Malik23 wrote:deer of the dawn wrote:I guess what bothers/intrigues me about that is that it was sacrifice that allowed Covenant to defeat Foul-- he laid his life down no less than the father of horses did, and it worked.
Are you sure about that? If it worked, we wouldn't have a Last Chronicles.
I for one am sure of it!
I don't think Covenant thought he was defeating Foul forever; he knew he could not do that since TPTP. He knew he was defeating Foul for another age or more, but not forever. But it was a necessary act nevertheless. Linden could not defeat the Sunbane while Foul was around. Covenant could not give Linden the ring while Foul was around. His sacrifice at that time made the victory over the Sunbane possible, and made his wish to pass the ring on to Linden possible.
(And, by sacrifice here, we have to remember that he clearly knew and planned on being able to continue existence and act as one of the Dead. He didn't believe he was heading for a final dark.)
Malik23 wrote:But the Ritual of Desecration "worked" for a while, too. So I'm not sure what you gain by winning a temporary victory, if the result of that "victory" is worse than where you started.
Well, the Ritual of Descration, if you can even call it a sacrifice, has got to be in that category of ill-chosen ones that serve despite. Kevin didn't sacrifice himself, he sacrificed the Land and everything in it, in a megalomaniacal act of self-service. This is talked about in much detail elsewhere, but I think we can take it as a given that Kevin's Ritual was not only a tactical mistake, it was a moral one as well.
I could not put Covenant's sacrifice of his mortal life with Kevin's Ritual in any common category as if they were similar.
As far as temporary victories, sometimes it's the only open path. No one can say that any temporary victory is good; but in some instances it can be the best outcome possible.
(And Kevin's Ritual cannot be considered a victory; if it is, it is a pyrrhic one.)
Malik23 wrote:So I don't believe that it's the nature of one's sacrifice which is the problem (e.g. "despair vs no despair"), because all self-sacrifice involves a kind of despair . . . it's a last resort kind of thing, even if you're at peace with doing it.
When I read this, I cannot help but think about Linden's reaction to Hamako's death.
In [u]White Gold Weilder[/u] was wrote:"I'm glad you didn't," he said. "Never mind what it would've done to me. I'm glad you didn't for his sake." Thinking of her mother, he added deliberately, "You let him achieve the meaning of his own life."
At that, her head jerked up; her gaze knifed at him. "He died! she hissed like an imprecation too fierce and personal to be shouted. "He saved your life at least twice, and he spent his own life serving the Land you claim to care so much about, and the people that adopted him were nearly wiped off the face of the Earth, and he died!"
Covenant did not flinch. He was ready now for anything she might hurl at him- His own nightmares were worse than this. And he would have given his soul for the ability to match Hamako. "I'm not glad he died. I'm glad he found an answer."
For a long moment, her glare held. But then slowly the anger frayed out of her face. At last, her eyes fell. Thickly, she murmured, "I'm sorry. I just don't understand. Killing people is wrong." The memory of her mother was present to her as it was to Covenant. "But dear Christ! Saving them has got to be better than letting them die."
"Linden." She clearly did not want him to say anything else. She had raised the fundamental question of her life and needed to answer it herself. But he could not let the matter drop. With all the gentleness he had in him, he said, "Hamako didn't want to be saved. For the opposite reason that your father didn't want to be saved. And he won."
"I know," she muttered. "I know. I just don't understand it."
Linden didn't understand the same essential thing - that giving up your life to achieve something meaningful can be a good choice.
Malik23 wrote:... or the Ranyhyn serving the defenders of the Land (which is something they love, not a sacrifice--it gives their life meaning, similar to the Ramen serving the Ranyhyn).
And that, too, seems to say that the distinction is missing.
The Ranyhyn
do sacrifice themselves - they literally give up their will and bear their riders even into sure death. Yes, they love serving the Land and its defenders, yes it gives their life meaning -- but yes, it's also a sacrifice.
A sacrifice which gives their life meaning and which they do for love.
Just like Covenant's sacrifice. And Hamako's. And the Ramen.
It's up to people to define the meaning of their own lives. And you can decide that the meaning involves sacrificing your life to further the ends of those you love, when there is no other way than the one you pay for with the ultimate price.
.