Jeremiah's future

[shadowbinding shoe]

If you think I am comparing Jeremiah to a car, you are being disingenous. In fact, I did not even make a comparison. I demonstrated the difference between motive and coincidence. Which I've exhaused the ways of explaining now.

Sorry if I read you wrongly. The thing is you talk about coincidences such as in your car example like it's over a minor detail. But Jeremiah's mental problem is not minor. It's so central you have a problem noticing anything else about him for it. Why did she pick him in your opinion? You say I'm dead wrong about it so I'd like to have your take on it.

Because being capable of it and wanting it doesn't bring it. See the Valentines Day threads in this forum, for example. A woman who works long hours at her job, and is a single mom, has a hard time finding a man. Ask around.

But she did have plenty of time for Jeremiah. And I think you've read me too narrowly in this. Where are the girls she spends out of job time with at the, tea-parlor? Carioki bar? She has acquaintances but no close friends. I read this to mean she lacks the courage to reach out to people.

Besides being quite a bit older than Linden (he was older even than Covenant) Dr Berenford is already married. TC mentions that his wife is disabled and hence the doctor had some sympathy for his own attempt to care for Joan.

Interesting to know. I didn't remember that. So, was the guard that Roger killed available?

[earthbrah]

I'm curious about something that has come up in this thread:

At what point does an interpretation become a projection?

Wayfriend, you say that shadowbinding shoe is projecting when he/she says that Linden chose to give her love to a person (Jeremiah) who couldn't say no receiving it, essentially. How is his interpretation a projection? What makes his take a projection and not just an interpretation that differs from your own?

Shadowbinding shoe also said that he/she thinks that Linden was willing to give her love "only where there are no risks." While I disagree partly with this idea (thinking that there are still possible risks for the love-giver in this case as well), I don't see how I could qualify the viewpoint as anything more than a different interpretation of what stands in the text. I can't see how I can call it a projection, especially not knowing the person who is doing the "projecting".

Furthermore, I also see it the same way as shoe there. I don't understand what the difference is between the viewpoints shared. You quoted the text as saying that Linden "recognized immediately the missing piece of her heart" when she found Jeremiah. You quoted a piece of text that essentially states how Linden related to Jeremiah's plight, to his condition; that she herself had been a "conscious prisoner inside her own skull." (Isn't that a kind of projection on Linden's part?)

I get that his condition doesn't inherently represent an inability to resist her love. However, you also say that his plight is not a condition for Linden to love him. But if he is the missing piece of her heart, and is just like her as she once was, or what she might have wound up becoming, then how can you justify the idea that his plight is not in some way a condition for receiving Linden's love?

I am seeking to understand your take on this, and how you distinguish a projection from an interpretation that differs from your own. Can you help me?

[wayfriend]

The thing is you talk about coincidences such as in your car example like it's over a minor detail.

It has nothing to do with a minor detail or a major detail. It has to do with intent vs outcome. Not every outcome is something that was a primary goal. But your argument rests on the idea that every outcome is a primary goal.

... That if you have a car accident you must have wanted a car accident. That if the best job you can find is at McDs, your goal in life must be to work at McDs, and your incapable of working anywhere else. That if you find yourself loving a mentally impaired child, you must only be able to love mentally impaired children. That if you decide to adopt that child, it must be because you have a secret need to adopt mentally impaired children.

Why did she pick him in your opinion?

The book states why, quite clearly.

Her own damaged childhood had taught her an intense empathy for children forced to pay the price of their parents' folly; and before long she remembered Jeremiah Jason. She had already done him a little good. Perhaps she could do more.

Nothing in the book says she was looking for messed up kid that she could take advantage of.

Wayfriend, you say that shadowbinding shoe is projecting when he/she says that Linden chose to give her love to a person (Jeremiah) who couldn't say no receiving it, essentially. How is his interpretation a projection?

I call it projection because I lack a better word for it; I'm not claiming it's a standard term of literature.

But the book doesn't say that Linden chose Jeremiah because he could not refuse. Not outright. Not indirectly. Not implied. Not insinuated. Not hinted. Nada.

The idea that Linden sought someone who could not refuse her as a fix to her problem of needing someone to love is, IMO, an idea which is made up in order to make the sum total reach a specific, pre-chosen conclusion. It's "projection", in the sense that someone is saying, if I want this conclusion, what do I need to ADD to what was written to make it be true?

IMO Interpretation is when you try to understand what was actually written. Projection is when you make stuff up. And of course it's not a black and white thing, since imagination is part of the reading experience. But you can take it too far, too.

I also think the term "projection" is when you say to yourself something like "I could never love Jeremiah, so if Linden loves Jeremiah then she must be weird". (And then make up something that satisfies your need to find her weird.) You project your biases and motives on the character. And of course it's not a black and white thing, since empathy is part of the reading experience. But you can take it too far, too.

The author states that Linden wishes Jeremiah could speak, show initiative, express desire. How does this square with the opinion that she desires him because he can't do any of those things?

The author states that Linden considered adopting Jeremiah in order to heal some of the harm Lord Foul has done. How does this square with the opinion that she did it to find an easy love target?

They don't square. Which is where I get MY opinion of these other opinions.

[shadowbinding shoe]

Wayfriend I think you projected a bit there about my opinions. I'll return to that later in my post.

... That if you have a car accident you must have wanted a car accident. That if the best job you can find is at McDs, your goal in life must be to work at McDs, and your incapable of working anywhere else. That if you find yourself loving a mentally impaired child, you must only be able to love mentally impaired children. That if you decide to adopt that child, it must be because you have a secret need to adopt mentally impaired children.

You make a jump here that I don't follow. Now the car accident would depend on how much control you had over the situation. If you saw an old lady you hated crossing the street and stepped on the gas then I'd blame you. If a drunk suddenly bumped his car into yours I wouldn't.

The McD job works in a similar way.

Now did Linden lack any control over her budding relationship with Jeremiah? And did she also lack ability to make other meaningful relationships? Because that's what would be needed to accept your statements.

She fails both the positive test and the negative test. The books clearly say Linden chose Jeremiah and sought him long and hard to make him her son. It also shows various other characters that offer her friendship that she ignores (TC's lawyer, other workers at her clinic)

Do you really think actions (and inactions) do not speak of your motives?


You can justify both choices but they are still her choices all said and done.

Nothing in the book says she was looking for messed up kid that she could take advantage of.

And here we have projection no. 1

Is she taking advantage of him? She fulfills a need in herself obviously but she give him much much more so if anything he is the one taking advantage of her (and no, don't bother to defend Jeremiah's honor. Saying he's taking advantage of her when the boy is so catatonic is absurd).

But the book doesn't say that Linden chose Jeremiah because he could not refuse. Not outright. Not indirectly. Not implied. Not insinuated. Not hinted. Nada.

This is a Point-of-view oriented story. We wouldn't expect her to think in these terms. When I'm talking about her feelings to Jeremiah I don't imagine her gloating over her power on him. I'm talking about what motivates her on the subconscious level. I thought that was obvious. And now to show that I too can find specific book examples I refer you to the names the three ravers give to themselves. Despite being evil and depraved they describe themselves in terms like enlightenment. (and no, I'm not saying that Linden is evil in disguise. Calm down wayfriend.)

you say to yourself something like "I could never love Jeremiah, so if Linden loves Jeremiah then she must be weird". (And then make up something that satisfies your need to find her weird.)

This is a bit of circular logic. I believe something and therefore make that same something to explain it?

Now lets turn to the real meat of your argument:

The author states that Linden wishes Jeremiah could speak, show initiative, express desire. How does this square with the opinion that she desires him because he can't do any of those things?

Let's be realistic here.

1)The chances of him healing are small. It's easy to wish for things when you don't believe they'll never happen. Should we take an anarchist's statement that he wants the State and all its trappings to disappear seriously? He knows the government wouldn't listen to him and pack its bags and go so he can say the things he says without fear of the consequences. (Such as would he really want to live without the protection the State gives him). There is some truth in the things he says but on the whole they are false and misleading.

2)Even if he does heal, it would be a long time before that happens.

3)This is Linden's input on this 10 years after she adopted him. Don't you think her feelings for him developed somewhat over that time-span?

The author states that Linden considered adopting Jeremiah in order to heal some of the harm Lord Foul has done. How does this square with the opinion that she did it to find an easy love target?

Not easy (he's a lot of trouble taking care of). Safe. She sees a kindred spirit in Jeremiah. What is the similarity? A passivity created by trauma.

[wayfriend]

I have nothing more to add here.

Let me put the shoe on the other foot. How about a burden of proof on someone else but me?

I note that we're another page in and there are STILL no quotes from the text to support these positions. Anyone?

Or how about this excercise. . .

Let me state: Superman rescues people because it makes him feel superior.

Most would disagree with that. But how would you prove it?

My argument: Superman is superior. He knows he is superior. Whenever he chooses to rescue people, he knows he acting superior. Therefore, he does it to feel superior.

To me, the statements being made about Linden are the same as that. And about as well substantiated.

[shadowbinding shoe]

Maybe you're right. You quoted passages that support your position. I can't rise to your challenge. I don't remember specific passages that prove what I say. It was more of a general feeling based on what we know of her life from the books, particularly those of the Last series. Maybe I'll try to find something later.

I'd like to point out that just because I believe she has problems making contact with other people doesn't mean I despise her, think she's deviant, depraved or anything like that. I also don't deny that she came to love her adopted son. That this love may be enabled by his unique state (and by that I mean that it gave her the courage to love him) doesn't deny the love itself. It may not be what you'd call a normal love in some senses but it is there.

Donaldson's characters tend to be flawed (or should I say spiritually wounded?) They would never be romance novel fl/stuff. Recognizing this fact doesn't denigrate them. We should applaud Linden for managing to open up to another human being despite all that happened to her. Not gloss over anything that might make her look less than perfect. Her past influences her present.

[Unfettered One]

Ok... Honestly, I can see both points. But personally I tend to agree with Wayfriend's assessment.

However, I think fiction like this does change slightly depending on who is reading it, and their own personal experiences. I'm gathering from this discussion that Wayfriend and Shadowbinding Shoe may have different world views which shape the way they read the story.

SRD says himself that he is reluctant to explain too much about the themes and such, because he believes that his stories are interactive with the reader. It's not much different than a piece of visual art speaking to two people differently.

I think you two need to agree to disagree here.

[earthbrah]

Unfettered One wrote:

I think you two need to agree to disagree here.

I fully concur.

[Rigel]

Also I feel inclined to comment on the relationship between Linden and Jeremiah; which is one of the most unhealthy relationships in a donaldson book. I know she supposedly loves the boy, but honestly, why? Linden went through years of legal hassle, and for the better part of ten years trailing after and wiping the bum of what is a vegetable. There is something seriously unhealthly about wanting that kind of child;

It's sad that you understand so little of love.

Love is a verb. It's something you do for other people; it has nothing to do with what you'll get out of it, or how it will be reciprocated.

While you yourself wouldn't love Jeremiah in Linden's position, take it on faith when I tell you that people are entirely capable of loving others as selflessly as Linden loves Jeremiah.

Of course, you'll probably not believe me, because you can't understand it yourself. You'll say that I'm unhealthy because I love other people this way; I won't argue with that, as I don't care whether you call me unhealthy or not. I will only assert that the type of love Donaldson describes Linden as having for her son is entirely plausible.