Kevin's Watch

Continueing my second read series, I have just finished FK and had been jotting down thoughts and impressions on a Word file as I read. Below is copied and pasted version of this 'gradual file', in its raw and unedited form with the thoughts and impressions as I read.
To preface this, I have to say i still don't see Angus as any sort of 'hero' figure, and does not elicit much pity from me even with the tid-bits of his horrible childhood. On the otherhand I find myself feeling a little pity for Nick!
Well here goes:...

Thoughts on the Gap series as told in the first two books:

- Sorus scars Nick against all women the same way Morn is scarred against all men because of Angus.
- Morn hates Nick (and almost all men) because he is male, a pirate and confident; 2 of three of these are because of the scar left on her by Angus.
- but Nick seems to learn to actually fall in love again. Nick is not raping her: she is acting (because of the zone implant) as a woman totally in love with a man who saved her, giving herself freely and with such passion that it makes Nick rethink his fears and doubts of women (as far as Morn is concerned … not all women). He even relents (a little in his pirate way) and allows Morn a way to keep her baby – the author makes it seem (through colour of scar and expression that Morn exhibits in him) that he is moved by her lie that she loves him and wants to keep his son alive as a part of him with her.
-only after she seems to undermine him on the bridge in front of everyone by making the bargain to keep her son, does Nick ‘force’ sex on her a lot at the most inopportune time while she is trying to figure out how to solve the virus problem.
-Mikka acknowledges that Morn is like no other woman she (or Nick) has ever met. It is acknowledged that Morn has changed Nick!
-With the Amnion, presented with the idea that Morn’s mind will be gone when the baby is force-grown, he panics, “I’ll lose you!” he shouts. Now is this the emotion of love which maybe even he cannot properly identify after all this time, or is it merely possession?
- Of course Nick absolutely loses it when he sees that the baby is not his, and there is the fundamental change that occurs. He is driven back to his brutal, untrusting side because Morn lied to him all the time and betrayed his trust, on a smaller level than Sorus, but no less stinging since he is supposedly the man that can’t lose. His pride and emotions are hurt and he embarks on a path violence and uncaring, breaking what little change started to become apparent in him (more caring and trusting of Morn … love). It doesn’t matter that she feels she is doing this for her own survival, independent of anyone or anything (except the zone implant), to him she is undermining everything he is as a man and a captain of a starship.

POV with regards to opinions about Nick. The only relative neutral POV is found in TRS. Earth views him as a pirate as bad as Angus. To Morn he is a threat like Angus (like every man), to his crew, he is tough, but fair – and alternative to UMC corruption.
I don’t think we will ever truly know the man that Nick was before he met Morn, because there is (so far) any accurate POV telling of his past (similar to that of Morn or Angus). We can only see the man he became after meeting Morn. And it seems by all the evidence in FK, that he changes, and a few times at that!

I just finished my second reading, so I'm right there with you.

I am like you - I feel like Nick was on the verge of letting all of his past shit start to melt away - healing, if you will. He tells Morn "you can still hurt me" when he thinks she's unconscious because of the disabled zone implant. He's still a dick, but he was on the verge of redemption, because he's vulnerable. Morn's necessary deceptions, when discovered, probably push him irrevocably over - he will never EVER trust again.

<nodding> Agreed. But in the scheme of the story, in a sense, it is almost as if there really is no alernative for Morn. So Morn's 'necessary' choises for survival (of her son and herself) leads her to do the things she does, and therefore affect others around her in adverse ways in may circumstances. It is a really sad, and desparaging (although admittedly, facinating and darkly inriquing story). As mentioned in one post (I think it may have been yours) in some sense it is really hard to get in to this as the roles of the characters changes so much, and rarely for the better. It is hard to sympathize for any character in this series, but for me, the action and story and tormented characters are too gripping to put down

I did say that I had a hard time associating with any character, which made it a hard read.

The only part I still had trouble with was a question I think SRD *tried* to address at one point, but failed to convince me. That is: why didn't Morn run to the cops instead of Nick? Sure, she was in posession of a zone implant control, but she could have said "Angus threw it at me when you arrested him - I don't want the damn thing".

Of course, the story REALLY would have sucked had she done that.

But in the scheme of the story, in a sense, it is almost as if there really is no alernative for Morn.

You can't acknowledge this without also acknowledging that Nick was in the same situation, as was Angus. You seem to want to sypathise with Morn but not with the other two because they're "evil". But they are no more evil than Morn. They do the things they do because they're forced by their past lives, experiences and genetic makeup.

Angus and Nick may be forced to do certain things to protect themselves because of the harm they've suffered in life, but I will never accept "past harm" as an anodyne for harming or killing another person. It's just too easy to abdicate your own responsibility in response to "past trauma". You might as well say "I'm a powerless puppet who does nothing but react".

You can't acknowledge this without also acknowledging that Nick was in the same situation, as was Angus. You seem to want to sypathise with Morn but not with the other two because they're "evil". But they are no more evil than Morn. They do the things they do because they're forced by their past lives, experiences and genetic makeup.

I can see your point, but the descrepancy or difference here is that she is doing what she is doing (manipulating people, mainly Nick) to preserve her son, and to a lesser effect to save her and defeat those people she knows are 'evil' (pirates that kill people indescimanently because they need 'scrubbers' for example.) The fact that she has to manipulate Nick, when it seems that he may change as a person for the better, in order to preserve her life and later, her son, is a tragic side-effect that sends NIck back down a 'bad' path...

As for why didn't Morn run to the cops, the answer is in the fact that she really didn't know who to trust! She knew there was a traitor in the station security and doubt had already crept in to her mind. She was looking for an alternative, and ended up getting more than she bargained for: more doubt about UMCP, a bastard son, and a handsome pirate that got pushed way to far to the point where he is such a danger to EVERYONE!

Ah, it's such a greek tragedy, aint it....

Yes it is, god love it.

You're creating distinctions where none exist. Morn is doing everything she does in order to try and make her own life more comfortable. That's exactly the same reason that Nick and Angus (and every else) do the things they do. Just because Morn's actions that make her comfortable fit in more with your moral code doesn't change the fundamental fact that every action she takes is just as selfish as every action Nick and Angus take.

Example: Morn would not kill miners to get air scrubbers because she would find life with scrubbers, but the knowledge that she'd killed innocent miners less comfortable than life without scrubbers.

Every action since the beginning of the universe has been a reaction.

Nathan wrote:You're creating distinctions where none exist. Morn is doing everything she does in order to try and make her own life more comfortable. That's exactly the same reason that Nick and Angus (and every else) do the things they do. Just because Morn's actions that make her comfortable fit in more with your moral code doesn't change the fundamental fact that every action she takes is just as selfish as every action Nick and Angus take.

Example: Morn would not kill miners to get air scrubbers because she would find life with scrubbers, but the knowledge that she'd killed innocent miners less comfortable than life without scrubbers.

Every action since the beginning of the universe has been a reaction.

But by killing miners to get scrubbers, Angus is depriving the miners of ANY choice in the matter.

You may be fundamentally right that her motives are for her own personal comfort at base, but I find your assertion that forcing your will on another person, even to the point of his death, has no value outside of how comfortable it makes you to be chilling and unconvincing.

But by killing miners to get scrubbers, Angus is depriving the miners of ANY choice in the matter.

And by killing her family Morn is depriving them of ANY choice in the matter. You seem to apply one line of logic to Angus and a completely different one to Morn.

C'mon, she was out of her mind at the time! Remember the Gap sickness? Angus made a sane decision to kill others.

I even granted you that your basic position is defensible. I believe, as you do, that an individual's own best interest is at heart in every decision they make, even when on the surface it appears to be selfless.

But you are never going to convince me that there's no difference between Angus and Morn. I say intent matters, you say it doesn't. We're just going to have to agree to disagree. I just don't know how you can read SRD's books and see it all in such black and white terms - what sort of character arc do you derive from ANY work if you believe that the characters can never act selflessly and are just endlessly churning in a moral vacuum?

(unfortunately I have a friend who applies logic in the same manner as Nathan. And it is impossible to argue a point such as this… still…)

The distinction I make is indeed one based on a given set of morals. And the strain of thought that the base reasons behind the motives of Morn vs. Angus and Nick are the same is true, but only in a cold, unimaginative way.
It is all about motive and circumstance. Angus murders miners for scrubbers because his highly criminal past, based on similar acts of murder and theft, he feels has ‘forced’ him in to it. Morn is manipulating Nick and others for the safety of her son. Killing for scrubbers and wealth vs. wanting to kill someone because they try to rape you in the ship's mess ... there is a fundamental, human difference there, and a line that gets crossed.

Yah, I know this discussion can continue along the same line, adnauseum, as Nathan mentions, but I am not making a point concerning cold philosophy, but human nature. We are no longer animals working off base instinct. We still feel their impulses (how can we not), but we are intelligent and self aware enough to resist and/or react in a manner more becoming of our 'evolution'...

(ok, I meandered there a bit... sorry...)

Yeah, it can go on forever. I've had this same discussion twice before I think.
( Who are the good people)
( Determinism)
I don't expect to convince anyone of anything, I just enjoy trying.

fair enough...

Nathan wrote:Yeah, it can go on forever. I've had this same discussion twice before I think.
( Who are the good people)
( Determinism)
I don't expect to convince anyone of anything, I just enjoy trying.[/url]

Damn.... what do we talk about now? I feel so empty.

We could go round again?

That decision would not do much for my comfort levels.