Foul the Good Guy/Creator

[Rukh]

I am spinning off from the another post here; subject was the intimation from SRD about the Creator. Someone had broached the idea that Foul might be the "good guy" of the real story between he and the Creator. One of the replies sought to show that this could not be true, based on Foul's behavior in the past. My specualtion is that there is no simple answer here; Foul may be every bit as vile as he appears, but it is possible that the Creator may have greater culpability in the suffering of the Land. I keep talking about how many echoes I find of Gnostic thought in the Chronicles, and this would be another great example. In the Gnostic view, the Creator/s/Archons can be both "good" and "evil'. They set the limits, they defined, what these things mean when they created the worlds. Therefore Foul could be a rebel against divine tyrrany, but still be completely corrupted by the fanaticism that motivates him. Look at it this way; Lord Foul is guilty of following his hatred, but the Creator is far more guilty, in my opinion. He admitted in the first chronicles that he acted against the interest of love and beauty when he alowed his outrage at Foul to cause him to act impulsively and cast Foul down into the Earth. By doing this he caused the greatest harm to the thing that he most loved. In my opinion this is all just another way of saying that Foul is a part of the Creator. And it is appeaing that there is some macrocosmic link between Covenant, Foul, and the Creator. I beleive that what we are seeing at work here, is SRD development as a thinker and myth-maker. One of the more disturbing aspects of theological/cosmological thought is that when persued far enough we almost always end up facing the least comforting of all thoughts; namely, that there a dark secret at the heart of creation. The motifs of dualism, such as postulating a good and evil god, as in the Land's myth of the Creator, and his shadow/ brother, is an attempt to escape the estimation that dark and light are intrinsic to the process of creation, and that any act of the Creator always evokes his shadow, because the shadow is Him. I think that is why so much of Despite is characterized by self-loathing, and contempt for life. You will notethat Foul's view is not merely of power for its own sake, but the excercise of power as an act of rebellious hatred for Creation. He speaks with the assured contempt on someone who knows something, (or believes he knows something) about the true nature of Creation. This is his darkness, and his consuming passion...

[Sheriff Lytton]

Well, if I'd been trapped somewhere I didn't belong for many a millenia and I couldn't die, then I suppose I'd try just about anything to escape, no stragety too deperate, no price too high to pay, etc.

However the story turns out, this is a remarkably fertile area for a twist in the tale.

[lurch]

..What is it about Life that is a dark secret? What is the ultimate paradox about Life..that nobody wants to speak of.,,come face to face with..that The Lord Worms Crawl in and Worms Crawl Out knows something about?
No,,Lord Darker Than Blue is more than a Shadow of the Creator. He has quite a few more dimensions than that.
...SRD shows you the Twist...oh oh, WARNING: YET,, ANOTHER META PHOR!...look at the twisted logic of Roger trying to get guardianship of his mother Joan. Even the Sheriff found a moral equivacation to " go along with" what Roger requested...But Linden had it as all wrong rite from the start...and Roger proved it to be so.
...Sure,,Lord Foul as Victim,,,( would SRD actually duplicate the Angus Thermopyle characterization?),,mite be a card played by Foul or any of his followers,,out of being fooled or ignorance,,but there many more cards in the deck than that.
...No,, this series is more indepth than a Shadow.
...Its clear as day already stated...Will Linden sacrifice the Land for her son?.Consider this offer..

Spoiler

Break the arch of time,and I'll send you and jerry back before Roger ever showed up

.Thats a FOULIAN proposition in itself. Thats a bargain offered in black in white with no mention of the Gray. Thats where Foul wants Linden to be. She panicked in despair once already,,,will she do it again,,or has she learned from it?..ie...trust that the deputies have had alot of time at the shooting range...Shes aware,,and thats why ever decision she makes is frot with worry....MEL

[finn]

[b]Rukh:[/b]

One of the "nays" was me and I still hold IMO, that Foul cannot be a good guy. I think the catalogue of his actions over millenia is too great, the work of himself and his minions is so malicious that he simply cannot be a good guy!

However your posts did spark a couple of thoughts. One was the need for impurity to be used to strengthen, as in an alloy. Pure gold is very malleable; weak one might say. White gold is far stronger for the inclusion of an "impurity". Perhaps that's the role Foul plays within the overall creation of the land, maybe it needed despite as a balance to allow it to exist.

The second thing that occurred to me (and you'll have to bear with me here) was a reminder of why I like this series so much: it's elevating the genre. By this I mean, I loved LOTR but it is very two dimensional, all good guys are good and all bad guys are bad and corruption is absolute. There's no Orc somewhere struggling to reconcile a good streak in himself, or a Gandalf copping a quick look at Arwen's bum as she bends over (or Arwen copping a look at Boromir's pouch for that matter)! No, good and evil are defined and there's the attraction, we can clearly identify and be identified with either good or bad.

What SRD has done is add the third dimension where the main protagonists have to make choices of what is right and wrong; it's not so obvious so they and we, have to think about it. Because there is that need for choice each time, it's acceptable that thas no-one's perfect and therefore sometimes it'll go wrong, sometimes drastically wrong (Lena). But after a wrong decision/action/choice, the next choice can still be right

What does this have to do with the thread? Well it underlines to me that SRD has already changed the rules by making his characters capable of both good and evil, by their actions and by others reactions. Clearly Mhoram understood the duality of being human, it defined his wisdom but also became a statement of the availability in THIS fantasy world of redemption. So the IDEA that Foul could indeed be a good guy is within the realm of possibility; hell, we have the ur-viles as allies!

Myself I think not, but his role could be more benign if interpreted as a necessary evil or perhaps as the anvil on which things are shaped. Lurch's last comment about the choice of Linden echo's back to the choices Foul has presented TC and indeed, Drool Rockworm and the Ravers may have acted as a result or choices offered by Foul rather than being ordered to do things by him.

However this defence did not work at Nuremburg

[CovenantJr]

I wrote a fan fic about this in the Hall of Gifts [/self promotion]

I think originally heard this suggestion from Tom C a while back, and it stuck with me. I don't think Foul is the "good guy" (that point of view becomes more difficult to argue with each successive series) but I'm entirely open to the possibility that the Creator is not as holy as we might assume.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Doesn't foul specifically state that given enough time, Covenant will undoubtedly come to all of the same conclusions he did? Maybe I'm misremembering...

[drew]

.. I'm entirely open to the possibility that the Creator is not as holy as we might assume.

Well, the Creater deffinatly takes risks. He was banking a lot on Covenant.
One thing that eluded me at the end of the 1st chrons, is his "..Creators are too powerfull, and powerless for despair.."Meaning that he can't fix his World's Problems without destroying it, but on the other-hand, he can always make a new World if he pleases.

So maybe that's were the Creator is..maybe he gave up!!

[CovenantJr]

That occurred to me too.

"This is too much like hard work. To hell with it, Foul can have the thing."

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Hmmm... well, you could go freudian with this. Creator as the Super-ego, Law, order etc, Foul as the ID, and Covenant as the acting ego forced to resolve the two conflicting forces.

[Rukh]

This is a reply to JemCheeta's observation about Foul's final viturpations in the first series. Indeed, when Foul was bested he commented that Covenant's Unbelief, and his resolution to combat Despite were only a stage in his development. Of course, this could be typical "Foulian" prophecy designed to shepard his listener along the path he desires. But, still, with recent developments it is interesting to speculate...My gut feeling on all of this is that if Covenant and Foul are not exactly the same person, than they are linked in some fundamental way. Now, I would like to point out that this is not just a reiteration of the "internal landscape" idea. Though that is one useful way of looking at the existence of Foul, and the Land, and the Creator, I think that it is only a stage in understanding it, very much like Covenant's original stance of Unbelief. Rather I look at these connections as intersections of realities; it isn't a question of saying "Foul is just an extension of Covenant." I think it is a question of different echoes of the same self-existent realities. But, having said that, this is the sum of my current theories on these ideas. The three fundamental characters of the story are Covenant, the Creator, and Lord Foul. They are essentially the same being expressed in different ways. The Creator is roughly defined against Covenant as his creative powers, as defined especially by the book that he wrote in his golden days with Joan. Lord Foul is reflected in Covenant as not just his leprosy, but the consciousness of bitterness and hatred that arose from Covenant's loss...
Okay, on to the next idea. I have pointed out, at length, the similarities between the Chronicles, and the ancient Gnostic beliefs, and other beliefs that are linked to some of the lesser known aspects of Judaeo-Christian concepts. This time I am thinking about the Elohim. In the Chronicles they are defined as pure Earthpower, that nonetheless, stand beyond the Law. In the Hebrew myths from which the word Elohim is derived, the Elohim are the other gods of heaven; at least this was the original idea before the Hebrews developed into monotheists. I think that it shows remarkable insight on SRD's part to portray these creatures as fundamentally aloof and uncaring about anything but the dictates of their Weird. The angels, or the hosts of heaven, in Hebrew legends are like this as well. There is an old tradition in the Hebrew, and later Gnostic thought, about angels that were cast not into Hell, which was an idea that really didn't exist for the ancient Hebrews, but into the Earth. The legend says that God had appointed certain angels as Watchers over the Earth, and that these Angels grew enamored of humanity, and descended to mate with them, and teach them the arts of war and magic. In his anger God essentially said, "If you are so eager to involve yourself, to loose yourself, in humanity and the Earth, then let this be your punishment; that you will be bound unto the Earth until the end of days." In this I am reminded also of Lord Foul. His tampering with the Earth was not motivated by lust for humanity, (at least not so far as we can tell), but it is very similar. And, we know that there have been Elohim that have been bound to the service of the Earth, very much against their will.
Again, I am not defending Foul. But, I say this now, and I believe that this last series will prove me right. The essential issue with Foul will be revealed to be the his secret connection to creation, and the fact that the Earth is his prison...

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Why would Foul totally abandon all ethical means of conduct? he is obviously dedicated to despair and pain....

[CovenantJr]

I hadn't really noticed until Gart pointed it out to me recently, but Foul doesn't seem to lie. He's the Despiser, a personification of malice, but he (as far as Gart and I could recall) never actually utters anything he knows to be untrue.

I just though that was interesting.

[Rukh]

I am a bit puzzled by the next to last post on this.I never said anything about Foul even being capable of "ethical" conduct. If you were were referring to the fallen angel idea, I only brought it up because of certain intimations in the Foul/Creation story about Foul being responsible for the creation of certain dark aspects of Creation. We have gone back and forth about whether or not Foul ever chose to be who or what he was; it might serve us to point out, because of the importance of paradox in these stories, that the truth of Foul's nature might somehow encompass elements of both ideas.
And,yes, it is interesting to not that he never seems to have actually lied...

[Variol Farseer]

I hadn't really noticed until Gart pointed it out to me recently, but Foul doesn't seem to lie. He's the Despiser, a personification of malice, but he (as far as Gart and I could recall) never actually utters anything he knows to be untrue.

I just though that was interesting.

Actually, Foul lies all the time — by omission. He tells people just enough of the truth to mislead them.

The closer to the truth, the better the lie, and the truth itself, when it can be used, is the best lie.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

That's an absolutely excellent quote there....

[firelion]

Could be that the Creator fears that Foul will soon gain release and he has gotten the hell out of Dodge befor Foul can open a can on him.

[CovenantJr]

I hadn't really noticed until Gart pointed it out to me recently, but Foul doesn't seem to lie. He's the Despiser, a personification of malice, but he (as far as Gart and I could recall) never actually utters anything he knows to be untrue.

I just though that was interesting.

Actually, Foul lies all the time — by omission. He tells people just enough of the truth to mislead them.

The closer to the truth, the better the lie, and the truth itself, when it can be used, is the best lie.

Your pedantry is beginning to grate. I never said Foul is a fine and upstanding citizen of the universe. I know he omits, but he doesn't speak untruth.

[finn]

I've just read the Kastenessen thread and it occurred to me that maybe Foul is not destined to be the primary bad guy in this chronicle.

That being the case he may have a role to play as a reluctant ally. Kastenessen may be the bad guy, he's the one with all the bad mates, Merewives, Skurj, Arguhle, Croyel etc. and not forgetting the Elohim.

Perhaps Foul will be motivated to ally himself so as to be able to eventually achieve his own objectives.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

Like how he made sure they brought down Drool in LFB?

[Usivius]

ads, no. I truly believe that, as with all the TC stories thus far, Foul has been the master manipulator. I don't beleive he feels anything is out of his control, whether directly or (more commonly) through manipulation wrought over thousands of years of shrewd planning.
He IS THE bad guy in this series, but, like that past, he is not seen much, except through the feeling of impending doom and despair.