Inconsistency in [i]the Gap[/i]

[ashke09]

Yeah, since TRC was originally going to stand alone, Donaldson did a great job of building upon it and incorporating potential loopholes into the story. I would probably agree with him when he says they're his best works. Whenever I read them, I'm in awe of how complex the story gets and how well everything works together. I also really enjoy how Angus goes from being a character that is hated by the reader to one who (at least in my case) the reader feels sympathy for.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

But my original complaint still stands. At the end of TRS Angus "at least" had the courage not to tell the authorities the truth. Then, in FK, SRD branded Angus a coward for not having the courage to tell them the truth.

[ashke09]

I think both can be true at the same time. It's possible for Angus to fundamentally be a coward and show courage in certain circumstances.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

I think both can be true at the same time. It's possible for Angus to fundamentally be a coward and show courage in certain circumstances.

Yes, but not in an SRD series in which the villain evolves into the hero.

[Auleliel]

I think both can be true at the same time. It's possible for Angus to fundamentally be a coward and show courage in certain circumstances.

Yes, but not in an SRD series in which the villain evolves into the hero.

Why not?

[CovenantJr]

My thoughts exactly...

[Vraith]

I think that it might depend on who is calling who a coward and why and when...and how. In this particular instance, it is non-cowardly because Angus endures torments that no merely ordinary person probably could or would suffer without 'failing'. It is cowardly, because his motivations are basically self-serving. But then, it is again non-cowardly because, no matter his motivations and self-serving, he sticks to his commitment no matter the cost. The thing is, we only see the complications a little at a time...which is the thing I like...Angus was cowardly, but only partly, and acts/motivations at one point can transform to other things...and the point of view can alter not only the perception of an act, but the actual truth of it.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

I think that it might depend on who is calling who a coward and why and when...and how. In this particular instance, it is non-cowardly because Angus endures torments that no merely ordinary person probably could or would suffer without 'failing'. It is cowardly, because his motivations are basically self-serving. But then, it is again non-cowardly because, no matter his motivations and self-serving, he sticks to his commitment no matter the cost. The thing is, we only see the complications a little at a time...which is the thing I like...Angus was cowardly, but only partly, and acts/motivations at one point can transform to other things...and the point of view can alter not only the perception of an act, but the actual truth of it.

I'm not saying that at the end of TRS Angus had achieved anything like heroic stature. He was at heart a coward, but he did a courageous thing. I'm saying that SRD characterized him as courageous at the end of TRS and cowardly at the beginning of FK over what are virtually the same torture-interrogation events.

In the first book, Angus refused to talk because he had made a secret deal with Morn. In the second book, Angus refused to talk because he was afraid to die. One truth (concerning being set-up with the stolen goods) would inevitably lead to another (revealing the illegal zone implant).

[StevieG]

From what I remember, Angus was only heroic/courageous when when it had something to do with Morn. In other situations, he was a coward.

[thewormoftheworld'send]

From what I remember, Angus was only heroic/courageous when when it had something to do with Morn. In other situations, he was a coward.

Maybe...