On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 09:31:17 GMT, Troels Forchhammer
<Troels@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>In message <news:8v0rs1d6311cnotj1ir6lp5cvs84aku6u5@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>William Marnoch <william@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> enriched us with:
>
>> It does seem slightly incongruous to see them rate his work
>> as 'dangerous'.
>
>I was a bit confused about that -- for all the Eriondia books (except
>that PoA an tRC aren't rated because of being too bad) the rating is
>"Christian Morality: Harmless/Dangerous". What could they mean by
>that? It can't be both, surely, and the explanation elsewhere doesn't
>give a hint.
Perhaps it means it is largely harmless but has a few dangerous
elements.
>tRoA, however, is given an unqualified "Dangerous" (I was also, as
>one of the defenders of that book, thrilled to see it score 4/5 in
>literary quality to opposee the 3/5 for the Eriondia books <G>).
That makes no sense ;)
>There is no doubt that the books does introduce precisely this nice,
>easy solution: our protagonists are charming, witty and generally
>likeable, while our antagonists are about as unpleasant as they can
>be (it's a bit more complex than that, I admit, and of course Zakath
>manages a turn-about in the Malloreon, but as a general rule the
>above is nevertheless true of the core persons on both sides).
Martel is another example who would could almost have fitted in with
the protagonists if he hadn't been corrupted.
>The other point I'm referring to is the natures of the two prophecies
>-- they are not Good and Evil either, but rather represent change vs.
>stasis. There's a nice passage (IDHTBIFOM) in the Seeress of Kell as
>they're entering the cave where Belgarion says something along the
>lines of 'It will change' to Zandramas/the Dark Prophecy[*] where we
>get an exposition of this philosophy.
>
>[*] This light/dark issue is really one of the vestiges of a
>good/evil characterisation in the books, the other being that Torak
>is so obviously Evil, whereas Eriond is equally obviously Good (in
>the Christian sense, even).
Unfortunately DE didn't really do the change vs. status argument
justice. The 'dark' side was too obviously evil for it to be
believable that it could possibly win.
--
William Marnoch
william@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Film and Book reviews
|
