The Lanfear Appreciation Thread

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

i'm just having a hard time understanding what kind of quotes could support a personal opinion of a particular character. or how anybody could be forced to offer anything in refutation of someone else's personal opinion?

 

Uhmm quotes from the story that helped shape said personnel opinion? You know little things that would back up some of Emu's statements such as...

 

There is enough ambiguity and complexity to Mierin's character that my interpretation of that character is defensible inasmuch as it follows from what is in the text.

 

 

i tried to quickly scan the thread for the quote you quoted, but i failed, sorry. again, so very many words. . . but it doesn't seem like that was said in the first few posts. seems like maybe it was a reaction to the intensifying debate?

 

i'm not criticising your statements here. i'm just trying to figure out where and why the whole thing went all angry.

 

i still don't get it, but it doesn't matter. i don't understand a lot of these things.

[Suttree]

i'm just having a hard time understanding what kind of quotes could support a personal opinion of a particular character. or how anybody could be forced to offer anything in refutation of someone else's personal opinion?

 

Uhmm quotes from the story that helped shape said personnel opinion? You know little things that would back up some of Emu's statements such as...

 

There is enough ambiguity and complexity to Mierin's character that my interpretation of that character is defensible inasmuch as it follows from what is in the text.

 

 

i tried to quickly scan the thread for the quote you quoted, but i failed, sorry. again, so very many words. . . but it doesn't seem like that was said in the first few posts. seems like maybe it was a reaction to the intensifying debate?

 

i'm not criticising your statements here. i'm just trying to figure out where and why the whole thing went all angry.

 

i still don't get it, but it doesn't matter. i don't understand a lot of these things.

 

another example...

If I were basing my interpretations of Mierin on fluff and smoke, then you could call me out for not having ground to stand upon. But you can't say that my interpretations are wrong because they aren't identical to RJ's. The books themselves have room for his take and my take.

 

Based on these and other statements I think it is valid to ask Emu to showcase what she is basing her interpretations on and to provide quotes from the story that would give her opinion a ground to stand on. As it is I think "fluff and smoke" is an apt description.

[Guest Emu on the Loose]

Just backing up what I believe with quotes, may be helpful if you did the same(you mention evidence in the books supporting your interpretation) instead of relying on opinion so much. At the very least some of these other posters that are getting all riled up would be forced to offer valid refutations.

Now that's a meritorious suggestion...in principle. In practice, it's almost always a diversionary tactic from people who are not going to be the least bit persuaded by whatever amount of evidence is shown to them. Of course, it's also a very difficult request to decline, because a request for proof is always legitimate, even when the requester's motives are not. I run into this dilemma all the time in political discourse. Some mook asks to see the proverbial birth certificate. It takes a lot of work and time to fulfill that request. Then the mook just turns around and says it's a forgery or some blather like that.

 

As it goes with politics, here at Dragonmount I recognize that many of the people who participate in hostile debate are not interested in the subject matter at hand or in a reasonable exchange of ideas. They just want to shoot down ideas they don't like, win validation from the other people following the debate, and generally feel good about being confrontational.

 

Other people are less malicious than that, but get in over their heads when it comes to intellectual exchange. They honestly don't realize when they've been rebutted and are logically obliged to come up with a new argument or a new position, and then they become petulant when their assertions are not acknowledged thereafter. People like that aren't going to know how to process evidence even when it is shown to them point-blank.

 

The Egwene-bashing threads are full of both kinds of people, but to a lesser extent it shows up anywhere that somebody has a controversial idea about any aspect of the series. That's human nature for you.

 

If I had a vested interest in trying to persuade people that they ought to adopt my views on Mierin, I would own a higher level of responsibility to comply with even the pettiest demands to see every intricate detail of my thought process. As it stands, however, I don't mind if no one at all agrees with my interpretation of the character. My expectation is that some folks enjoy reading my thoughts, agree or disagree, and this expectation in combination with my own enthusiasm for the series is what motivates me to post here on the forums in threads like this. Having been involved in all aspects of participation in and administration of web forum communities, I know very well that thoughtful, passion-driven discussion is what keeps forums alive and thrumming.

 

The bottom line is that I'm comfortable not showing you a single excerpt in support of my views, especially since I have already posted excerpts in the past, to no avail, and doubly especially since you and others debating with me have disrespected the debate by showing little if any consideration at all for the points I have already made, as if nothing could possibly be valid if it is not excruciatingly cited with footnotes the length of my arm.

 

Nevertheless, out of goodwill I will oblige you with some substantiation of my position. What, specifically, would you like to know about? I hope you won't mind doing it this way, since if you are being honest in your request then you won't mind spending some of your own time as a concession to the time I will have to spend digging up these bits and pieces.

 

 

~~~ ~~~ ~~~

just curious and not voicing an opinion on the thread's OP, but since the thread is titled, "The Lanfear Appreciation Thread She's hot, she's dangerous, she's everything you need," and the first few posts are pretty much neutral or sort of in agreement with the OP, without any angry seeming objections, is there an objective reason that people seem to start getting angry only with emu's statement of opinion?

 

is it because there are so many words typed, and that gives more things to be anrgy about? is it the way the opinion is phrased? is it because the opinion is posed as an interpretation instead of calling itself an opinion? is it a specific dislike of the poster of the opinion?

I expect that my tone and style inspires a bit of defensiveness in some people who disagree with my positions. Of course, it could just be that they're trolls. But if they're not, if they are genuinely upset with my personal views about this fictional character Mierin Eronaile, then it has to be that they somehow feel threatened. I know I write intelligently; that might make me seem intimidating. I know I write forcefully; that might make me seem aggressive. And I also know that people don't like to feel intimidated or threatened, and if they interpret somebody as doing either to them, they'll get snippy about it. That's my theory.

 

Another possibility is that the loudest gripers and moaners are just not very well-behaved people in general. If you look at some of the threads that I don't participate in at all, such as the Egwene-bashing threads, you'll see the same acts of pettiness, derision, and spoilage of honest discussion.

 

I do know that I have gone out of my way in this thread not to tell anybody that their own interpretation of Mierin is unsupportable, even though I think that I have a much more solid and well-considered read of the character than just about anybody else has bothered to construct. Every bit of argument thus far has been with people who will not extend that same courtesy to me, as if my own interpretation of the character is an attack of some kind. Pshaw!

 

Maybe they all got bitten by emus when they were kids and never got over it...

 

 

Edited for misspelling.

[Mrs. Cindy Gill]

the opinion that's being debated seems to be what someone likes or dislikes about a character? the statements about the solid ground this personal opinion is based on seem to occur after the poking for the opinion begins, and may be reactionary?

 

i dunno, i have opinions about characters in the books that aren't the same as other people's opinions, and probably aren't quite what the author intended me to feel. . . i wouldn't be able to provide quotes to defend my personal like or dislike of a character. it doesn't seem like the same thing as defending something like, say, who killed a specific chracter based on a logical dissection of facts as presented in the text. which i also couldn't personally support with quotes, but i do understand how others could. if they were taking notes.

 

but i really wasn't trying to derail the original argument. just trying to understand what all the upsettedness was about.

 

thank you for trying to explain it to me. i'm afraid it's one of the things i just don't understand no matter how much it's explained.

[Suttree]

The bottom line is that I'm comfortable not showing you a single excerpt in support of my views, especially since I have already posted excerpts in the past, to no avail, and doubly especially since you and others debating with me have disrespected the debate by showing little if any consideration at all for the points I have already made, as if nothing could possibly be valid if it is not excruciatingly cited with footnotes the length of my arm.

 

Convenient that bolded bit and I have disrespected the debate? I read your statements, contradicted a few with direct quotes and then pointed out how you may be able to get some of the other posters that seemed upset into constructive discourse. Until you do so, and especially since it is an interpretation that runs counter to most evidence available, people have every right to view it as "fluff and smoke".

[Zentari]

just curious and not voicing an opinion on the thread's OP, but since the thread is titled, "The Lanfear Appreciation Thread She's hot, she's dangerous, she's everything you need," and the first few posts are pretty much neutral or sort of in agreement with the OP, without any angry seeming objections, is there an objective reason that people seem to start getting angry only with emu's statement of opinion?

 

is it because there are so many words typed, and that gives more things to be anrgy about? is it the way the opinion is phrased? is it because the opinion is posed as an interpretation instead of calling itself an opinion? is it a specific dislike of the poster of the opinion?

 

i'm just having a hard time understanding what kind of quotes could support a personal opinion of a particular character. or how anybody could be forced to offer anything in refutation of someone else's personal opinion? i feel like i'm missing some kind of social interactiony thing here.

Honest answer ? She projects ideals and morals to Lanfear that she never had in the first place , trying to justify her being a complete monster by saying she was spurned of love.That and she shows unwarranted familiarity with her ; how many posters refer to her by first name and why ? She herself claimed a new name,was anyone married to her like LT to be on first name basis ?

 

To be precise , fanboyism is an annoying trait especially since when push comes to the shove the defense is "this is my opinion and I'm entitled to it" even as it goes against what the writer said.

 

Other people are less malicious than that, but get in over their heads when it comes to intellectual exchange. They honestly don't realize when they've been rebutted and are logically obliged to come up with a new argument or a new position, and then they become petulant when their assertions are not acknowledged thereafter. People like that aren't going to know how to process evidence even when it is shown to them point-blank.

Pot meet kettle ?

 

 

The Egwene-bashing threads are full of both kinds of people, but to a lesser extent it shows up anywhere that somebody has a controversial idea about any aspect of the series. That's human nature for you.

It would be good if that controversy had actual substance behind it.

 

 

If I had a vested interest in trying to persuade people that they ought to adopt my views on Mierin, I would own a higher level of responsibility to comply with even the pettiest demands to see every intricate detail of my thought process. As it stands, however, I don't mind if no one at all agrees with my interpretation of the character. My expectation is that some folks enjoy reading my thoughts, agree or disagree, and this expectation in combination with my own enthusiasm for the series is what motivates me to post here on the forums in threads like this. Having been involved in all aspects of participation in and administration of web forum communities, I know very well that thoughtful, passion-driven discussion is what keeps forums alive and thrumming.

Actually since you put forth an argument , isn't your responsibility to back it up ? That's kinda how it works.

 

The bottom line is that I'm comfortable not showing you a single excerpt in support of my views, especially since I have already posted excerpts in the past, to no avail, and doubly especially since you and others debating with me have disrespected the debate by showing little if any consideration at all for the points I have already made, as if nothing could possibly be valid if it is not excruciatingly cited with footnotes the length of my arm.

If you are comfortable not showing support don't fret when someone calls you out on them.

 

 

I know I write intelligently; that might make me seem intimidating. I know I write forcefully; that might make me seem aggressive. And I also know that people don't like to feel intimidated or threatened, and if they interpret somebody as doing either to them, they'll get snippy about it. That's my theory.

Eloquence does not equal substance, as any politician would know.

 

I do know that I have gone out of my way in this thread not to tell anybody that their own interpretation of Mierin is unsupportable, even though I think that I have a much more solid and well-considered read of the character than just about anybody else has bothered to construct. Every bit of argument thus far has been with people who will not extend that same courtesy to me, as if my own interpretation of the character is an attack of some kind. Pshaw!

So it's just like when you say that you COULD provide support but you don't ?

[Lama Chemist Ho]

interesting thread...found myself learning things, in spite of myself. dammit people this is supposed to be strictly entertainment for me.

 

anyways its been quite a while now since I read the lanfear books (2-5?), I remember her helping rand in the beginning, giving him advice on the portal stones, callandor, knowledge he wasn't about to get from the aes sedai any time soon (at least not without ending chained on some cushions beside the amyrlin seat, princess leia-style) and I can't remember for certain it ever being clarified.....within the actual text that is.....whether her intentions or motivations were purely evil, or potentially ambiguous. so, ok sorry to be dense but it seems like at first, someone was arguing that you can have an interpretation of an ambiguous character which is different from the author's, and someone else was saying...you can't? or that its wrong in light of the author announcing a contradictory? hmmm... and now the debate is over whether you CAN, or CAN'T, interpret lanfear as not wholly evil? I'm just trying to follow (god knows why).

 

"fluff and smoke" is an apt description.

I guess my humble, pittily opinion here is to disagree. despite what jordan may have said outside the actual work, and lanfear's monstrous acts within the work, I don't think its beyond the realm of possibility to interpret her as not-wholly-evil / beyond redemption. no, I'm not going to go look up quotes either...I don't have a life, but I still don't have THAT much time. you may pwn me as you wish. but that might be a good idea for a poll topic..."is lanfear 100% evil and utterly irredeemable, or not?" (I dunno...the exact wording would be key)

 

 

 

would that some of you could apply your times energies and superior intellects to more important causes, like solving the problems of the world (cancer, war, etc) rather than arguing pointlessly about fantasy books

 

(not that I'm one to talk)

[Elan Tedronai]

one of the more overrated characters of the series. Her last accomplishment was working with beidomon to bore through the DO prison.

 

Other than that she's completely useless.

[randsc]

See, when I am overbearingly arrogant in a post it is intentional, and not to be taken seriously. Certain flightless birds, on the other hand...

[Suttree]

"fluff and smoke" is an apt description.

I guess my humble, pittily opinion here is to disagree. despite what jordan may have said outside the actual work, and lanfear's monstrous acts within the work, I don't think its beyond the realm of possibility to interpret her as not-wholly-evil / beyond redemption. no, I'm not going to go look up quotes either...I don't have a life, but I still don't have THAT much time. you may pwn me as you wish. but that might be a good idea for a poll topic..."is lanfear 100% evil and utterly irredeemable, or not?" (I dunno...the exact wording would be key)

 

I see you need some perspective here, this debate started a while back and revolved around Emu's assertion that Lanfear was actually a "decent" person who only had been wronged by fate and the universe.

 

Emu on the Loose, on 26 March 2011 - 02:28 AM, said:

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. Charn thought well of her, and Mierin's own actions as Lanfear in the pages of the books have suggested a decent person who has gotten trapped by bad circumstances--not a blithely evil villain who deludes herself with dreams of the Dark One's power. At heart she is a decent person--frustrated and tragic, overly jealous and proud to a fault, but not sadistic or megalomaniacal like most of the other Forsaken.

 

Things moved along later in the thread to say that the BWB is not reliable so we can't hold her responsible for the atrocities listed within and other such convenient twisting of the facts from the books. You can check out the bulk of it here...

 

http://www.dragonmount.com/forums/topic/57976-why-rand-never-joined-with-lanfear/page__view__findpost__p__1793404

 

Just to highlight, here is a choice bit...

 

Emu on the Loose,

However, by my standards Mierin has made mostly honest, ethical, and consistent choices over the course of her life, and has demonstrated a strong humanistic impulse. That constitutes decency in my book.

 

As you can see the point you raise, of there being a possibility of redemption is far different than what was initially discussed. I understand there is the whole "no-one can walk so far in the Shadow that he may not return to the Light", but if you could Lanfear would have passed that mark long ago. She most certainly wasn't a decent person "trapped by bad circumstances".

[randsc]

Yes, Emu's argument is an absurdity. Lanfear was driven to the Shadow by mean, mean people who just didn't understand that she didn't mean to release unspeakable evil into the world.

 

Of course, there is no discussion of WHY exactly she was boring that hole.

[Guest Emu on the Loose]

one of the more overrated characters of the series. Her last accomplishment was working with beidomon to bore through the DO prison.

 

Other than that she's completely useless.

I think you're in the wrong thread.

 

Idea time! Some of you folks ought to start a "Lanfear Sucks" thread. Or maybe an "Emu Sucks" thread. Either way, you're not adding much to this one.

 

I find it baffling that many folks--or maybe it's just a small but vocal minority--can't accept the plausible scenario of a character who was never truly evil so much as pushed into evil because of events that were out of control or because of character flaws that set them up to fail. The story of Darth Vader is a perfect example, with the difference being that George Lucas decided that Vader wasn't a one-dimensional ne'er-do-well, whereas Robert Jordan perhaps never had that same opinion of Mierin (although we'll see in AMoL). You can't say Vader wasn't a villain, given all that he did, yet his redemption at the end of the story revealed that he had never been truly evil so much as doomed to fail. Mierin is the same: Her ambition culminated in the Bore--a project meant to make both her and the human species more powerful (a noble and humanistic endeavor), but which instead unleashed the worst possible evil. The spread of that evil wasn't her intention and she bears only a minimal ethical fault for it, unless you're brazen enough to damn the entire human impulse of curiosity as well as our inherently ambitious nature (in which case you would be a cynical misanthrope). Likewise, her love for Lews Therin was honest enough and true to her character even though it overlapped with her personal desire for greatness, and that love when rejected was more than she could cope with--which, when combined with the likely implosion of her career following the drilling of the Bore is a readily plausible explanation for her subsequent declaration for the Shadow. The result of Mierin's character and the nature of the world around here is that she became a Forsaken. Then, in the Third Age, she went out of her way to rekindle her relationship with Rand and to help him become the great person she wanted him to be. Not one of you has truly responded to any of this, other than to dismiss it with a droll puerility. And when you focus on her culpability for her wrongdoings to the exclusion of the context in which those wrongdoings occurred (let alone her numerous "rightdoings" which far outnumber her wrongdoings in the text), you are demonstrating a moral simplicity which cannot adequately describe most human behavior nor effectively judge character integrity--even in works of fiction, let alone real life. Can bad people do no good? Can good people do no bad? Is everything a drab black and white?

 

Looking back at some of the comments in this thread, I see now that many excellent points I made were either ignored outright or rebuffed without proper critical analysis. That's disappointing, not only because it discourages other people from participating in a more positive discussion but also because it suggests that some of you have no real interest in discussing this character as an object of our mutual fascination. Instead, some of you seem to prefer to protect your preconceived notions about the character--in which case this kind of thread is the worst for you to participate in. It's like the Egwene-bashers who hijack pretty much any attempt at discussion of her character in a way that reflects the passions of those who enjoy this series or the character in particular. And a few of you have let your hostile attitude degenerate into criticism on a more personal level. Tut tut!

 

I can't prove, and never claimed, that my take on Mierin is the only valid interpretation that a person can make. But it is valid, and if you're not content to let me have it then too bad for you. I have nothing more to say to those who don't want to advance the discussion in this thread in a positive way.

[Suttree]

Looking back at some of the comments in this thread, I see now that many excellent points I made were either ignored outright or rebuffed without proper critical analysis.

 

and yet some of your comments, by posters such as myself, have been proven wrong with quotes as evidence. You continue with more opinion and a refusal to back up anything with evidence from the text, but the fact is many of your claims are patently false. A few examples being, things like what we know from Maria's quote such as the drilling was not done solely with "noble" intentions. Or that her love per RJ and Rand was not "honest".

 

TSR, Ch. 9

 

You were mine long before that pale-haired milksop stole you. Before she ever saw you. You loved me!”

 

“And you loved power!” For a moment he felt dazed. The words sounded true — he knew they were true — but where had they come from?

 

Selene — Lanfear — seemed as startled as he, but she recovered quickly.

 

Notice Lanfear doesn't even attempt to deny it, she was only startled Rand remembered the truth of the situation.

 

Let's try and move this forward, you did ask me to be specific when asking for proof, it is somewhat difficult to specify when 99% of what you put forth goes against all available evidence. But lets start with this:

 

(let alone her numerous "rightdoings" which far outnumber her wrongdoings in the text)

 

or bringing it back farther that...

 

Mierin has made mostly honest, ethical, and consistent choices over the course of her life, and has demonstrated a strong humanistic impulse.

 

Feel free to pull quotes from the text in support of these views. If you truly look forward to honest discourse please stop projecting intentions on others, stop being evasive, and start providing proof for your assertions relating to Lanfear's character.

[Lama Chemist Ho]

one of my favorite scenes of the last 6 books

 

"If you truly are one of the Chosen, I will serve you," the bearded man in front of Cyndane said doubtfully, but she did not hear what else he had to say.

She could feel it. That much of saidar being drawn to one spot was a beacon that any woman in the world who could channel would feel and locate. So he had found a woman to use the other access key. She would have faced the Great Lord -faced the Creator!- with him. She would have shared the power with him, let him rule the world at her side. And he had spurned her love, spurned her!

The fool babbling at her was an important man as such things were accounted here and now, but she did not have time to make certain of his trustworthiness.....

 

everyone knows what happened next, and the only other thing I wanted to say about some of the people we see lanfear kill...it's not like they're all completely innocent. kadere for example, has been mentioned a few times, didn't he kill his sister or something as he killed what was her face? disendre? yes at several places in kadere's chapter,

 

Someday he hoped to return to Saldaea, to walk in the garden where his sister Teodora had taught him his first letters and numbers. He missed her as much as he did Saldaea.........(then again, later) He wished he were home in Saldaea. He wished he could see Teodora again.

then a nice typo by Isendre:

 

"They shaved me, Hadnan. Adelin and Enaila and Jolien, they held me down and shaved every hair. They beat me with with nettles, Hadnan." (sic)

maybe she was just sniffling while speaking...

 

The Maidens had broken her. He had broken people himself, and he knew the signs.

 

He had loved his sister, but she had discovered what he was, and she would not have kept silent.

I'm just saying one could argue maybe lanfear has these things in the back of her mind when she flies off the handle and suddenly kills people in a violent rage. maybe some part of her is even perpetually disgusted by them at all times, or by having to constantly deal with them, and can't wait to seize such opportunities. anywho this being the lanfear appreciation thread and all, maybe someone could be kind enough to deign to recall me the atrocious despicable acts attributed to her? cuz killing kadere isn't one. and I can't seem to remember all that many...(of course I have no idea what the "BWB" is or whatever) :P

[Guest Emu on the Loose]

I've had that thought myself: Maybe she has a particularly low opinion of Darkfriends. She certainly thinks poorly of the other Forsaken. I'm not enough of a WoT ninja to recall every Mierin appearance in the series, but to my recollection she has never murdered a non-Darkfriend onscreen, and the only time she would have done so was that day at the docks when she was insane--but insanity makes it hard to commit murder (as opposed to lesser homicide), since murder requires a presence of mind that insanity often precludes.

[randsc]

Where do you get the jealous rage = legally insane and therefore not guilty of murder?

 

From nowhere, that's where. You have no reason to think she wasn't just enraged.

 

Suttree is right. Back up your assertions with some actual textual evidence, or you're effectively just an unusually diligent troll.

[Aiyen kin Leary]

She's evil. RJ said so, he wrote the book, end of story. Emu, I know literary critics love to ignore the author's statements and tack on their own interpretations, but the WoT is the story RJ thought up. Now, you're right she could have been written a little differently to make her a grey character rather than a purely dark one, and that would have been interesting (perhaps someone wants to make non-evil Lanfear fanfiction?), but in the story as it stands she is a complete monster. Maybe a redeemable one-if I were writing WoT I'd make her kind of like Gollum, getting what seems like a redemption but making it only partial and having her die in the end having gone off the deep end, but who knows what RJ and BS have in mind? Definately a monster though.

[Lama Chemist Ho]

She's evil. RJ said so

 

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.

if this is the only quote people are referring to, ...I'm not really sure it says what people are saying it does, or refute's emu's take on lanfear. I also even after a cursory search am still having trouble finding textual evidence besides (of lanfear's utter evil-ness). the only really bad thing I can remember attributed her is vague mention of an old wives tale that she kills children or something? indeed it seems like most of her actual malevolence is directed toward other darkfriends and forsaken. ok I also just checked the BWB on her...so she occasionally served as an assassin for the shadow, and gave people nightmares? it also said this:

 

There is little doubt that she was surprised as the rest of the world to discover what actually lay beyond the hole she helped create, and she was indeed fortunate to be one of the few to survive the backlash that destroyed the Sharom and most of the Collam Daan.

 

From various bits of evidence it seems that Mierin was not among the first to go over to the Shadow, but when she did pledge her soul to the Dark One, it was for the most basic of reasons: love and hate.

sounds a little grey to me...

[Suttree]

She's evil. RJ said so

 

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.

if this is the only quote people are referring to, ...I'm not really sure it says what people are saying it does, or refute's emu's take on lanfear. I also even after a cursory search am still having trouble finding textual evidence besides (of lanfear's utter evil-ness). the only really bad thing I can remember attributed her is vague mention of an old wives tale that she kills children or something? indeed it seems like most of her actual malevolence is directed toward other darkfriends and forsaken. ok I also just checked the BWB on her...so she occasionally served as an assassin for the shadow, and gave people nightmares? it also said this:

 

There is little doubt that she was surprised as the rest of the world to discover what actually lay beyond the hole she helped create, and she was indeed fortunate to be one of the few to survive the backlash that destroyed the Sharom and most of the Collam Daan.

 

From various bits of evidence it seems that Mierin was not among the first to go over to the Shadow, but when she did pledge her soul to the Dark One, it was for the most basic of reasons: love and hate.

sounds a little grey to me...

 

Lama please don't cherry pick info...just a couple other examples.

 

RJ

 

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.

 

and if you read the BWB entire you know that...

 

BWB

She was involved in many atrocities, perhaps more than most of the Forsaken, but the people she governed had more than the usual horrors of the Shadow to face; they feared sleep itself. Suicide rates were extremely high in her territory, even considering the fact that suicide was endemic in all the conquered territories.

[Aiyen kin Leary]

She's evil. RJ said so

 

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.

if this is the only quote people are referring to, ...I'm not really sure it says what people are saying it does, or refute's emu's take on lanfear. I also even after a cursory search am still having trouble finding textual evidence besides (of lanfear's utter evil-ness). the only really bad thing I can remember attributed her is vague mention of an old wives tale that she kills children or something? indeed it seems like most of her actual malevolence is directed toward other darkfriends and forsaken. ok I also just checked the BWB on her...so she occasionally served as an assassin for the shadow, and gave people nightmares? it also said this:

 

There is little doubt that she was surprised as the rest of the world to discover what actually lay beyond the hole she helped create, and she was indeed fortunate to be one of the few to survive the backlash that destroyed the Sharom and most of the Collam Daan.

 

From various bits of evidence it seems that Mierin was not among the first to go over to the Shadow, but when she did pledge her soul to the Dark One, it was for the most basic of reasons: love and hate.

sounds a little grey to me...

 

Lama please don't cherry pick info...just a couple other examples.

 

RJ

 

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.

 

and if you read the BWB entire you know that...

 

BWB

She was involved in many atrocities, perhaps more than most of the Forsaken, but the people she governed had more than the usual horrors of the Shadow to face; they feared sleep itself. Suicide rates were extremely high in her territory, even considering the fact that suicide was endemic in all the conquered territories.

 

Exactly.

[Lama Chemist Ho]

ripe for the Shadow's plucking

usual horrors of the Shadow

+ nightmares, and high suicide rates? (in lands controlled by the shadow, during the war of power)

 

uhhh is that it? she could still be grey

[Suttree]

ripe for the Shadow's plucking

usual horrors of the Shadow

+ nightmares, and high suicide rates? (in lands controlled by the shadow, during the war of power)

 

uhhh is that it? she could still be grey

 

Again please don't cherry pick. Anyone can cut out crucial portions of quotes in an attempt to twist meaning.

 

She was involved in many atrocities, perhaps more than most of the Forsaken

 

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.

 

Suicide rates were extremely high in her territory, even considering the fact that suicide was endemic in all the conquered territories.

 

Using dreams, she guided a number of operations that turned people against established authority, creating massive riots.

 

So she was involved in more atrocities than the majority of the Forsaken. Think about that for a second. The most evil people in the history of the world and she was at the top in terms of atrocities committed. The assertion Emu put forth that the drilling was a major cause of her turning is directly contradicted by a quote from RJ. Next up, how many people do you imagine died in those "massive" riots? The blood is on her hands. Finally the people in her territories feared "sleep itself". Think of the psychological terror that would result from sleep deprivation in a shadow controlled area.

[Zentari]

ripe for the Shadow's plucking

usual horrors of the Shadow

+ nightmares, and high suicide rates? (in lands controlled by the shadow, during the war of power)

 

uhhh is that it? she could still be grey

As gray as a highly placed forsaken can be, one who's territories get EXTRA stuff, aside from the usual trolloc feeding camps and soul ripping,turning people to the Shadow against their will, torturing etc etc.And aside from the fact that she CHOSE her name.Totally gray.

 

Or pitch black.

[Guest Emu on the Loose]

Exactly.

The BWB is not itself canonical, but an in-character historical document. When reading historical documents, which is what RJ told us the BWB is to be interpreted as, you have to apply good judgment when analyzing what is written. Statements like "the enemy did evil" are much less reliable than ones like "the Bore was drilled on a Friday."

 

Indeed, all of the hardcore evidence of Mierin doing evil things is in the BWB--not the WoT books themselves--making it a logical dead end and a very flimsy case for those trying to support their case. Even the stuff that suggests she isn't an evil person has to be viewed with the same skepticism.

 

But to dwell on this still misses the point. Canon itself could claim that Mierin is an evil person. The narrator, in the opening paragraph, could say, "The Wheel of Time turns and Lanfear is still just as friggin' evil as ever," and it wouldn't matter. Why? Because the point that people can't or won't comprehend is that these sorts of claims are inadmissible in critical analysis. Actions themselves, and internal thoughts, and to a lesser extent the speech and style of parties involved, are the objective criteria for evaluating a character. Sometimes the author sets us up to make this discovery for ourselves, with a little narratorial help, such as Mark Twain did in Huckleberry Finn. Other times the author was grinding an axe and never considered that their work would be put to critical analysis, such as the biblical story of Jezebel, featuring a character who, now that our society has become a little less sexist, people realize was a victim and not a villain.

 

In the canon, the WoT books, Mierin has hindered only Darkfriends and helped only Rand (and to a minimal extent Mat, Perrin, and Rand's party in the portal stone world). She has also demonstrated considerable arrogance, jealousy, and emotional instability. "Evil," not so much. Mentally ill...yeah, some of that. A victim of very unfortunate circumstances...definitely. A strong-willed and ambitious person who got punked by a deity and spurned by another strong-willed and ambitious person...yep. But evil? It depends on your ethics, and on facts to which we don't have access.

 

I know that it's tempting to "just call a spade a spade," but that doesn't work here and is a symptom of ethical oversimplification. Some people think that there is ample evidence that Mierin is objectively evil. It's true there is ample evidence that she is subjectively evil, if you're willing to make a number of assumptions and normative judgments, but objectively she has not behaved like an evil person, nor spoken like one. Maybe that will change in AMoL. Or maybe it will change the other way, in my favor.

 

Perhaps appearing later in this thread than it should have is a common understanding of the definitions we are all using for the word "evil." In my philosophy, ignorance is evil, and willful ignorance is the worst form of it. This is not in line with a traditional monotheistic view of "Evil is when a person does or says X, Y, or Z," but I find it to be a more reliable and more powerful perspective with which to view human nature. By my definition, Mierin is in a gray area (because we don't know a lot about her), but what stands out is that she has helped Rand more than any other Shadow-sider and more even than just about all of Rand's actual Light-side friends and allies. In that help, she has taught him a great deal and aided him in attaining a great deal of practical knowledge and abstract wisdom. She's like a Cadsuane wearing a black hat rather than a white one.

 

People who are using a more simplistic concept of evil may be hamstrung in trying to identify the motives I have for taking the view of the character that I do. In contrast, I can see how Mierin qualifies as evil under a different perspective. I just don't agree with that perspective, and am not remotely persuaded by people telling me that I should think a certain way because it's the way somebody else supposedly thought.

 

The RJ letters don't matter unless we are trying to decipher his take on the character, and the BWB has a big question mark hanging over it in the form of being non-canonical. Even the canon, as I have said, has to be judged by what is shown rather than what is claimed.

 

Now, assuming that the BWB is generally accurate about what Mierin did as Lanfear (which I am only doing for the sake of argument), then what it proves is not that she herself was an evil person but that she committed atrocities. We have no certainty as to why, and none or almost none as to what. The ambiguity leaves us room for possibilities ranging from the exotic (e.g., she has been fighting the Shadow on her own terms as an insider--which would follow from her stated desire to overthrow the gods) to the pedestrian (e.g., she was being vengeful--which, given what the BWB said about Beidomon being made into a social pariah, is eminently plausible).

 

So, there you have it. More than enough ambiguity in the canon, and more than enough diversity of worldviews, to make just about any interpretation of the character. What I've said along is that my take on Mierin is my own, and I humor other people when they have their interpretations. I might debate those interpretations if I had a more serious conversational counterpart, but as yet none has appeared. Most of the noise in this thread has come from the same three or four people (a couple of whom are trolls, to be blunt) who haven't demonstrated any interest in the original topic (i.e., passion for the character) or in my contributions to the original topic.

[Zentari]

 

The BWB is not itself canonical, but an in-character historical document. When reading historical documents, which is what RJ told us the BWB is to be interpreted as, you have to apply good judgment when analyzing what is written. Statements like "the enemy did evil" are much less reliable than ones like "the Bore was drilled on a Friday."

Letting special credence to it.It doesn't require any sort of analysis to understand that Lanfear was an especially bad apple in batch of rotten ones.

 

Indeed, all of the hardcore evidence of Mierin doing evil things is in the BWB--not the WoT books themselves--making it a logical dead end and a very flimsy case for those trying to support their case. Even the stuff that suggests she isn't an evil person has to be viewed with the same skepticism.

One can't help but ask a question: if Lanfear was trully as you claim , how come she rose so high in that hierarchy ? Food for thought ; then again given how ample evidence has been discarded and the self-delusion is still going strong, it's doubtful it will even register.

 

But to dwell on this still misses the point. Canon itself could claim that Mierin is an evil person. The narrator, in the opening paragraph, could say, "The Wheel of Time turns and Lanfear is still just as friggin' evil as ever," and it wouldn't matter. Why? Because the point that people can't or won't comprehend is that these sorts of claims are inadmissible in critical analysis. Actions themselves, and internal thoughts, and to a lesser extent the speech and style of parties involved, are the objective criteria for evaluating a character. Sometimes the author sets us up to make this discovery for ourselves, with a little narratorial help, such as Mark Twain did in Huckleberry Finn. Other times the author was grinding an axe and never considered that their work would be put to critical analysis, such as the biblical story of Jezebel, featuring a character who, now that our society has become a little less sexist, people realize was a victim and not a villain.

The point is that Lanfear is evil.She always had the roots for it and the willingness to act only to satisfy her own desires,her obsessions.

 

In the canon, the WoT books, Mierin has hindered only Darkfriends and helped only Rand (and to a minimal extent Mat, Perrin, and Rand's party in the portal stone world). She has also demonstrated considerable arrogance, jealousy, and emotional instability. "Evil," not so much. Mentally ill...yeah, some of that. A victim of very unfortunate circumstances...definitely. A strong-willed and ambitious person who got punked by a deity and spurned by another strong-willed and ambitious person...yep. But evil? It depends on your ethics, and on facts to which we don't have access.

So just because she might be unstable she's excused all of her actions ? In that vein , Ishamael has a get out of jail card since EVERYONE , in-universe and out of it recognizes that he was freaking insane. Lanfear was very much in possession of her faculties when she did all she did, even if she was obsessed.

 

I know that it's tempting to "just call a spade a spade," but that doesn't work here and is a symptom of ethical oversimplification. Some people think that there is ample evidence that Mierin is objectively evil. It's true there is ample evidence that she is subjectively evil, if you're willing to make a number of assumptions and normative judgments, but objectively she has not behaved like an evil person, nor spoken like one. Maybe that will change in AMoL. Or maybe it will change the other way, in my favor.

Actually it does.As for her being evil being subjective , she serves the personification of evil.Doesn't get more objective than that.She went over that side willingly and doesn't regret it.Oh, perhaps she regretted losing her grip on LT or such but NOT ONCE did she regret jumping ship.THAT makes her an accomplice, a willing accomplice , to the torturing and murdering of thousands, not to mention the systematic breakdown of civilization.

 

Perhaps appearing later in this thread than it should have is a common understanding of the definitions we are all using for the word "evil." In my philosophy, ignorance is evil, and willful ignorance is the worst form of it. This is not in line with a traditional monotheistic view of "Evil is when a person does or says X, Y, or Z," but I find it to be a more reliable and more powerful perspective with which to view human nature. By my definition, Mierin is in a gray area (because we don't know a lot about her), but what stands out is that she has helped Rand more than any other Shadow-sider and more even than just about all of Rand's actual Light-side friends and allies. In that help, she has taught him a great deal and aided him in attaining a great deal of practical knowledge and abstract wisdom. She's like a Cadsuane wearing a black hat rather than a white one.

She helped Rand because she wanted to control him.Notice when the accusations fly at her ? She doesn't deny them.And once again we do know more than enough to paint her pitch black.

 

People who are using a more simplistic concept of evil may be hamstrung in trying to identify the motives I have for taking the view of the character that I do. In contrast, I can see how Mierin qualifies as evil under a different perspective. I just don't agree with that perspective, and am not remotely persuaded by people telling me that I should think a certain way because it's the way somebody else supposedly thought.

That perspective is backed up by facts, yours with adoration.

 

The RJ letters don't matter unless we are trying to decipher his take on the character, and the BWB has a big question mark hanging over it in the form of being non-canonical. Even the canon, as I have said, has to be judged by what is shown rather than what is claimed.

Anything else that you would like to disregard that goes against that ideal of yours ? Just saying because you keep tearing evidence apart without actually contradicting it or point out flaws.It's always, "we don't know" ,"it's subjective " etc etc.

If we discard everything what's left ? Nothing , which is so conveniently a nice base for that idealized fantasy of yours.

 

Now, assuming that the BWB is generally accurate about what Mierin did as Lanfear (which I am only doing for the sake of argument), then what it proves is not that she herself was an evil person but that she committed atrocities. We have no certainty as to why, and none or almost none as to what. The ambiguity leaves us room for possibilities ranging from the exotic (e.g., she has been fighting the Shadow on her own terms as an insider--which would follow from her stated desire to overthrow the gods) to the pedestrian (e.g., she was being vengeful--which, given what the BWB said about Beidomon being made into a social pariah, is eminently plausible).

Or, given her power hungry nature, a willing accomplice.Something that also fits nicely with the rest of the evidence as opposed to the "rebel fighter" idea or the rest of them.