An apology for TLD
Posted: Sat Nov 02, 2013 3:03 am
But not in the sense of saying sorry.
First off, the resolution to the “Diassomer Mininderain” subplot. Technically, the Dancers of the Sea were “made” beings like the “made” ur-viles and Waynhim. And their power flowed from both Kastenessen and She Who Must Not Be Named—through Emereau Vrai. Also, the Vain-Findail relationship is noticeably “queer,” wherefore the union of the Demondim-spawn with the souls of those whom She devoured makes at least obtuse metaphysical sense: the masculine grandchildren of the Viles are now one with the feminine aspect of eternity. They embody the beautiful harmony of the masculinity-femininity dual archetype. (Plus there's Esmer's weird relationship with the Demondim-spawns' Weird, his own ancestry in Kastenessen and Emereau Vrai... And finally, if the Viles themselves were ghosts, for those they indirectly sired to be able to unite with other ghosts seems to fit with the way of things in the Land.)
And why, “I AM MYSELF”? Well, doesn't the Christian deity call His own name “I am that I am” or even just “I am”? In any event, I don't think that She was saying Her true name in this part of the dialogue. I think She was just announcing that She was now truly Herself again *because* She now knew what Her true self was.
Secondly: the last dark itself is the darkness between the last chapter and the epilogue. We can't be given to “see” the recreation of the world since the true midnight eclipses the light by which we would “see” this. Or why do you think that the epilogue opens with the three our-worlders walking in the depths of that kind of night? If it's intentional on the author's part, this is even descriptive brilliance on an absolute scale. The representation of ineffability by a gap between effable pieces of information.
Besides, SRD's descriptions of the devastation of temporal structure are fucking amazing. For him to have Stave speak in three tenses to convey the collapse of the Arch was fantastic. I have never read an author depict the death of time with such perfection. (In fact, I doubt I can remember a time when another author ever depicted such death.) The absences of those turns of phrase we would hope for in an account of the Land's final salvation are made up for by the glory of the precedence and consequence of that salvation, as it is lexically accounted for. At worst, that is, we ought to forgive SRD more or less completely for his “failure” to report in our language how Covenant, Linden, and Jeremiah inverted the actions of the Worm.
Third, the “happy” ending is entitled by the end line(s?) of a poem from the first novel, IIRC. A poem about the world dying and yet living on in the souls of those who dream for the sake of that world's splendor. In WGW we got that Covenant would always live on in Linden's heart, and in TLD we got that Covenant's resurrected form was equipped with leprosy owing to Linden's conception of the man. The reborn Earth is the eternal dream of the three our-worlders, then. It is the dream within their dream, even.
And that is the ultimate answer to the question of whether Covenant's experiences in the Land are real. They are real in relation to the dreams Covenant, Linden, and Jeremiah themselves have in the Land, and ideal in relation to our waking world. They are the reality of ideality, even.
I mean, the Creator is an archetype who Covenant merges with by merging with the Despiser, his recursively reflected brother. And if Covenant is thereby one with the Creator, is his beloved son in whom, along with Jeremiah, he is well-pleased—and if Linden is the Despiser-Creator's daughter—then it is no wonder save for that of redemption, restitution (wrought in time to redeem and restitute the Land), that Covenant can with his adopted son and wife reconstruct the Moebius Arch of the Land's Earth.
OTOH: I don't agree with the resolution to the Sandgorgon subplot. Not that they were defeated by Fire-lions but that they all seemingly died. Supposing that some survived elsewhere is not identical to knowing that they did. (Then again, that which is good need not remain so until the end...)
First off, the resolution to the “Diassomer Mininderain” subplot. Technically, the Dancers of the Sea were “made” beings like the “made” ur-viles and Waynhim. And their power flowed from both Kastenessen and She Who Must Not Be Named—through Emereau Vrai. Also, the Vain-Findail relationship is noticeably “queer,” wherefore the union of the Demondim-spawn with the souls of those whom She devoured makes at least obtuse metaphysical sense: the masculine grandchildren of the Viles are now one with the feminine aspect of eternity. They embody the beautiful harmony of the masculinity-femininity dual archetype. (Plus there's Esmer's weird relationship with the Demondim-spawns' Weird, his own ancestry in Kastenessen and Emereau Vrai... And finally, if the Viles themselves were ghosts, for those they indirectly sired to be able to unite with other ghosts seems to fit with the way of things in the Land.)
And why, “I AM MYSELF”? Well, doesn't the Christian deity call His own name “I am that I am” or even just “I am”? In any event, I don't think that She was saying Her true name in this part of the dialogue. I think She was just announcing that She was now truly Herself again *because* She now knew what Her true self was.
Secondly: the last dark itself is the darkness between the last chapter and the epilogue. We can't be given to “see” the recreation of the world since the true midnight eclipses the light by which we would “see” this. Or why do you think that the epilogue opens with the three our-worlders walking in the depths of that kind of night? If it's intentional on the author's part, this is even descriptive brilliance on an absolute scale. The representation of ineffability by a gap between effable pieces of information.
Besides, SRD's descriptions of the devastation of temporal structure are fucking amazing. For him to have Stave speak in three tenses to convey the collapse of the Arch was fantastic. I have never read an author depict the death of time with such perfection. (In fact, I doubt I can remember a time when another author ever depicted such death.) The absences of those turns of phrase we would hope for in an account of the Land's final salvation are made up for by the glory of the precedence and consequence of that salvation, as it is lexically accounted for. At worst, that is, we ought to forgive SRD more or less completely for his “failure” to report in our language how Covenant, Linden, and Jeremiah inverted the actions of the Worm.
Third, the “happy” ending is entitled by the end line(s?) of a poem from the first novel, IIRC. A poem about the world dying and yet living on in the souls of those who dream for the sake of that world's splendor. In WGW we got that Covenant would always live on in Linden's heart, and in TLD we got that Covenant's resurrected form was equipped with leprosy owing to Linden's conception of the man. The reborn Earth is the eternal dream of the three our-worlders, then. It is the dream within their dream, even.
And that is the ultimate answer to the question of whether Covenant's experiences in the Land are real. They are real in relation to the dreams Covenant, Linden, and Jeremiah themselves have in the Land, and ideal in relation to our waking world. They are the reality of ideality, even.
I mean, the Creator is an archetype who Covenant merges with by merging with the Despiser, his recursively reflected brother. And if Covenant is thereby one with the Creator, is his beloved son in whom, along with Jeremiah, he is well-pleased—and if Linden is the Despiser-Creator's daughter—then it is no wonder save for that of redemption, restitution (wrought in time to redeem and restitute the Land), that Covenant can with his adopted son and wife reconstruct the Moebius Arch of the Land's Earth.
OTOH: I don't agree with the resolution to the Sandgorgon subplot. Not that they were defeated by Fire-lions but that they all seemingly died. Supposing that some survived elsewhere is not identical to knowing that they did. (Then again, that which is good need not remain so until the end...)