Why Rand never joined with Lanfear?

[Guest mike03]

It seems like emu is trying to emphasize the importance of contextual factors on Lanfear's decisions, which is certainly a valid point. Context plays a significant role in every individual's decisions, and there are many interactional patterns that occur when multiple contextual factors influence an individual. Therefore, I think that it is valid to say that Lanfear probably had some decent qualities as a human being and is a somewhat tragic figure because of the route that she took.

 

However, I don't think that it excuses her decisions because she also could have made different choices in the face of those contextual factors. Some individuals would have chosen to follow a path of humility and accept the fact that she was wrong rather than follow pride, and ultimately turn to the Dark One. Emu made a statement that striving for power is healthy. It is certainly fine to strive to succeed and accomplish goals, but Lanfear's desire for power has clearly become a distortion of that healthy desire.

 

In addition, there was a comment about selfishness being good and people who are unselfish will become victims, but that is not valid. You can be selfless and care about others while still caring for your own needs and building self-esteem. You do not need to eschew others' needs in order to provide for your own. Many people suffer heartbreak and move on in a healthy direction rather than building upon revenge and anger.

 

Ultimately, I think that Lanfear's decisions were influenced by contextual factors, just like all people. However, it seems like her pride was her major downfall. She chose to pursue power at the expense of others and never learned to control her emotions. All of those emotions that emu mentioned are common in people, but the fact that Lanfear allows her anger and jealousy to control her is the problem. To recognize one's anger and jealousy is a positive, but to then murder people without remorse reveals a lack of control and a distortion of a natural human tendency.

[DPT24]

Why did Rand not join Lanfear??? Because she's one of the most infamous Forsaken, he was in love with someone else, Moraine would have killed him, and he's not evil??? He did use some of the help she gave him, but he wasn't crazy and he didn't trust her.

[Elan Tedronai]

Hootchie cootch's probably a wasteland all up in there after 3000+ years...probably even has cobwebs!

 

..Would you want in on that?

 

I personally wouldnt say no to graendal even if she was 10,000 years old

[Pandemonium]

Rand almost stuck his schlong in Lanfear but Asmodean cock-blocked Lanfear. Lanfear was pretty much fully naked in that dream. Rand is not as impenetrable to Lanfear as he would like to think.

[bsmnt23]

This post is being split into parts because the system tells me it has more usages of blockquoting than is allowed for a single post. Hah!

 

Emu, to start I took the time to read (and to re-read in some cases to make sure I fully understood your point) your arguments. They are well thought out with strong philosophical foundations. Not to mention articulate. Despite this, you are wrong.

 

Tut tut! You mean you disagree with me. =)

 

I have heard the theory postulated (and i guess it's been shot down now) that Miren could have been a decent girl before she discovered the new power scource and tapped it, thus breaking free the source of all true evil in the universe upon her unsuspecting world, and in so doing she could have been inadverdantly turned to the dark one against her will. If that has been debunked by RJ himself, then all we have to go by on Mierin's character is what we have seen in the series cannonicly. She declared for the dark one in the Hall of the Servents itself, and chose her name as a Forsaken (I dont know if anyone has ever asked what "Lanfear" means in the Old Tounge but the fact she chose it herself indicates she wanted some recognition that would set her apart and superior to the other, "lesser" forsaken. She was hungery for power, this is cannon and irrefutable.

 

Much of what you mention occurred in the Age of Legends and is only canonically referenced, not objectively illustrated in the narrative. That's an important difference! Even so, the actions you're talking about concern only Mierin's defection to the Shadow--a fact which isn't in dispute. It doesn't really address her underlying character. Oh, sure, you can say it does, but why does anybody do evil? Is there no such thing as evil done for reasons other than evil? RJ himself debunked that simplistic idea with the story of Aridhol.

 

I'm also really surprised that people keep going on about the "hungry for power" part as a hallmark of being evil. That's just not true, and it doesn't matter how many one-dimensional fictional villains suggest otherwise. Wanting power is a sign of a healthy ego. Some people take issue with Mierin having wanted power "for power's sake," but that kind of phrasing is a straw man logical fallacy; there's no such thing as wanting power for power's sake, and to accept it as a character motive is indefensible.

 

Bear in mind that this is a world where the bad guys are very easy to spot. The bad guys worship the "Great Lord of the Dark", visit pain and torment on any opposition, introduce into the world armies of genetic abominations that activily eat people and who are captained by Fades who's sole pleasure in their twisted version of life is raping human women into suicidal insanity and very likely wake up in the morning with a fresh kitten to kick every day.

 

The blunt conspicuousness of evil in the WoT world is a big part of what makes Mierin such an exceptional Shadow character, because she performs very little evil onscreen. Mierin is written as a proud and arrogant aristocrat. That part of her character is very convincing. But then there's all this stuff about how evil she supposedly is, and it just doesn't stick.

 

The universe did not deal her a bad hand, she had everything anyone could have ever wanted, and she wanted more.

 

If I could ask you to go back and really ponder the ramifications of that sentence, I would consider it most thoughtful of you. First of all, your opening clause is unsubstantiated. Your second clause is judgmental in a way that cannot respectfully be defending when it comes to respecting human freedoms.

 

That she "went evil for love" makes great fodder for maybe an '80s hair-ballad but is in no way a valid argument for her intrensic decency. And when you atribute a definiition to "decency" as haveing a sense of personal honor is only half correct; there is such thing as Right and Wrong and it is not dificult to tell them apart. If you do wrong even with good intentions, it is still wrong. This sentiment could be used to justify joining the Nazis knowing full well the extent of their atrocities and volentering your brand shiny new jack-boots for kitten-kicking duty. Wrong is wrong, and blaming your actions on anyone else for any reason, while currently fassionable for todays youth...and politions since the dawn of time...is for the weak.

 

We were having such a good time until you compared my earlier argument to an apology for the Nazis. =(

 

You're not giving enough thought to the desperation that Mierin must have found herself in. I also dispute your authority to declare "there is such thing (sic) as Right and Wrong and it is not dificult (sic) to tell them apart.)" My defense of Mierin clearly implies you are mistaken in one way or another, and you can't make a good argument by making a disputed claim and then not supporting it.

 

Lanfear is credited as the most beautiful woman of her Age, and LT, being a healthy red-blooded human male simply wanted to tap that.

 

This comment is sexist, but, putting that aside, you are forgetting one of the most poignant lines in the whole series, from TFoH, where Rand is remembering, through LTT, what he and Mierin had done together when they were young. He wasn't remembering "tapping that." He was remembering learning the joys of the One Power. The evidence in the series suggests that both Mierin and LTT were ambitious, power-hungry people of unparalleled competence in the One Power and surely were a strong fit for each other.

 

And like any other healthy red-blooded human male also got sick of her crap when it became apparent that she was bat&^$% crazy. (It is a truism that no matter how hot she is, someone, somewhere is sick of her shi7).

 

That is even more sexist.

 

Emu, you mistake me. I did not mean to imply you were a Nazi apologizer; I merely used the Nazis as a convenient fill-in-the-blank for "group of evil-do-ers". I could have just as easily said al Qaeda, Soviet or Chinese Communist parties, Cobra, the Death-Eaters, the Dallas Cowboys, or the Democrats. The point I was attempting to illustrate was you cannot side with evil and be good, these two viewpoints are inherently opposite and contradictory; they do not balance each other out, they annihilate each other. You dispute my authority to declare right and wrong and I rebuff you: you seem one for philosophical debate, well, re-read your Neichie. Every man and woman of sound judgment possesses the right--and the responsibility--to determine for themselves where they stand on moral issues. As I said before, the evil is very evident in the Wot series, there is no moral grey area (unless you include aridohol, but even that is blanketed under the statement that they became as bad as the shadow in order to combat it--and were in turn consumed by their own brand evil. When you fight monsters be wary, lest you become monsters yourselves, and when you stare into the abyss...the abyss stares back). Yes, Miren may very well have been publicly scorned for her involvement with introducing the DO to the world and yes, she may very well have loved LTT with all her heart and was again scorned. These...excuses... are irrelevant. She willingly sided with evil. To use my previous analogy, she donned her jackboots and set to kicking kittens with her sleeves rolled up. Therefore, since she signed on with evil, she participated in evil...she is by definition evil.

 

And, as to my allegedly sexist remarks, well...I remember that scene you reference and I inferred it to mean they hooked up when they were young, and did a great deal of experimenting the limits of their strength with the power while spending a great deal of time linked...now whatever your viewpoint, the male/female link sounds very, very intimate and what do young people do with other, very attractive young people...well, I really hope I don’t have to draw you a picture... anyhoo...there was a lot of "tapping" going on.

 

That being said, my girlfriend just came down the stairs in her Lanfear outfit. Gotta go.

[Guest Emu on the Loose]

Did Mierin love LTT, or did she love being associated with LTT? Lanfear maintained the former, and Rand countered with a good description of the latter. Lanfear may not even realize the difference, but violent jealosy is not surprising.

 

Love is love. It doesn't have to be the pure and melty stuff described in the storybooks. Real life is a testament to that.

 

~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~

You are welcome t actually provide dictionary definitions, rather than just claiming they exist.

 

You're quite right, Mr. Ares! I've been negligent in my accessibility to a lay audience. There are a number of etymological entries you may peruse at your leisure on this page. As for the modern definitions most similar to my own use of the word for Mierin, I propose Definition No. 2 under both Dictionary.com Unabridged and Collins English Dictionary Unabridged. However, as wielders of language are apt to do, I have waxed connotative in this thread. Simply put, that means I have slightly expanded the meaning of the word.

 

Now, if your complaint is that you don't approve of my diction because you're some kind of strict linguistic constructionist, I can't help you. I've given a rather lengthy insight by this point into my personal interpretation of the concept of decency, and to ignore the concept by assaulting the word itself is futile. If it would ameliorate your situation, you are welcome to imagine the word of your choice in place of "decency."

 

Which doesn't really address my point.

 

I apologize. Please rephrase your point so that I will be able to give you the response you would prefer. I think what you want me to say is that most if not all the Forsaken, and Darkfriends generally, go over to the Shadow for self-serving purposes. True enough. Then again, that doesn't really address my point. And, since we've both already addressed our respective points, perhaps it would be simpler to let it go at that.

 

No, it isn't.

 

You don't give me much to work with, here! Your clipped conversational style reminds me a little bit of Jack Webb's Sergeant Friday. In lieu of a supporting explanation for your statement, therefore, because your statement is a claim of fact rather than a declaration of opinion, and because Lews Therin's mental monologue in the prologue clearly contains the passage "in (Rand's) pride he had believed that men could match the Creator, could mend what the Creator had made and they had broken," I declare your statement to be nullified. As was famously said, one is not entitled to one's own facts.

 

Alternatively, Shai'tan=(alomost) getting exactly what he wanted. How is that supplanted?

 

Ah! I'm getting better at this. Here you go.. In particular I direct your attention to Definition No. 2. of Dictionary.com Unabridged.

 

The fact that most readers appear to think that Mierin didn't love LTT would indicate it is not as clear as you pretend.

 

I invite you to document your support for the word "most," but even so it is a well-understood logical fallacy to base the truthfulness of a claim upon the popularity of that claim. Therefore, you probably could save time by retracting your claim rather than substantiating it, since it would be fallacious anyway.

 

However, this use of the word "pretend" alarms me. If I didn't know better I might think you weren't interested in our conversation. You're something of a head-butter, aren't you? I know that what brings me to this thread is my considerable interest in the character and nature of Mierin Eronaile. If you share that interest, then I look forward to your reply. I can't say I am the slightest bit interested in butting heads, though.

 

~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~

It seems like emu is trying to emphasize the importance of contextual factors on Lanfear's decisions, which is certainly a valid point. Context plays a significant role in every individual's decisions, and there are many interactional patterns that occur when multiple contextual factors influence an individual. Therefore, I think that it is valid to say that Lanfear probably had some decent qualities as a human being and is a somewhat tragic figure because of the route that she took.

 

You're quite right; it is a critical point that my judgment of Mierin is able to incorporate the context of her decisions and actions. However, context is only one part of the equation, and I don't mean to imply that it is of central significance. If I made any statement to that effect, then let me clarify that hereby.

 

However, I don't think that it excuses her decisions because she also could have made different choices in the face of those contextual factors. Some individuals would have chosen to follow a path of humility and accept the fact that she was wrong rather than follow pride, and ultimately turn to the Dark One.

 

That's really an interesting point. We might assume she could have made a different decision, but we don't actually know that it was within her physical ability to do so. Also of interest: We don't know that he didn't make a different decision. All we know is that she eventually went over to the Shadow.

 

When somebody loses a loved one to an uncommonly insegrevious tragedy, do you think it would make sense to say that that person could choose not to be emotionally affected by it? No, individuals have an extremely limited faculty for modulating emotional impulses in real-time. Well, then, do you think it would at least make sense to say that that person could choose not to act on their emotional response?

 

From a biomechanical standpoint, yes: Most individuals have a high degree of control over their faculty to act or not act on emotional impulses, although it diminishes with the increasing intensity of the underlying emotions. However, from an anthropological viewpoint, no, it doesn't make sense to ask a person not to express their emotional response to the tragedy--except in very specific circumstances, usually involving an emergency. Emotional expression is healthy.

 

Mierin was driven to a state of mind where her emotional stress was enormously high. If she was capable of rational behavior at all--and even that is debatable--we should expect her to have expressed her stress somehow. In such a mindframe, it isn't difficult to imagine her rationalization. Remember that at this point the world was already against her for creating the Bore, her own ambitions lay in ruin, and now Lews Therin had rejected her. All of her bonds with human society had been broken. Essentially she was estranged. When the "society" in question is subcultural, we can simply say that an estranged individual would withdraw from that aspect of civilization. But when the society in question includes all of civilization, we conclude psychopathy for there is no social reserve to which the individual may withdraw. Thus the diagnosis is technically accurate but also subjectively constrained.

 

What Mierin did made sense to Mierin, even if it was deplorable to the rest of society. With her social bonds severed, she was well-primed to become an antagonist to all of civilization, and the Shadow just so happened to supply epic visions of undermining civilization. This is why I lay more of the blame for her defection at society's feet than at her own. From her point of view, Mierin made a defensible choice even considering her stress level. She did not mean to drill the Bore and should not have been treated otherwise. Indeed, Mierin would have been one of civilization's most valuable assets in sealing the Bore.

 

Now, perhaps society did in fact try that. Perhaps she was not prejudicially mistreated. Perhaps even Lews Therin himself offered her some kind of bargain. And perhaps Mierin rejected all of it and went over to the Shadow anyway. If so, then her case becomes indefensible. However, it's also pure speculation--of the same sort that much of the rest of this thread is. We just don't know what happened between the drilling of the Bore and her defection to the Shadow. But, absent factors that change the equation, the simplest explanation is that Mierin was spurned for introducing a great evil into the world, and ultimately was driven into a position of total antagonism.

 

You can say that she could have chosen otherwise, but you would have to define a system of ethics that would make an alternative choice superior from the viewpoint of Mierin herself. If civilization rejected you, what would you do? What would you do if you were an enemy to the world through no deliberate desire of your own? Such a society has committed an error; any time an individual is mistreated we must call it an error, and the only thing that makes Mierin's case special was that the error resulted in the creation of a new Forsaken.

 

We have to assume that Mierin genuinely thought she had enough power to direct events in her favor as a player for the Shadow. Whether this is a delusion or not remains to be seen in AMoL. However, she believed it, and therein lies the justification for her decision. Our immediate history is full of "deals with the devil" on the supposition that those making the deals had the power to come out ahead. Remember when we gave weapons to Saddam Hussein to oppose Islamic radicalism in Iran? Or what about Libya right now: We're supporting a rebellion we know nothing about, simply to eradicate the present government there.

 

Such deals inevitably seem foolish and arrogant when they fail, but they don't always fail. We won the Korean War and now South Korea is a key Asian ally and one of the economic powers of East Asia. We (or the UK, more specifically) took a seat at the table with the IRA and helped end the uprising in Northern Ireland. It works sometimes, and you have to remember that. Did the people of the Age of Legends view the Dark One as a literal Satan, if at the same time they were actually talking about wielding the power to literally seal him away? Those must have been people with a very different mindset, granted to them by their power, and Mierin was among the most powerful of all of them. If Lews Therin supposed he could have sealed the Bore with one hundred twenty males, what do you suppose Mierin thought she could do with the power of the Shadow at her command?

 

I'm not expecting it, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if it turns out in AMoL that Mierin has been playing some kind of game this whole time, whose goal we have not yet seen. If she ends up helping to save the world through her own designs, I think a lot of jaws in this community will drop to the floor. But the thing is: Such an outcome is entirely possible based on what we know about her. It may not be probably, given what we know about RJ's imagination, but it's possible.

 

If this was all a bit rambling, allow me to summarize: I don't think it's as straightforward as it may seem for us to say that Mierin could have and should have made different decisions. Society had already cut its ties with her, and Lews Therin's wedding was a plausible last straw. She became a free agent at that time. Even if the costs were high to civilization, I can't blame her for pursuing her own interests thereafter. (Unless, of course, society had offered her some kind of olive branch that we aren't aware of. But we don't know one way or the other.) She was a headstrong, self-willed, ambitious person. More dutiful people, and more timid people, and more cynical people may have rolled over and tendered themselves to the mercy of the society that hated them. But Mierin never was any of those things. She lived in an Age of Legends, and if she thought she could get ahead by dealing with the devil, I'm inclined to think it was a possibility and therefore a legitimate choice.

 

Emu made a statement that striving for power is healthy. It is certainly fine to strive to succeed and accomplish goals, but Lanfear's desire for power has clearly become a distortion of that healthy desire.

 

That's quite possible. We'll know more in AMoL. It could be that her character is beyond redemption by this point.

 

In addition, there was a comment about selfishness being good and people who are unselfish will become victims, but that is not valid. You can be selfless and care about others while still caring for your own needs and building self-esteem. You do not need to eschew others' needs in order to provide for your own.

 

I suppose that's what I get for not being more nuanced. I wasn't talking about selfishness to the exclusion of unselfishness. I merely wanted to point out that some selfishness is a good and necessary thing, and should come first and foremost. "If I am not for myself, who will be for me?" Yes, the next line is "If I am only for myself, what am I?" But that doesn't nullify the first line. The two go together; so you and I have no disagreement here.

 

Many people suffer heartbreak and move on in a healthy direction rather than building upon revenge and anger.

 

I put it to you that, for loss of the magnitude Mierin suffered, this ideal outcome of "moving on in a healthy direction" is unlikely without luck, strong therapy, and a good deal of encouragement to move in the healthy direction. Was Mierin ever provided any of these things?

 

All of those emotions that emu mentioned are common in people, but the fact that Lanfear allows her anger and jealousy to control her is the problem. To recognize one's anger and jealousy is a positive, but to then murder people without remorse reveals a lack of control and a distortion of a natural human tendency.

 

Once again, your assumption that she "allowed" this is only workable if her jealousy is a personality trait. If it's a psychological disorder (and to me it clearly is), then the control you assume is there, does not actually exist.

 

~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~

Emu, you mistake me. I did not mean to imply you were a Nazi apologizer; I merely used the Nazis as a convenient fill-in-the-blank for "group of evil-do-ers". I could have just as easily said al Qaeda, Soviet or Chinese Communist parties, Cobra, the Death-Eaters, the Dallas Cowboys, or the Democrats.

 

You're playing with fire, there. Just going by national statistics, there's a good chance I'm a Death-Eater, a Cowboys fan, or even a Democrat! And then where would you be?

 

The point I was attempting to illustrate was you cannot side with evil and be good, these two viewpoints are inherently opposite and contradictory; they do not balance each other out, they annihilate each other.

 

RJ believed something similar, or at least that's the lesson he taught us with Aridhol. The methods of the Shadow would not defeat the Shadow, etc., etc. (Won't it be a lark if Fain turns out to be the one who defeats the Dark One, thereby proving RJ wrong in his own story?) Now, supposing one subscribes to this viewpoint, your conclusion is sound.

 

I don't, though. My sense of good and evil have nothing to do with that kind of model. I reject the binary absolutism which asserts that there is either the one or the other and ne'er the twain shall meet, on the grounds that it is grossly unrealistic on the basis of real-world examples. This is one reason why I prefer films like those of Hayao Miyazaki, where the heroes are not all good and the villains are not all bad. Some of his movies don't even have villains, and villainy is an exaggerated, overused concept that does not appear very often in real life. Simply put, in his films the characters are more realistic.

 

You probably gathered that my views lean in that direction, given the amount of space I've spent trying to articulate why Mierin is not as bad as most people assume her to be. Thus, you certainly anticipated my objection. Hence, I will give you the only answer that will suffice: We'll agree to disagree, because the alternative is a Kirk-Spock fight to the death--complete with music and foam weapons.

 

You dispute my authority to declare right and wrong and I rebuff you: you seem one for philosophical debate, well, re-read your Neichie. Every man and woman of sound judgment possesses the right--and the responsibility--to determine for themselves where they stand on moral issues.

 

Very good. It's "Nietzsche," but very good for asserting yourself like that. I don't mean to say that others aren't allowed to determine where they stand on the issues. I mean that your right to determine where you stand does not extend to supersede the determinations of others. Your earlier post staked out a position I found flimsy and untenable. You didn't support it. You basically just made the claim that there are "Good" and "Evil" and that these are incompatible. You didn't support your claim. Thus, I don't accept it as operative here. And unfortunately I have you at a disadvantage: I've already sunk many hours in this thread explaining my position. You'd have a lot of catching up to do, and we'd both still be hobbled by the board restrictions on political and religious discussion.

 

The short of it is that by your view of the world my case is unworkable. I accept that. I also think your view is wrong. You feel the same about mine. That's as far as we're likely to get, so we can amicably leave it at that and move on to greener pastures.

 

Yes, Miren may very well have been publicly scorned for her involvement with introducing the DO to the world and yes, she may very well have loved LTT with all her heart and was again scorned. These...excuses... are irrelevant. She willingly sided with evil. To use my previous analogy, she donned her jackboots and set to kicking kittens with her sleeves rolled up. Therefore, since she signed on with evil, she participated in evil...she is by definition evil.

 

Well put, but again all of this relies upon the integrity of your underlying conception of good and evil, which leaves no room for any other conclusion. Tell me: Do you judge people in the real world similarly? Is each person either all good or all evil, and never in between? If so, do you have much hope for the human future, and do you consider yourself one of the good ones?

 

And: If not, why do you object to my using real-world levels of complexity to analyze a fictional character, given that the process is so rewarding and thought-provoking?

 

And, as to my allegedly sexist remarks, well...I remember that scene you reference and I inferred it to mean they hooked up when they were young, and did a great deal of experimenting the limits of their strength with the power while spending a great deal of time linked...now whatever your viewpoint, the male/female link sounds very, very intimate and what do young people do with other, very attractive young people...well, I really hope I don’t have to draw you a picture... anyhoo...there was a lot of "tapping" going on.

 

I think it says more about your sex drive than it says about these books or Mierin that you interpreted that line to mean Rand was remembering all the hot sex they'd had, to the exclusion of all else. If I go look in the "What Age and Gender Are You?" thread, am I going to find a 20-year-old male, by chance? =)

 

At any rate, you're not off the hook for sexism. Please remember that it's unlikely that your disparaging mischaracterizations of the female sex are going to be appreciated by a general audience. We'll all get along better here if we put those kinds of attitudes aside and concentrate on productive conversation.

[bsmnt23]

~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~

Emu, you mistake me. I did not mean to imply you were a Nazi apologizer; I merely used the Nazis as a convenient fill-in-the-blank for "group of evil-do-ers". I could have just as easily said al Qaeda, Soviet or Chinese Communist parties, Cobra, the Death-Eaters, the Dallas Cowboys, or the Democrats.

 

You're playing with fire, there. Just going by national statistics, there's a good chance I'm a Death-Eater, a Cowboys fan, or even a Democrat! And then where would you be?

 

The point I was attempting to illustrate was you cannot side with evil and be good, these two viewpoints are inherently opposite and contradictory; they do not balance each other out, they annihilate each other.

 

RJ believed something similar, or at least that's the lesson he taught us with Aridhol. The methods of the Shadow would not defeat the Shadow, etc., etc. (Won't it be a lark if Fain turns out to be the one who defeats the Dark One, thereby proving RJ wrong in his own story?) Now, supposing one subscribes to this viewpoint, your conclusion is sound.

 

I don't, though. My sense of good and evil have nothing to do with that kind of model. I reject the binary absolutism which asserts that there is either the one or the other and ne'er the twain shall meet, on the grounds that it is grossly unrealistic on the basis of real-world examples. This is one reason why I prefer films like those of Hayao Miyazaki, where the heroes are not all good and the villains are not all bad. Some of his movies don't even have villains, and villainy is an exaggerated, overused concept that does not appear very often in real life. Simply put, in his films the characters are more realistic.

 

You probably gathered that my views lean in that direction, given the amount of space I've spent trying to articulate why Mierin is not as bad as most people assume her to be. Thus, you certainly anticipated my objection. Hence, I will give you the only answer that will suffice: We'll agree to disagree, because the alternative is a Kirk-Spock fight to the death--complete with music and foam weapons.

 

You dispute my authority to declare right and wrong and I rebuff you: you seem one for philosophical debate, well, re-read your Neichie. Every man and woman of sound judgment possesses the right--and the responsibility--to determine for themselves where they stand on moral issues.

 

Very good. It's "Nietzsche," but very good for asserting yourself like that. I don't mean to say that others aren't allowed to determine where they stand on the issues. I mean that your right to determine where you stand does not extend to supersede the determinations of others. Your earlier post staked out a position I found flimsy and untenable. You didn't support it. You basically just made the claim that there are "Good" and "Evil" and that these are incompatible. You didn't support your claim. Thus, I don't accept it as operative here. And unfortunately I have you at a disadvantage: I've already sunk many hours in this thread explaining my position. You'd have a lot of catching up to do, and we'd both still be hobbled by the board restrictions on political and religious discussion.

 

The short of it is that by your view of the world my case is unworkable. I accept that. I also think your view is wrong. You feel the same about mine. That's as far as we're likely to get, so we can amicably leave it at that and move on to greener pastures.

 

Yes, Miren may very well have been publicly scorned for her involvement with introducing the DO to the world and yes, she may very well have loved LTT with all her heart and was again scorned. These...excuses... are irrelevant. She willingly sided with evil. To use my previous analogy, she donned her jackboots and set to kicking kittens with her sleeves rolled up. Therefore, since she signed on with evil, she participated in evil...she is by definition evil.

 

Well put, but again all of this relies upon the integrity of your underlying conception of good and evil, which leaves no room for any other conclusion. Tell me: Do you judge people in the real world similarly? Is each person either all good or all evil, and never in between? If so, do you have much hope for the human future, and do you consider yourself one of the good ones?

 

And: If not, why do you object to my using real-world levels of complexity to analyze a fictional character, given that the process is so rewarding and thought-provoking?

 

And, as to my allegedly sexist remarks, well...I remember that scene you reference and I inferred it to mean they hooked up when they were young, and did a great deal of experimenting the limits of their strength with the power while spending a great deal of time linked...now whatever your viewpoint, the male/female link sounds very, very intimate and what do young people do with other, very attractive young people...well, I really hope I don’t have to draw you a picture... anyhoo...there was a lot of "tapping" going on.

 

I think it says more about your sex drive than it says about these books or Mierin that you interpreted that line to mean Rand was remembering all the hot sex they'd had, to the exclusion of all else. If I go look in the "What Age and Gender Are You?" thread, am I going to find a 20-year-old male, by chance? =)

 

At any rate, you're not off the hook for sexism. Please remember that it's unlikely that your disparaging mischaracterizations of the female sex are going to be appreciated by a general audience. We'll all get along better here if we put those kinds of attitudes aside and concentrate on productive conversation.

 

Well, Democrat, Death-Eater or (shudder) even Cowboys fan, you're still wrong, but thats a discussion for a seperate forum. I'll repeat that I never ment to imply that you are a nazi apoligiser, but you are a Lanfear apologiser, and thats why we're all here . Got me with "Nietzsche"...is there a WoT emoticon for facepalm? Oh well, have a Trolloc

 

Anyhoo, I really don’t want to "yeah, but..." you to death here, Emu, but...um...yeah, but here you expose the gap in your logical process: you are in fact dealing with a universe of Good and Evil, your own taste in media notwithstanding. This is Robert Jordan's sandbox we are all playing in, I think we should abide by the rules he set up? This isn’t real life, this sure isn’t a hipster foreign film fest; this is a Classic High Fantasy book series and as such certain rules are in play, namely the theme Good vs. Evil, I think we should stick to those parameters. Personally I have to admit to enjoying a good debate on the motivations of a given character--but within the framework of the given universe. With this in mind and given my previous arguments on Miren's personality, you have no choice but to conclude--in the context of the story-- that she is nothing if not evil regardless of weather she intended to become a villainess or not. She is now.

 

I'm going to rest my case on that point, you'll no doubt still like to apply your POV to her, but once you apply out-of-context rationalizations to a fictional character, doesn’t that sort of render that character null and void? At that point is it any longer the character the author even created?

 

I think the original question was why Rand did not ally himself with her. The general consensus is he would never, for whatever reason. Maybe as Selene she could have manipulated him to the point where he could have, but Lanfear seems a bit impatient with such schemes. She blows it. As Selene, she is every young man's fantasy come to life. She is perfect: beautiful, intelligent, obviously a Lady, obviously interested in Rand, seemingly all about Rand's greater destiny. The only thing holding Rand back is his greater problems. In tGH there is no mention of any sense of foreboding keeping him from shacking up with Selene, just a fading bit of guilt about being mostly-promised to Egwene, which seems to fade even more the closer Selene gets to him. Later in the Stone, he is shocked to the point where his subconscious brings Lews Therrin's memories of Miren when she, as Selene reveals herself as Lanfear. He didn’t know, and he was only thisclose to running off to find her at any point when he was in Cairhein. He wanted her bad. Rand's only...what? 18? 19? at this point? He's a kid; she could have lead him around by the short handle and manipulated him into doing whatever her black little heart desired with only a little effort. She loses her opportunity when she reveals she is Lanfear. We've all seen this at some point in our lives; no matter how hot she is, sometimes she is not worth it. Even Rand knows this on some instinctual level. Lanfear is what we like to call Bad News, Rand's own memories from LTT should confirm that. He is repulsed by her. Any sense of attraction evaporates, not even an impulse to "explore their power" once "for old time's sake" remains. From then on he treats her like the live cobra he knows her for.

 

I havent bothered with the "Introduce yourself" thread, I see no point, but since you ask: yes, male and 30. And "disparaging mischaracterizations of the female sex" nothing: got a lot of...hands-on research in the field of the opposite sex. We all know that we've had that one in our past who, despite being absolutly breathtakeingly beautiful is in fact straight poisen, with her own personal brand of batf#*k crazy. And we all know, that despite any brief, fond memories you might have of her, that she is Just Not Worth It. Lanfear, or Mirin, or whatever her name, is that character archetype, and that is science fact.

[Guest mike03]

If this was all a bit rambling, allow me to summarize: I don't think it's as straightforward as it may seem for us to say that Mierin could have and should have made different decisions. Society had already cut its ties with her, and Lews Therin's wedding was a plausible last straw. She became a free agent at that time. Even if the costs were high to civilization, I can't blame her for pursuing her own interests thereafter. (Unless, of course, society had offered her some kind of olive branch that we aren't aware of. But we don't know one way or the other.) She was a headstrong, self-willed, ambitious person. More dutiful people, and more timid people, and more cynical people may have rolled over and tendered themselves to the mercy of the society that hated them. But Mierin never was any of those things. She lived in an Age of Legends, and if she thought she could get ahead by dealing with the devil, I'm inclined to think it was a possibility and therefore a legitimate choice.

 

I agree that Lanfear's decision was not straightforward and simple, much like any individual decision. However, I disagree with your overall point because I think that the focus should be on her decisions since they were the final actions taken despite the extenuating circumstances. Her decision to follow the Dark One is not a one-time instance, and choosing a path of evil never is made on one choice. As we see in the current story, Lanfear continues to make the same choices to support the Dark One despite the change in setting and different factors that have arisen. The fact that she continues to follow the same path puts more of an emphasis on her decision-making process than the extrinsic factors.

 

Perhaps, I do not understand your argument. If you simply want to say that she made a legitimate choice based on the situation, of course that's fine. Every choice is legitimate and can have supportive reasoning, no matter how flawed. However, some choices obviously lead to more negative and evil consequences, such as supporting an evil entity who wants to cause harm and destroy the world.

 

What exactly are you defending in Lanfear's decision? If you claim that she made the right decision, I think that there is a flaw in your argument because I believe that you previously said it would be nice to see Lanfear help Rand in the final book. I definitely agree that her redemption would be an excellent turn in the story, but if that occurs, it also inherently shows that Lanfear made the wrong decision initially.

 

I put it to you that, for loss of the magnitude Mierin suffered, this ideal outcome of "moving on in a healthy direction" is unlikely without luck, strong therapy, and a good deal of encouragement to move in the healthy direction. Was Mierin ever provided any of these things?

 

I certainly agree that those things would be beneficial to achieving a positive, healthy outcome, and of course we can never know if she received them or not. Like you said, all we know is that she chose the Shadow, which is why we should focus on her choice rather than the external circumstances that we cannot be sure about. All that we have is the story and information from the authors, and we should base our opinion on the patterns of thought and behavior that we see from Lanfear.

 

Once again, your assumption that she "allowed" this is only workable if her jealousy is a personality trait. If it's a psychological disorder (and to me it clearly is), then the control you assume is there, does not actually exist.

 

That is incorrect regarding psychological disorders, and I actually agree that she has mental health issues. Even some of the most difficult disorders to live with, such as schizophrenia, antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, or obsessive-compusive disorder, do not cause an individual to lose control of every aspect at every time. It is under certain conditions or at certain times that individuals lose control. For example, with Lanfear, let's assume that she loses control when angry or jealous. She could clearly claim that she had no control over her actions, but where she has control is in preparation for those situations. There are many behavioral and cognitive strategies to prepare individuals for situations where they may lose control, and it is the individual's choice to recognize his or her faults and take steps to prevent those occurrences. Of course, like you said before, we cannot know if she sought out those opportunities or not. All we can use is the story, and Lanfear never seems to recognize or consider her own faults. She seems content with following her current path, which is why I believe that pride is her ultimate downfall. She seems to always consider herself right, and is not humble or empathic enough to think from another individual's perspective.

 

You mentioned a couple times that I am making assumptions, but it actually seems like you have many larger assumptions about Lanfear's behavior and the external factors. My assumptions are based on the story and the pattern of Lanfear's thoughts and behavior because you are correct in saying that we don't know how the past history occurred. However, it seems like you are setting up many hypothetical situations that excuse Lanfear's decisions rather than recognizing her free will and decision-making process.

[nolirion]

Funny whenever Rand view of lanfear this draw an argument on whether Lanfear was /is/will be a good person . When i find it really interesting ,the one's on Lanfear side develop some nice argument and that had some dept to the character ,as imaginary as some point of view are, it almost alway come back to justify Lanfear action by the way she was dumped by Ltt or because of some misplaced sense of self-righteousness over an hypothetic power-hungry women (well they are more to it of course).

 

 

 

But to answer the question of this thread ,witch's was already answer in the book by a letter from Moiraine, Rand clearly manipulated her , to protect his followers mainly , troughs her he gain information on Asmo plan , and valuable training and that is that .

 

 

 

One thing is sure Emu would have joined Lanfear!!!

[Suttree]

If you accept the DO as the supreme source of evil in the world, like RJ wrote in TSR, then there is a big difference between serving the DO for status in his hierarchy and serving the DO as part of a plan to overthrow him.

 

Letter to Carolyn Fusinato from RJ - 1 February 1994

 

Lanfear holding back and doing good for Rand's sake? Ha! She was psychically fixed on possessing a man who never loved her. Even with that, her desire for Rand was as much a desire for power as for him. To be the one to deliver the Dragon Reborn to the service of the Shadow; that would set her above the other Forsaken.

 

Great job overall, you have actually changed my mind on a couple points Emu. Unfortunately there is just way too much evidence to the contrary for your theory to hold much weight.

[Mr Ares]

You are welcome t actually provide dictionary definitions, rather than just claiming they exist.

 

You're quite right, Mr. Ares! I've been negligent in my accessibility to a lay audience. There are a number of etymological entries you may peruse at your leisure on this page. As for the modern definitions most similar to my own use of the word for Mierin, I propose Definition No. 2 under both Dictionary.com Unabridged and Collins English Dictionary Unabridged. However, as wielders of language are apt to do, I have waxed connotative in this thread. Simply put, that means I have slightly expanded the meaning of the word.

Those definitions do not support your claims, they support exactly what I said. So why did you bother providing them? As for rewriting the dictionary to suit my own argument, I can't say I'm hugely in favour of that as a debating tactic. Of course, my disagreement with your definition was only one part of a wider disagreement with your argument.

 

No, it isn't.

 

You don't give me much to work with, here!

True. Brevity is the soul of wit. But, to expand, LTT's mental monologue isn't enough. It doesn't explain why one man's opinion at one point in time, made in despair, should be considered the truth of the matter. I'm still not sure how this constitutes "challenging" the Creator. As I said, the Creator doesn't care overmuch - see Rand's thoughts in CoT, which LTT nods along to. Also, the voice (generally taken to be the Creator) in EotW - "I WILL TAKE NO PART". The evidence we have indicates that this is a problem caused by humanity, and they will be left to sort it out. How does that constitute a challenge to the Creator?

 

Alternatively, Shai'tan=(alomost) getting exactly what he wanted. How is that supplanted?

 

Ah! I'm getting better at this. Here you go.. In particular I direct your attention to Definition No. 2. of Dictionary.com Unabridged.

I still don't see how doing exactly what Shai'tan wants done is replacing, supplanting, removing, succeeding, etc., Shai'tan. You are just as bad at this as you ever were.

 

The fact that most readers appear to think that Mierin didn't love LTT would indicate it is not as clear as you pretend.

 

I invite you to document your support for the word "most," but even so it is a well-understood logical fallacy to base the truthfulness of a claim upon the popularity of that claim. Therefore, you probably could save time by retracting your claim rather than substantiating it, since it would be fallacious anyway.

I direct you to your use of the word clearly. Who is it clear to? You left that unspecified. If it is clear to you, then of course the feelings of the general public do not enter into it. If it is clear to the general public, the forum at large, then the popularity of the claim is entirely relevant. If most people don't think it is clear, then it is clearly not clear to most people - and if it is clearly not clear to most people then clearly you can't claim that it's clear. If you were to say 1+1=3, we couldn't prove you wrong by popular vote. If you said that to most people it was clear that 1+1=3, then asking most people what they think is perfectly valid. Because your statement was about popular perception, and therefore stating that the popular perception disagrees with what your perception of what the popular perception is is not fallacious. If you want, I can go back to brevity?

[AparnaVengakkad]

LTT had every right to love whomever he wanted and be with whomever he wanted (assuming they wanted to be with him too). What I meant in my earlier comment was that, from a viewpoint of saving the world from great evil, LTT could have prevented enormous tragedy by making a relatively small sacrifice and being with Mierin.

 

I do not understand what you mean here. Do you mean LTT/Rand should have been compassionate with Lanfear or do you mean Rand should have chosen to be with Mierin (as in marriage or taking her as a partner) for the sake of saving the world. If the one I agree, but LTT may or may not have been compassionate with her (we do not know what happened there). Rand couldn't have been earlier because he knew too little and was right to be scared of a woman who was touted to be most evil of forsaken.He believed he was acting for the world (or at least his friends) not the other way around.

 

If you mean the second then i disagree. If Rand can be called selfish, what would you call the woman who would destroy the world or remain with the shadow just because she didn't get the person she loved? (I understand the part about the bore and what the public sentiment may have done to her psyche, but that does not justify this threat. And i suppose we are talking about the original point of the post here?)

 

Besides it is not just about selfishness. Rand has been shown to be capable of personal love. So it would not have been no small sacrifice for him to give up a love (who loved him back and would also suffer, and that is important) for a woman who threatened to destroy the world if she didn't get him. That act would assail him and could over a course of time make him bitter. So much so that he may end up lashing out either at Mierin or the world itself. It is inevitable because he is susceptible to personal love. Now this wouldn't happen if he was a dispassionate person who didn't love any one person over another, didn't need companionship, and loves the whole world equally. That is not the case here, is it? He may well think that instead of making all these sacrifices - making himself and the person he loved unhappy- he should reject the offer and do whatever is necessary to protect the world.

 

Would lanfear herself be happy? How can a person be happy if she knows that her consort is not there by choice but because he was threatened? It was not because of something of value in her. If she is too proud to accept that, well she is blind.

 

That's an interesting interpretation. I think you may be right. However, I also think that such a motive, when true, points to weakness in the author's skills, because, ultimately, "control over other people" is just a more specific case of "power for power's sake." There's still the question of what to use that control to do. The only difference is that, if you accept that people have a strong fundamental right to self-control, then "control over other people" needs to be justified to a higher degree than "power for power's sake."

 

I guess what i was talking about here, what i think the authors think of is when they say control over other people is evil is, well the case where the control is exerted to inflate an ego. To feel good about oneself. When control is asserted to boost one's self confidence rather than to achieve a noble goal whatever that goal may be. Essentially many authors portray villians as big bullies with vast reserves of power, yet for some reason lacking in self respect and a healthy notion of self -worth. I should think people would think the same of Lanfear. After all her notion of self worth seems to be linked to LTT and his acceptance and love of her. She could've just shrugged and decided that if he does not think me worthy of him i do not consider him worthy of me. She didn't. She wanted his regard. Probably at all costs. That to me is a sign of mistaken notions of self worth.

I do not think her evil for it. Most people are to some extent or other are susceptible to it to varying degrees. It would be an exceptional person who is not affected by rejection. And if she was hurt there is nothing wrong in it. I am sorry for her... But to take that as sufficient reason to hurt other people (aviendha, egwene, et al). I do not agree with it. I wouldn't blame Rand if he were to do something about her just for that streak of mental instability.

 

There's an old saying: "Don't suffer fools." I think Mierin's disdainful conduct toward others can largely be explained by that concept. She goes out of her way to help the people she thinks deserve her help, and has no compunctions about pushing aside everybody else. In other words, she's a hardass. She doesn't have patience for people who get in her way. Many effective leaders, in politics and elsewhere, have that kind of mentality. Everybody wants to pass themselves off as a kind soul who wouldn't so much as hurt a flower, but that kind of existence isn't realistic for most of us, nor is it what most people desire. Part of developing a mature worldview requires acknowledging that good and evil rarely appear in their pure forms, and accepting that even hardasses can make the world a better place. All we can do is try to escape evil. We can't yet lay claim to what constitutes unfettered good. That makes it hard to judge people, as opposed to judging specific qualities within people (which is much easier).

 

I hold people to a high standard. When they fall short, I don't treat them cruelly like Mierin would, but I do tend to dismiss them like she would. Because of my aggressive style I have changed people's lives for the better, more often than for the worse. I have also encouraged people to think and communicate, which is always a positive. Unconditional kindness and respect carries a hidden cost: It helps the weak to become weaker. It helps bad ideas go unchallenged. You can disagree with Mierin's style, but her motives are valid. Consider what she did to Asmodean. Asmodean was an invaluable tutor for Rand, and may have helped him to survive in the ordeals that followed. Given that Rand is the key to the fate of the world, you can even see the benefit in her mistreatment of Asmodean.

 

Right now, the Tokyo Electric Power Company is sending technicians into the damaged nuclear power plant to contain radiation leakage, exposing them to radiation dosages that will increase their risk of disease and early death. That seems like a harsh thing to do, doesn't it? We don't even know if those workers are volunteering or being assigned. But the culture of honor among hazardous site workers makes it likely that many of them would volunteer, and, even if that weren't the case, they would have known upon taking their jobs that they might eventually end up risking themselves to mitigate an emergency. Somewhere, some power company executive is authorizing every risky operation being undertaken. Is that person evil? No, because there is a context to the action, and that context justifies everything. The alternative is massive uncontrolled radiation leaks, pandemonium, and the crash of the Japanese economy and potentially with it the economy of the world.

 

This is not really so different than what Mierin did to Asmodean, except that she didn't give him a choice and Asmodean was fool enough to think that by going over to the Shadow he might never be called upon to make such a sacrifice. Mierin is probably also cognizant of her own peril in serving the Shadow, which might help further explain her relentless attitude toward her Shadow counterparts.

 

Mierin's attitude toward servants of the Shadow may well be resentful to the point of contempt. The same goes for Aes Sedai. Rightly or wrongly, she probably thinks of them as inferior and expendable. If she mistreats or kills Darkfriends or Aes Sedai (deliberately, as opposed to acting in a fit of rage), I'd suggest that, even if isn't something we would condone, she has a strong justification for her actions because they serve a legitimate purpose. (Hence the whole Asmodean example.) There aren't many examples of Mierin being destructive or cruel without a good reason. There is at least one I can think of (her behavior toward the Darkfriend before going to the Cleansing), but that episode is riddled with many of the asterisks that muddle Mierin in the form of Cyndane. It's hard to say anything about her.

 

I'm inclined to see her shielding of Asmodean to press him into service as Rand's tutor as an constructive action with a human cost, a cost she justifies by his allegiance to the Shadow, demonstrating in her mind Asmodean's unworthiness. Real life is filled with those kinds of hard gains. Mierin would be a better person if she had more empathy for the human cost of her actions, that much is definite. But as to how that extra empathy might influence her actions...I'm not sure it would make much of a difference.

 

Hmm... I was not thinking of Asmodean but of those wagon dark friends and of Egwene. If someone, a reasonable person was against her, Lanfear would lash out against that person. And I do not consider that the sign of a good ruler. But would Mierin have done that before she went over to the shadow? That is open to speculation... I frankly do not know. If i take that link you gave as history and truth then i think she woudn't have made a good leader in any case.

 

As for not suffering fools.. and softness only bolstering weakness... There are different facets to this i think. There may be some who need a stern hand, who would take softness for weakness, and be made indolent by that... and others who would blossom under compassion and would wither under an unforgiving, dismissive or disdainful eye. The world after all has all sorts of people. A good leader should bring out best in all (or most of) her people, not just in a few who would work well anyway. And she should be able to know when to be firm or dismissive and when to be gentle. If she does not want to be a leader none of this matters.

Lanfear could be harsh (not kill) with people if they do not go her way (If she gets too harsh someone more powerful than her may take notice and decide to do something about it, but that is another matter..). But she cannot claim to be a good leader if she does that.

 

So i think I basically disagree with you on that.

 

Lews Therin himself provided the original framing in TEotW prologue. He likened the sealing of the Bore to a folly because it attempted to correct a cosmic disaster--the drilling of the Bore. His actions triggered the Dark One's Counterstroke and nearly ruined the world. His view was that only the Creator could alter the nature of the world, and humans would always fall short in trying to recreate that power for themselves. Yet, that is exactly what happened with the cleansing of the Taint, this time with no disastrous consequences, no cosmic counterstroke. It was a challenge to the Creator--not to the Creator's authority (which is irrelevant since the Creator seems to have abdicated responsibility), but to the Creator's ability to shape the nature of the world.

 

The framing was LTT's not creator's. So how can it be challenging the creator? It may have been challenging LTT's notion of creator. Anyways the nature of world was altered when Bore was drilled, so the case of Creator being the only person able to alter the world does not stand, does it?

So Rand managed to cleanse the taint and thus changed his own notion of what humanity can do. Naught to do with creator since creator didn't seem to have any notion either way. (or may be he thought that humans can do the cleansing and that is why he didn't bother to interfere. He knows humans can make mistakes and they can also find their way. Still there is no way to know since the fellow doesn't bother with talking.)

 

Hmm.. I've given quite a long winded reply to your thoughts...

[szilard]

Necro!!!

 

I know Rand is supposed to be a simple farmer, but why didn't Rand just simply accept Lanfear as a trainer? Unless he didn't trust her, but Lanfear did nothing but attempt to help Rand become more powerful.

It would be interesting to see what happens if Rand and Lanfear had joined forces...

 

Totally wrong question. Rand often takes advantage of her ignorance.

 

I think it is worth noting that all three of those choices came from Lanfear's finding out about Aviendha.

 

Exactly.

 

I don't agree with other fans' interpretations that Mierin is insane. (And, if I may wax meta for a moment, the sexist comments about her just aren't funny at all, and certainly aren't relevant. I hate that when people do that. It comes out especially with Egwene, Cadsuane, and Faile. Is it so hard to make criticisms without descending into bigotry?) Mierin's jealousy and apparently her short temper drove her to temporary insanity that day at the docks, but as a continuing character trait Mierin is really among the most rational of the Forsaken, up there with Asmodean and Graendal. She's mentally disturbed for sure, but then again if we're using that as a judge of good character then Rand is a considerably worse villain than she is, which doesn't jive. We know that history has attributed many atrocities to her, but the judgment of history is warped and unreliable.

 

Bingo!

 

What exactly suggest that she's a decent person? She was not trapped by bad circumstances - she joined the Dark One on her own free will because of obsessive jealousy and desire for power. She committed countless atrocities in the War of Power - you may say the history has been warped and the Guide is unreliable, but you don't get to be a top Forsaken for as long as she did without committing plenty of atrocities. There's a reason why her name is still used to scare little kids. In the main series, the only positive for her is that she was unwilling to kill or compel Rand at first, but even this was at least partly due to her arrogance that she can seduce him to join her on his own free will. Most everything else she did shows that she's has a really cruel and twisted personality. Skinning someone for bringing bad news, setting up Isendre to be caught stealing by planting the stolen jewellery just out of petty meanness, casually killing a Darkfriend without a second thought before she went to the Cleansing simply because she was in a hurry, torturing Egwene at the docks instead of killing her quickly - all this certainly suggests she's evil and cruel and even somewhat sadistic. And if she's not megalomaniac with all of her "I am the best female channeller ever, the most beautiful woman ever, the best in TAR, I can beat the Dark One and the Creator and rule the world forever, only the most powerful man in the world is good enough for me" attitude, I don't who is.

 

The "good" side uses torture too.

 

the bolded part: http://www.theoryland.com/theories.php?func=5&rec=95&theo=2852 She thinks that she deserves the best things in life. Ever met any human?

 

 

 

TOR Questions of the Week, February 2005-July 2005
As an aside, for those who think that Lanfear was in some way twisted against her will by being involved in drilling the Bore---I have heard the theory advanced---of all those involved in the project, she was the only major figure to go over to the Shadow. She was ripe for the Shadow's plucking long before the Bore was drilled.

Letter to Carolyn Fusinato from RJ - 1 February 1994
Lanfear holding back and doing good for Rand's sake? Ha! She was psychically fixed on possessing a man who never loved her. Even with that, her desire for Rand was as much a desire for power as for him. To be the one to deliver the Dragon Reborn to the service of the Shadow; that would set her above the other Forsaken. And learning that the access ter'angreal for the two huge sa'angreal were still in existence....Sure, she wanted his love--not least because it had been denied her; Lanfear was a woman who claimed a right to anything she wanted--wanted his devotion, but even more than his body, Lanfear wanted power, the power possibly to replace the Dark One, even to replace the Creator. For Rand's sake? Not a chance.
 

End of.

 

 

(I sometimes disagree with the Creator.)

 

That's why I like her (except 'the plastic surgery' part). Her mentality: "I want that, so I will choose this path" is not wrong in itself. Plus she has a very colourful personality.

 

People are not black and white. LTT was not a saint either (I never liked him).

 

She basically kills people without an ounce of remorse. And not just at the docks either. There was that bearded darkfriend she just casually killed because she had to leave and couldnt be bothered with him anymore. She is basically self-deluded and psychotic, with no regard for other human life. She may not have the world scaling death and destruction that some of the other Forsaken may have had, but that doesnt make her any less bad.

 

Again,  our 'heroes' do this all the time.

 

She is like the Twilight vampires, physically alluring in order to attract her prey. She's a man-eater.

 

Please.

 

Extreme narcissism at it's worst, incapable of loving anyone but themselves.
She doesn't love LTT, she just thinks she does because it's one of the few things she can't have.
LTT knew this and by default, so does Rand.

 

Not true.

 

Having gotten a taste of how personal politics worms its way into just about every social institution, I've come to appreciate that awards and accolades are not necessarily a good measure of a person. I've seen people win awards they did not deserve, and I've seen plenty of people who should have won awards go unrecognized. In the real world, right now, there are millions of people who deserve the public's affection and nary a single one of them are popularly known.

Mierin's research prowess and strength as an Aes Sedai speak more than any third name would. And, let's not forget, several of the Forsaken did have a third name before they went over to the Shadow. If having a third name is no defense against personal failings, then accusing a person of failings on the basis of not having a third name doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

 

 

Yep.