyhoo .. does that ring any bells??

<hope I can sleep after that most disturbing mental image>

my memory is a little rusty now .. was Nyle cannibalistic?? or was there a suggestion of him being in anyway .. gross??

I remember him being a weakling .. and feeling bad about being responsible for putting Geraden and Terisa in jepody (sp?) .. or something like that .. just cant remember Nyle so well ..

[danlo]

Ms Mary said:

Lebbick was a basically good man who was trying to do his duty and became a victim of the circumstances. He was set up in so many ways, as danlo points out

--Cannibalism aside:The reason Nyle came up, in my mind, after the last 3 posts on page 1 of this topic is that I believe Nyle was basically a good man who became a victim of circumstances 2. One of the most wonderful places 2 live in Mordant appears 2 b Domne-Nyle's father is a good and wise man, Quiss is a great anchor 2 a wonderful household, every1 gets along in the village, there seems 2 b more peace in Domne than anywhere else and all his bothers are good men. Maybe Nyle didn't have the opportunities or the attributes of his brothers: not as strong as Tholden, not as popular as Artagel, not as close 2 King Joyce & Queen Madin as Geraden and not as goodlooking as Stead, but he was taught great morals and as far as love and living arrangements go--literally "had it made". Every1 else is busy doing things: running the village, bumbling around the Congery, womanizing or swordplaying. Nyle is sort of the 4gotten kid who, left on his own, beats himself up by not knowing where he fits in in the scheme of things, has a bone 2 pick w/King Joyce 4 overlooking him, is madly in love w/a Princess he knos he'll never get and is pissed that Elega was almost betrothed 2 Geraden.
--Many of the characters in Mordant's Need r used by King Joyce as "Hopboard pieces" w/o them knowing it, but Nyle isn't nescessarily a game piece--he bcomes the proverbial "pinball" in the book. Yes he is basically a good person but once he attempts 2 fit in2 the scheme of things EVERY1 uses his weaknesses 4 their own good and events always end up hurting him. Poor Nyle! Used by Elega, literally blackmailed and threatened by Prince Kragen, beaten up by Geraden, ignored by Joyce, misunderstood by Terisa (4 awhile), faces Lebbick's wrath, used 2 lure Terisa away so the King's Monomach can attack her, set up by Eremis 2 totally discredit Geraden, abducted as bait by Eremis and heaven knows what horrible Master Gilbur did 2 the poor boy!!! **shudder**.
--Blinded by a love he can never have, convinced that Joyce doesn't like him, is crazy, and doesn't give a rat's arse about his Kingdom, and having no idea where he fits in. Events and people exploit all this, spinning his head completely around so he has no ideal of what's going on-portrayed as a rat and a really bad guy. Nyle wears his heart and his emotions on his sleeve only 2 have it handed back 2 him "bent, folded and mutilated". IMO Joyce REALLY messed up on/this 1!!! Tho Joyce is portrayed as part hero/part villian @ the end of the 2 books-if u look @ the way he treated and allowed Nyle's good heart 2 b abused the way it was--no amount of apologizing can ever make up 4 that and Joyce really IS a villian!!! King Dastard, King Bastard--checkmated by his own hand! Boo, hiss! Joyce is a CREEP! or as they say in The Wizard of Id comic strip "The King is a FINK!" --Is that what u've been SO patiently waiting 4 Ms Mary? Well there u go!

[arabisha]

If leprosy=the pain, insecurity, guilt whatever that keeps one from accepting health/the Land then no she didn't have it. What I mean is that Terisa didn't have any trouble accepting the reality of Mordant. She was troubled for sure but it wasn't in direct opposition to Mordant to (her access to the horns.) She was like a child in a lot of ways.
TC said that leprosy was the fact of his existence. To accept the Land meant death (as he percieved it) because it meant throwing out the law of survival he knew and trusting something that seemed too beautiful to be true. He had been taught to fear his own dreams. He did not trust his own mind. Anyone who has ever had to deal with this knows the problems it causes because it feels like your foundations are wiped out.
Terisa feared that she was not real if I remember right. If she could have articulated it, would her "dream" be to be of substance? If so, she did not fight it coming to pass. She didn't have death hanging over her head. In this sense she was not her own worst enemy. She had it far easier than Covenant did since most of her struggles were external not internal.