The ending, again
Jan. 6th, 2006 07:46 pmMariem just pointed me to a post that is almost a year old, but has to be shared nonetheless. We've discussed the ending of the trilogy here before, and I always felt I couldn't quite express just why it bugs me so. Well,
astolat manages to put her finger exactly on the spot.
Excerpt:
And my god, of all the unsatisfying -- I mean, what I want, as a reader, if that's the choice -- give up Damien or die -- is for Gerald to be willing to die first. That would be the right choice, the redeeming choice. If Tarrant is prepared to give up the friendship that saved and redeemed him just in order to prolong his life -- he's learned nothing. That's exactly where he started.
Go and read:
Coldfire -- analysis of the ending by
astolat
Excerpt:
And my god, of all the unsatisfying -- I mean, what I want, as a reader, if that's the choice -- give up Damien or die -- is for Gerald to be willing to die first. That would be the right choice, the redeeming choice. If Tarrant is prepared to give up the friendship that saved and redeemed him just in order to prolong his life -- he's learned nothing. That's exactly where he started.
Go and read:
Coldfire -- analysis of the ending by
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 09:04 pm (UTC)A prime example for why fanfiction exists, really. Because we simply have to fix this mess.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 09:13 pm (UTC)I've no idea why she thought it would be a good idea to give the book three endings - anyone can see that it only makes them all less effective. But if the result is that people feel compelled to write alternate endings, well... I'm not going to complain. *bg*
no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 08:23 pm (UTC)Well, given LotR has about ten endings, maybe we should consider ourselves lucky.
And really, if there had been a fourth ending to the book it probably would have been Gerald and Damien riding off into the sunset together. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 09:02 pm (UTC)As for the LoTR endings - have you seen Kiss Kiss Bang Bang? *bg*
no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 09:23 pm (UTC)I missed that one - our cinemas didn't show it. Was it good?
no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 09:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-08 05:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 03:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 03:35 pm (UTC)Thanks for the link! I read that article a while ago, and some of the thoughts are very apropos, especially with regard to the name issue. But it did seem to me that it glossed over what bothered me (and
no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 06:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 07:49 pm (UTC)I've friended you, btw.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-07 09:16 pm (UTC)Friended you too, btw.
no subject
Date: 2006-01-08 08:36 am (UTC)