Posted: Sun Oct 21, 2007 9:15 am

Official Discussion Forum for the works of Stephen R. Donaldson
https://kevinswatch.com/phpBB3/
I agree, but they can be compared. The Enemy in LOTR was embodied by one individual (Sauron), and his minions (excepting a few lieutenants) were a mindless horde, as merciless as the Amnion, if in less subtle ways.amanibhavam wrote:That's quite a sweeping statement and entirely untrue in my opinion, but this is quite offtopic here. Nothing that Tolkien has written lacks dimension, culture etc., he was simply unable to write in any other way.
In the case of the amnion, I think that there's some ancillary document which speculates that the "mind/union" is just the amnion recognition of the absolute genetic imperative which rules all of them absolutely. Not even a conscious higher authority but a built in, instinctual need which shapes every action every amnion takes.ItisWritten wrote:I agree, but they can be compared. The Enemy in LOTR was embodied by one individual (Sauron), and his minions (excepting a few lieutenants) were a mindless horde, as merciless as the Amnion, if in less subtle ways.amanibhavam wrote:That's quite a sweeping statement and entirely untrue in my opinion, but this is quite offtopic here. Nothing that Tolkien has written lacks dimension, culture etc., he was simply unable to write in any other way.
The Amnion were of one mind (unity of purpose ...), led by no single individual (until Vestibule). The orcs, et al. were ruled by a single will.
I believe that you are correct.Holsety wrote:In the case of the amnion, I think that there's some ancillary document which speculates that the "mind/union" is just the amnion recognition of the absolute genetic imperative which rules all of them absolutely. Not even a conscious higher authority but a built in, instinctual need which shapes every action every amnion takes.ItisWritten wrote:I agree, but they can be compared. The Enemy in LOTR was embodied by one individual (Sauron), and his minions (excepting a few lieutenants) were a mindless horde, as merciless as the Amnion, if in less subtle ways.amanibhavam wrote:That's quite a sweeping statement and entirely untrue in my opinion, but this is quite offtopic here. Nothing that Tolkien has written lacks dimension, culture etc., he was simply unable to write in any other way.
The Amnion were of one mind (unity of purpose ...), led by no single individual (until Vestibule). The orcs, et al. were ruled by a single will.
interesting and ballsy .. at the same timeRoynish wrote:The Amnion were a rather lame and impotent foe. Donaldson's one and hopefully last escapade into specualtive fiction on the scientific side is by any means basic.
I've always just thought of them as alien. Inhuman. By their own standards, they're not villainous at all.Cord Hurn wrote:Yes, the Amnion were cool!!! Insidious, vindictive, relentless, and a whole bunch more flattering villainous adjectives, besides....![]()
![]()
You think?Avatar wrote: By their own standards, they're not villainous at all.
--A
Right, but by Holt Fasner's standards, his selfish attempts to have eternal life were for the good of humanity. Villains seldom think of their own acts as being villainous.Avatar wrote:I've always just thought of them as alien. Inhuman. By their own standards, they're not villainous at all.Cord Hurn wrote:Yes, the Amnion were cool!!! Insidious, vindictive, relentless, and a whole bunch more flattering villainous adjectives, besides....![]()
![]()
--A
^^^THIS!MsMary wrote: Avatar wrote:
By their own standards, they're not villainous at all. Very Happy
--A
You think?
I think they're well aware of how their actions horrify humans. And to be aware and continue to pursue it is fairly villainous, in my book.
Of course. But then, why should we expect the Amnion to want what is good for humanity? They want what is good for the Amnion and act accordingly. They're not hurting any Amnion by doing it.Cord Hurn wrote:Right, but by Holt Fasner's standards, his selfish attempts to have eternal life were for the good of humanity. Villains seldom think of their own acts as being villainous.
Yep. They're definitely dangerous---even an existential threat---from [and TO] our frame of reference...which is evil, even if not Evil.Avatar wrote:. There is no shared frame of reference or experience. They could have motives that we would be incapable of understanding.
--A
That phrase "for the greater good" is such a trap. One can justify all kinds of evil by saying it's "for the greater good."Avatar wrote:It's their genetic imperative though. It's no different from the missionaries who thought they were saving the souls of the natives by forcibly converting them. They were sure it was ultimately for the greater good.
--A