If... (Re: the conversation of Stave and Linden, p. 468-473)

[Vraith]

The fact that killing her mother screwed her up and burdened her iwht guilt doesn't mean it was the WRONG thing to do.

Sometimes there are no good choices--that's the message of AATE.

Don't think that's the message...not all of it anyway...though it's definitely in there.
On the first point: you're right, it was not necessarily the wrong thing. Linden's guilt is her struggle with WAS it wrong, but more importantly even if the act wasn't, were her reasons for doing it wrong, and was it really her place/responsibility to do it? I think this "if" conversation is where she starts actually solving the dilemma.

[ninjaboy]

I've never been a Linden hater.
I think hating someone who has lost so much and believes in themselves so little is a pretty sad, TBH.
She tries to be a good mum to Jeremiah, and she genuinely loves him.
Just because the choices she makes may lead the land we love to ruin does not mean they are bad choices. Also, her decisions to resurrect Covenant and save Jeremiah wouldn't be decisions she was compelled to make had Roger not kidnapped Jeremiah, or had the Masters allowed the lands inhabitants to continue to use Earthpower and provided her with the support she needed.

[Lord Verement]

Someone earlier had questioned whether the current Linden would have euthanized her mother. I think that question was answered with Esmer. The parrallel there was clear and she refused to act.

[Zarathustra]

I've never been a Linden hater.
I think hating someone who has lost so much and believes in themselves so little is a pretty sad, TBH.

I think the people who hate Linden hate her as a character, and wouldn't really hate a real-life woman who has lost so much. It's just like those who like Angus as a character (The Gap), but wouldn't really like mass-murdering cyborgs in real life. This is fiction. It's important that we remember that, and read each other's comments in that context.

[shadowbinding shoe]

Someone earlier had questioned whether the current Linden would have euthanized her mother. I think that question was answered with Esmer. The parrallel there was clear and she refused to act.

Are they really parallel? The central thing about her parents from Linden viewpoint was that their lives were meaningless and petty. I don't think you can say that about Esmer. Did her mother even ask for euthanasia? The way I remembered it she wanted to escape the pain/illness. She didn't ask to die.

I don't think we're supposed to see Esmer's killing as a good or moral thing. They've all grown to dislike him after all the betrayals (which kept getting worse as time went by and Kastanessen's control over him grew stricter), the Haruchai probably most of all and after everything he's been through, Stave couldn't control himself and let his emotions control him and killed him. A classic crime of passion in other words.

The right thing to do would have been to heal the contradictions that cut him in half and make him whole. He obviously wanted to be ruled by his haruchai side so that wouldn't have been bad for the group. The Ur-vile gave them a golden opportunity to achieve that with their manacles but the group wasted the opportunity.

[Vraith]

I don't think we're supposed to see Esmer's killing as a good or moral thing. They've all grown to dislike him after all the betrayals (which kept getting worse as time went by and Kastanessen's control over him grew stricter), the Haruchai probably most of all and after everything he's been through, Stave couldn't control himself and let his emotions control him and killed him. A classic crime of passion in other words.

I'm not so sure. Yes, his nature caused trouble for them, they didn't [couldn't and shouldn't] trust him. Yet, when Stave says [roughly] "It wasn't murder/revenge, it was mercy," I believe him, and I don't believe he lost control for a second. There are a number of reasons, but one is that Es is partly Haruchai, a people that would rather die than have a broken leg healed. Esmer's situation is much much worse than that. And Stave is the only living Haruchai that comes close to having the capacity to really understand Esmer.

[shadowbinding shoe]

I don't think we're supposed to see Esmer's killing as a good or moral thing. They've all grown to dislike him after all the betrayals (which kept getting worse as time went by and Kastanessen's control over him grew stricter), the Haruchai probably most of all and after everything he's been through, Stave couldn't control himself and let his emotions control him and killed him. A classic crime of passion in other words.

I'm not so sure. Yes, his nature caused trouble for them, they didn't [couldn't and shouldn't] trust him. Yet, when Stave says [roughly] "It wasn't murder/revenge, it was mercy," I believe him, and I don't believe he lost control for a second. There are a number of reasons, but one is that Es is partly Haruchai, a people that would rather die than have a broken leg healed. Esmer's situation is much much worse than that. And Stave is the only living Haruchai that comes close to having the capacity to really understand Esmer.

Well, the way I remember it (I haven't yet reached it in my reread) Stave was getting pretty bothered with Esmer's complaints, grimaced and just stabbed him in the back. It didn't seem like a balanced well-thought action. People who commit Crimes of Passion have all sort of very good reasons. He's better off dead without me to look after him, They deserve it for the way she treats me. They could probably go on all day before and shortly after the deed about why it's justified.

If we believe that Linden's healing of Stave was the right thing to do shouldn't it apply on a bigger scale to Esmer as well? There's a reason why the Ur Viles created manacles instead of say, a stave.

[Vraith]

A lot has to be left out to get to the point you make, I think. But you also have to say when Stave says it isn't murder it's mercy he looks Linden straight in the eye and flat-out lies...and I can't buy that.
And there's Esmer's viewpoint: before the deed he says [something like] "Kill me with the krill, and I can find peace." and when it's done, IIRC, he expresses joy and gratitude.

If we believe that Linden's healing of Stave was the right thing to do shouldn't it apply on a bigger scale to Esmer as well? There's a reason why the Ur Viles created manacles instead of say, a stave.

No, it's not the same. Among other things, wounds are only wounds...you can get better, learn, change, grow, make meaning. Esmer isn't heal-able, cannot do any of those things, and never could, and knows it and hates it. [this one I think is pretty close to exact]: "Then I must remain this way, a husk of life until the Worm devours me."

[wayfriend]

I'm not sure where to jump in here ... with the question as originally posed, with a reply to the most recent posts, or with my own tangent to this?

One thing is surely deserving of a preface: Linden is complex. More complex that Covenant by anyone's measure. And, unlike Covenant, Donaldson never really directly approached an explanation of what makes her tick - only indirect evidences. So we have no solid basis to start with. And then, Donaldson portrays her as a fluid personality, always changing - which is realism, but it makes it harder to draw conclusions.

For example, in AATE, when Linden chooses to rescue Jeremiah after rousing the worm, someone commented that she feared herself. I didn't think so - she trusted herself to make the best decision she could envision. However, several chapters later, Liand and Anele are dead, and Linden refuses to make any decisions. Believing all her decisions lead to bad ends, she does indeed fear herself.

So if you ask, does she fear herself, the answer is ... sometimes. But maybe not as a general rule. It's complicated, because she changes. She responds to different things differently.

There's just no one Linden to try and describe. If there's a Linden that always pertains, it's something at the core, not at the surface.

Another problem we have as a reader is distinguishing between our perceptions of Linden and Linden's perception of Linden. Sometimes she belives in herself, and sometimes she has a low opinion of herself, and you need to take this into account.

For example, when she thinks of her Staff as "the emblem of her arrogance" - how do you interpret that? Is that how she feels at that moment (because of the situation) or is that a deeper feeling that is constant, and so we can characterize the real Linden by it. In this particular case, I would say its a temporary feeling expressing the anguish she feels at that particular time. Someone else may interpret it differently. But either way --- take the situation into account.

Unfortunately, Linden moreso that Covenant is described in this way: more descriptions of transient feelings mixed with less description of her core self. When she does describe her core beliefs, how can you tell?

The bottom line is, the essential, the absolute, Linden is hard to pin down.

So, to tie back to the original question: we do in fact see Linden considering those ifs in a way that leads to despair. What conclusion do you draw? Do you jump to the conclusion that this is the core, essential Linden? Or do you have to wonder if this is a transient feeling?

We've all made mistakes. Probably some bad ones. And maybe one or two where you dwell on "if I had only done something else" for a while. I know I have. And I know that, right after, it's a strong, natural inclination. And I know it goes away after a while.

So, in this particular instance, I will credit Linden with a temporary, negative feeling, completely called for in and justified by the situation she happens to be in. That's how she feels then, but it isn't how she feels always. She doesn't, for example, spend a lot of time thinking about if she only didn't resurrect Covenant. Yes, she thinks it's a mistake, but no, she's not living in if-world.

And I would recommend it to anyone when trying to consider what qualities Linden does or does not have. Don't take a specific example and generalize. Instead, look for other examples, or counter examples, before you decide.

[shadowbinding shoe]

A lot has to be left out to get to the point you make, I think. But you also have to say when Stave says it isn't murder it's mercy he looks Linden straight in the eye and flat-out lies...and I can't buy that.
And there's Esmer's viewpoint: before the deed he says [something like] "Kill me with the krill, and I can find peace." and when it's done, IIRC, he expresses joy and gratitude.

I'll have to reread this chapter before I can give you exact answers, but
1) Stave might not want to burden Linden with guilt about this.
2) Stave's words should not be taken as absolute truth but only as his truth. He's become enlightened but his Haruchai heritage still defines him, especially after what happened to him before this.

If we believe that Linden's healing of Stave was the right thing to do shouldn't it apply on a bigger scale to Esmer as well? There's a reason why the Ur Viles created manacles instead of say, a stave.

No, it's not the same. Among other things, wounds are only wounds...you can get better, learn, change, grow, make meaning. Esmer isn't heal-able, cannot do any of those things, and never could, and knows it and hates it. [this one I think is pretty close to exact]: "Then I must remain this way, a husk of life until the Worm devours me."

What you say may fit a Haruchai's viewpoint but it doesn't fit a healer's. Linden doesn't only heals injuries that could get better by themselves. She heals things that could never change or improve practically all the time. How else would you look at what she does with Jeremiah? Or how she deals with the Sunbane at the end of WGW? Pitchwife's hunched back? She changes them fundamentally when she heals them. She transform them into an ideal form that never existed and never would without her intervention. The Sunbane case should be given special note. There, she join several broken archetypal pieces into something hale and whole. And not just joining but changing, erasing the evil that suffuses the whole thing. Aren't the similarities striking?

If Linden could denature and/or disconnect the unnatural loyalties he inherited from his mindless mothers to the nihilistic Kastenessen he would be free to pursue his wish to serve Linden and her cause. His problems are at their base mental ones, a division of loyalties and purposes. Hasn't Linden dedicated herself to the healing of just such people?

The reasoning of the Ur viles shouldn't be dismissed. These creatures specialized in understanding the future and all the possibilities it holds. The fact that they chose to create manacles as the answer to Esmer's dilemma should tell us that they saw some hope for him if his powers were contained.

[Vraith]

If Linden could denature and/or disconnect the unnatural loyalties he inherited from his mindless mothers to the nihilistic Kastenessen he would be free to pursue his wish to serve Linden and her cause. His problems are at their base mental ones, a division of loyalties and purposes. Hasn't Linden dedicated herself to the healing of just such people?

Ahhh...this is probably significant part of our disagreement. I don't think Esmer is sick at all, mentally or otherwise. "Healing" him, as I see his nature would be equivalent to healing a pig by turning it into a monkey, or curing bone cancer by removing the skeleton. The sunbane is a good example...because it was not the essence of the land, but the conflict IS the essence of Esmer. And wouldn't it require the evil of possession even if it was possible? She can't repair or restore his identity, she can only destroy it. I actually think she'd have a better chance of healing Kastenessen [though maybe not, since he was a little twisted even before his appointment, if you can trust what the other elo say about him].

And it's my impression that ur-viles made manacles cuz they couldn't kill him...it's implied that only the krill can do that...though it's nearly as likely that their weird/vision of possibilities said it wasn't their choice to make [speculation of course].

Anyway, it's closely tied [for Linden, her inability to do it] to the "if" of the topic at hand. As was suggested upthread, I think, tightly bound with "If I hadn't killed my mother" especially.

[shadowbinding shoe]

If Linden could denature and/or disconnect the unnatural loyalties he inherited from his mindless mothers to the nihilistic Kastenessen he would be free to pursue his wish to serve Linden and her cause. His problems are at their base mental ones, a division of loyalties and purposes. Hasn't Linden dedicated herself to the healing of just such people?

Ahhh...this is probably significant part of our disagreement. I don't think Esmer is sick at all, mentally or otherwise. "Healing" him, as I see his nature would be equivalent to healing a pig by turning it into a monkey, or curing bone cancer by removing the skeleton. The sunbane is a good example...because it was not the essence of the land, but the conflict IS the essence of Esmer.

Is the Sunbane's nature not the essence of the Land in the Second Chronicles? Can you describe the Land of this time with any degree of authenticity without including, or even giving center stage to the Sunbane in it? Donaldson says in one of his answers that the nature of Earthpower has been fundamentally changed in the time between the first and second chronicles. Instead of healthgiving hurtloam the Land produces plants (forget their name) that drugs people so they can be captured and vampirically used to make food.

The few remaining hints of the previous nature of the Land (like the Aliantha or the Unfettered they meet at the beginning) are the aberrations in this place. They don't belong anymore and are slowly but surely erased from the scene.

And wouldn't it require the evil of possession even if it was possible? She can't repair or restore his identity, she can only destroy it.

If that's the case most of her healing feats have a degree of evilness to them (as she herself thinks for much of the second chronicles.) As a being with a will we should ask what does he think about all this. Is such a treatment an evil subjugation for him? But here we have several problems. First, as an insane being (He suffers from a kind of Schizophrenia) can we trust him to know his own mind and make an informed decision? Second, does he have a free will or is there some form of geas through which Kestenessen commands his loyalty through his inherited magic just like the Sandgorgon have been corrupted by the fragments of the raver? Third, as a partial haruchai he inherits their abhorrence of magical healing to themselves. Most of us, myself included don't accept their position on this issue and think Linden was in the right whenever she tried to heal one of them. So how should we view his request to kill him? Is it his haruchai (and Elohim?) tendency for belligerent slef reliance, is it a ploy to help Kestenessen by preventing them from adding a powerful member to their company, is it despair born from his long struggle with his conflicting natures, a big no-no in this Chronicle, is it guilt for all he had done? The answer is by no means clear.

I believe his actions up to this point support my view that he wishes to serve and help Linden and her group (and the Demondim-spawn as well, for they are the proof that he is not beyond hope for salvation) and gains no joy from his betrayals in the name of Kestenessen. That his treacheries are forced on him by Kestenessen, certainly during AATE. That there is no warmth or feelings between those two as evidenced by the injuries Kestenessen forces him to suffer and the way Esmer calls his mothers mindless forces of nature.

I actually think she'd have a better chance of healing Kastenessen [though maybe not, since he was a little twisted even before his appointment, if you can trust what the other elo say about him].

I don't think Kestenessen can be healed and not because of his selfish nature before he became appointed. The thing is, Kestenessen, unlike Esmer, chose his evil. His symbiosis with the Skurj is intentional on his part unlike Esmer's two natures that he received at birth, or Jeremiah's connection with the croyel.

And it's my impression that ur-viles made manacles cuz they couldn't kill him...it's implied that only the krill can do that...though it's nearly as likely that their weird/vision of possibilities said it wasn't their choice to make [speculation of course].

While I can credit the second option the first is very unlikely. The manacles do less to restrict Esmer than Vain did to Findail. They allow him free movement

Anyway, it's closely tied [for Linden, her inability to do it] to the "if" of the topic at hand. As was suggested upthread, I think, tightly bound with "If I hadn't killed my mother" especially.

Well I think it's interesting to consider the what-ifs that do not happen in this story. To me this, and the other deaths in this part, are hints at missed opportunities caused by and indicative of failures of the Group. We are supposed to see that they make mistakes and have to pay for them.