Apr-11-2010, 11:05 AM (UTC)
I'd like to make this a separate post to reply to some of the excellent points that have been brought up here. To be honest, I'm very much of the kind that doesn't question these things. The way things go in a book or a series or a film, to me, is just the way things are and it's not until I visit forums such as this that it occurs to me that these things are created by - often fallible - people. Weird, I know. 
Anyway, one thing I wanted to throw into the debate is the idea that it may not matter how long a person is chopping away at a stone dragon, what matters more, I think, is what they choose to put in there. Fitz gives away the very foundations of his being to Girl-On-A-Dragon. I'll just sum them up;
- the memory of his mother and his feelings of her and his abandonment
- his longing for Molly and the memory of their days together
- his torture and death in Regal's dungeon
- his abandonment by his father
- his fear of Galen and the memory of how he was humiliated by him
- his anger towards Burrich for taking Molly away
And on top of that; his youthful anger and frustration for being excluded from the dragon-carving and for being used by the Farseers in general were taken earlier by Verity, as an example of what a dragon takes.
Compared to that, as far as we know, the Fool gives lighter memories; small things that caused him pain or joy. Of course, the book only describes a fraction of what the Fool gives away, and on top of that we never switch to the Fool's point of view to see what damage he took.
But going back to Fitz, effectively that would mean that he lost his drive for many things, and I think that we should look at how that would affect his later actions, compared to how they affected him before. For example, his drive to go to Molly and afterwards his acceptance that Burrich is the better man for her. Or his anger at his abandonment by the people who should have loved him above all else, would that not cause him to become a reclusive who doesn't care that his friends never come to find him? Take away his anger for being used by the Farseers and Fitz would still go through the motions of finding his own life, because he remembers that's what he always said he would do, but would he actually make anything of that life?
As for Verity, I think that when he was whole he was a man of very deep passion and love. The process of carving a dragon takes away the past feelings. It does not take away his capability for feeling. It also doesn't take away the memory in itself, but rather the feelings that accompanied it, much, I think, like a photograph of a nice day can be compared to the day itself. Thus Verity would remember Kettricken and he would remember that he used to have feelings of deep love and affection for her, but the love and affection itself would be gone. I think that when he saw her, he knew he owned it to her to pretend that that love was still there because he knew that if he was still whole, it would still be there. Also, when he touched her, new feelings of love would occur. Hence him saying to Fitz that Fitz' accusations make him feel guilty all over again.
So I think that Verity is very much only a shell of his former self when they find him in the quarry, but because he is aware of the emptiness inside him he uses his memories to pretend to the others that he is still the same man. Because he doesn't want to hurt them, in particular not his wife.
Also, I think that because he is willingly giving his being to a stone dragon, the almost-forged man that he is, is very different from a real Forged one. Much like lovemaking is different from rape. Compare how both acts affect people and I think you see the difference between people who carve a stone dragon and people who are Forged. Same process, extremely different methods.
One more thing I wanted to address is Molly accepting Fitz after her marriage to Burrich. In my opinion we are seeing two different kinds of love here. The love between Fitz and Molly when they are young, is a passionate love based more on physical attraction then on friendship. The love between Molly and Burrich is a more mature love, based on a friendship which develops naturally between people who go through a difficult time together, the need for protection and safety, and also convenience. Then again between Fitz and Molly at the end of the books it would be a more mature version of their earlier attraction.
I don't think that Molly takes anything away from her love for Burrich when she returns to Fitz after about two or three years of mourning him. Burrich would have been like a stable anchor for her in the years they were together, a man she might not have fallen in love with as such, but nonetheless someone whose stability, friendship, devotion and morality create a safe and comfortable home around her which allows her a very good life. All these feelings accumulate into love as well, albeit a very different one from a love that is based on youthful passion.
Remember King Shrewd and his two wives? I think Robin Hobb created for us a perfect example of Molly's two loves. Queen Constance was chosen for Shrewd and it was not until her death that he realized how much he had come to love her. Queen Desire he married out of love, but it quickly turned into something else entirely. Likewise, I don't think that Molly and Fitz would have been happy together had Fitz run away with Molly when she asked him to, when she realized she was pregnant with Nettle. But later on when they are both adults and more mature, they would both bring that steadiness into the relationship that makes it work.
I also don't think that Molly herself would have returned to Fitz after Burrich's death, if it hadn't been for Fitz constantly buzzing around her like a bee that doesn't want to go away. But if you're faced with the options of growing old on your own, with young children still to raise and keeping an estate on your own (which you have never done before), or to spend your old age with your childhood's love who also happens to be a good father and a capable man, the choice is easily made. Even if you still love and mourn your dead husband and father of your children.
I look forward to reading other people's thoughts on this. This debate has made me consider a lot of the things about the books that earlier on I had taken for granted, and it has deepened my respect for Robin Hobb as a writer.
Anyway, one thing I wanted to throw into the debate is the idea that it may not matter how long a person is chopping away at a stone dragon, what matters more, I think, is what they choose to put in there. Fitz gives away the very foundations of his being to Girl-On-A-Dragon. I'll just sum them up;
- the memory of his mother and his feelings of her and his abandonment
- his longing for Molly and the memory of their days together
- his torture and death in Regal's dungeon
- his abandonment by his father
- his fear of Galen and the memory of how he was humiliated by him
- his anger towards Burrich for taking Molly away
And on top of that; his youthful anger and frustration for being excluded from the dragon-carving and for being used by the Farseers in general were taken earlier by Verity, as an example of what a dragon takes.
Compared to that, as far as we know, the Fool gives lighter memories; small things that caused him pain or joy. Of course, the book only describes a fraction of what the Fool gives away, and on top of that we never switch to the Fool's point of view to see what damage he took.
But going back to Fitz, effectively that would mean that he lost his drive for many things, and I think that we should look at how that would affect his later actions, compared to how they affected him before. For example, his drive to go to Molly and afterwards his acceptance that Burrich is the better man for her. Or his anger at his abandonment by the people who should have loved him above all else, would that not cause him to become a reclusive who doesn't care that his friends never come to find him? Take away his anger for being used by the Farseers and Fitz would still go through the motions of finding his own life, because he remembers that's what he always said he would do, but would he actually make anything of that life?
As for Verity, I think that when he was whole he was a man of very deep passion and love. The process of carving a dragon takes away the past feelings. It does not take away his capability for feeling. It also doesn't take away the memory in itself, but rather the feelings that accompanied it, much, I think, like a photograph of a nice day can be compared to the day itself. Thus Verity would remember Kettricken and he would remember that he used to have feelings of deep love and affection for her, but the love and affection itself would be gone. I think that when he saw her, he knew he owned it to her to pretend that that love was still there because he knew that if he was still whole, it would still be there. Also, when he touched her, new feelings of love would occur. Hence him saying to Fitz that Fitz' accusations make him feel guilty all over again.
So I think that Verity is very much only a shell of his former self when they find him in the quarry, but because he is aware of the emptiness inside him he uses his memories to pretend to the others that he is still the same man. Because he doesn't want to hurt them, in particular not his wife.
Also, I think that because he is willingly giving his being to a stone dragon, the almost-forged man that he is, is very different from a real Forged one. Much like lovemaking is different from rape. Compare how both acts affect people and I think you see the difference between people who carve a stone dragon and people who are Forged. Same process, extremely different methods.
One more thing I wanted to address is Molly accepting Fitz after her marriage to Burrich. In my opinion we are seeing two different kinds of love here. The love between Fitz and Molly when they are young, is a passionate love based more on physical attraction then on friendship. The love between Molly and Burrich is a more mature love, based on a friendship which develops naturally between people who go through a difficult time together, the need for protection and safety, and also convenience. Then again between Fitz and Molly at the end of the books it would be a more mature version of their earlier attraction.
I don't think that Molly takes anything away from her love for Burrich when she returns to Fitz after about two or three years of mourning him. Burrich would have been like a stable anchor for her in the years they were together, a man she might not have fallen in love with as such, but nonetheless someone whose stability, friendship, devotion and morality create a safe and comfortable home around her which allows her a very good life. All these feelings accumulate into love as well, albeit a very different one from a love that is based on youthful passion.
Remember King Shrewd and his two wives? I think Robin Hobb created for us a perfect example of Molly's two loves. Queen Constance was chosen for Shrewd and it was not until her death that he realized how much he had come to love her. Queen Desire he married out of love, but it quickly turned into something else entirely. Likewise, I don't think that Molly and Fitz would have been happy together had Fitz run away with Molly when she asked him to, when she realized she was pregnant with Nettle. But later on when they are both adults and more mature, they would both bring that steadiness into the relationship that makes it work.
I also don't think that Molly herself would have returned to Fitz after Burrich's death, if it hadn't been for Fitz constantly buzzing around her like a bee that doesn't want to go away. But if you're faced with the options of growing old on your own, with young children still to raise and keeping an estate on your own (which you have never done before), or to spend your old age with your childhood's love who also happens to be a good father and a capable man, the choice is easily made. Even if you still love and mourn your dead husband and father of your children.
I look forward to reading other people's thoughts on this. This debate has made me consider a lot of the things about the books that earlier on I had taken for granted, and it has deepened my respect for Robin Hobb as a writer.
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Twitter
Blogger
Tumblr
Pinterest