This Day All Gods Die: Book Review and Discussion
This Day All Gods Die: Book Review and Discussion
I just finished reading This Day All Gods Die, which is the fifth and final entry in Stephen R. Donaldson's The Gap Cycle. Finally, we have reached the climax of the series and get to see the resolution of the plotlines that have been built up from the beginning of the story. Things have escalated in terms of scale and tension to a stunning degree, especially in relation to the isolated, but interesting, first entry of the series.
So, what did I think of it, and the series as a whole? Let's get started.
No Spoilers
There were good things, and there were bad things, but fortunately I found that the positives outweighed the negatives for this entry, and especially the series overall.
Story Structure
I found that I really appreciated how the whole series fit together. The Gap Cycle starts out very quick and simple. The Real Story was a compelling vision all on its own. The world, the atmosphere, the grim nature of the story—all of it immediately took me in. And the simplicity was also part of it. The series dips your toes into the world and gives you a bare look at what will come. It is worth mentioning that this simplicity is also complimented (insulted?) by an incredibly brutal introduction of a certain character. While the subject matter is very inaccessible, every other aspect is quite easy.
The second entry is much longer, but it largely maintains this tighter focus; most of the chapters happen from a particular perspective. Yet, the series also expands its scope in two key ways: first, by introducing some of the details regarding the intrigue in the world, particularly behind the events of the first entry; and second, by introducing some major worldbuilding developments that become central to the whole series, and the final conflict.
The third entry (and the next two) continue with the expanded length, and expands the series yet another step. We no longer see the story through largely one perspective. The series essentially explodes in size, bringing the political scene into focus as a serious storyline in its own right. Additionally, we see the first high-stakes climax to a story in the series so far; while the others had compelling endings, the action really accelerates to the forefront of the story in this one.
The final two entries are jointly the final stage of the expanding narrative. Every storyline is about as important as the rest, you get countless perspectives, even from characters you would not otherwise imagine, and both have explosive climaxes that transcend the ones that came before.
But since the fifth entry is the primary focus, I have to point out that at least the last two thirds of this entry is basically the final conflict. Pieces are falling into place and tension and terror are escalating, allowing for a series wide climax that satisfies in a way that most other series can't.
I like the series structure, with the continual escalation, enough that I think I want to mirror it in another series of my own. I currently don't have any like it planned, but I will definitely consider this kind of approach if I can. The feeling of expansion over time is just so exhilarating to me.
Climax
One part that I liked about the climax of the story is how it embodied what Game of Thrones was supposed to be. In Game of Thrones, the shitty writers had this naive notion that as the apocalypse began to descend upon the human race that people would finally throw aside their petty disputes and band together to stop it. Cersei doesn't count, as she is just one major character—and she doesn't really capture what I am talking about here.
In a more realistic depiction, there would be disagreements amongst the people over how to deal with the situation. While Cersei had no position on the issue, and simply chose to sit out the conflict, we have Holt Fasner in this series, who is part of the reason why the Amnion are so dangerous in the first place. Holt has his own ideas on how to deal with the Amnion, and he must be overcome, just as Calm Horizons must.
Just because a universal threat to humanity exists, does not mean people will agree on how to address the issue in the first place. The political aspect to an apocalypse is more interesting than the threat itself.
There were some complaints as well, which I will touch upon in the spoiler section.
Characters
Warden Dios is treated by Donaldson much like you would expect his character to be treated, though Donaldson manages to execute the overall idea in a way that is also surprising. This was the best that could have happened with his character.
Angus is also handled really well. I will touch upon the specifics later, as usual. What matters here is that there are no cartoonish elements to the story, instead approaching his character change and growth in a realistic manner. I was worried that the arc he was going to go through would be like that of Darth Vader, but Donaldson wasn't that ridiculous.
We have Holt Fasner as one of the major villains in this entry. At the end of the story, he turned out to be an overall disappointment. I like the concept of him; I just thought that there could be more to him. We don't get much complexity and what complexity we do get is barely, if at all, explored in any way; and, as I mentioned in the last review, I just don't find him all that intimidating—and this is in spite of the fact that the very idea of him should be. His mistakes are so contrived for the sake of the plot that I am reevaluating my rating of this book in the act of writing these words. I'm honestly kind of angry about it. There is a lot of good in this entry. But let's be real: nothing about Holt's character, at least in execution, worked out by a fucking long shot.
Also, with Holt, we have another example of this annoying trend, where the author presents ideas and then poisons the well to justify dismissing the ideas out of hand. If you've seen/read Death Note, then you know what I mean. I love that series (and this one) as a thrilling ride, but there is not much interesting philosophical discussion.
The Ending
Obviously, I can't say much of anything here. What I can say is that the ending is kind of hard to talk about, even with spoilers. It's like an odd mixture of bittersweet and happy, annoying romanticism and realism, excitement and disappointment . . .
Conclusion
Overall, I did like the last entry. I think I will give it a 7/10, which was revised down from an 8 because of the handling of Holt Fasner. The thrilling climax was significantly better than the rest of the entries. But a failure to make the major threat of the series . . . a major threat . . . is kind of annoying.
Spoilers
Warden Dios
Dios is a tragic character in this series. We understand from quite early on that Dios is taking issue with the current order, and also that he is motivated to stop it. That first scene comes in at the end of the second entry, when he swaps out Angus' datacore. From there, we get more and more chapters from his perspective, as his schemes slowly unfold. One major development is learning that their little scheme at Thanatos Minor was meant to provoke the Amnion into committing an act of war. By spreading info about an immunity drug and having Angus save Morn, Dios is able to scare the Amnion into action; but there are real complications that both help and hurt his plans, like the presence of Davies, which Dios never expected.
I immediately began to ask questions in the last entry once I finally heard what was going on at the hands of Dios. The plan was taking such risks. How could he know how the Amnion would have responded to this? The plan is ridiculous, and would probably have gotten everyone killed, if I had written it. However, I thought that Donaldson managed to handle the situation very well.
Dios had programmed Angus to avoid returning to Earth directly. This was Dios' way of avoiding a confrontation at Earth itself. And this is a sensible way of responding. Dios is also prescient enough to guard Earth first and foremost, just as a precaution.
And then everything that could go wrong goes wrong. Because Davies is there, and because the immunity drug is being broadcasted, the Amnion are more desperate than ever to find Trumpet. So, Calm Horizons goes right to Earth in an attempt to intercept them ahead of their arrival.
By having the plan blow up, but also having Dios plan for this worst case scenario is the perfect middle ground.
Angus Thermopyle
I was rather worried about how Donaldson would handle Angus' redemption arc. Since he was introduced to us in the beginning of the series as a rapist and murderer and worse, giving him some kind of redemption was going to be a tricky endeavor. And I had a lot of ways that this could be fumbled in mind.
The last thing I wanted was for Angus to be forced into a situation where he is pressured to sacrifice himself in the last moment; in a way, this would undermine the act, as it only happened under extreme pressure, which is not indicative of real character change. Another problem is related, which is that Angus would have to die, so he doesn't have to face the consequences of what he has done; basically, the redemption seems hollow, as it is obvious that the redemption "works" because he's dead, nothing else. And then the worst is the binary understanding of good/bad, where any individual good act is construed as the "ultimate" act of good, as if that alone would be enough; imagine if Angus had been redeemed by saving Davies' life, when that could easily have been construed as him coming to care for his son, and not becoming kind in any other way.
Basically, Darth Vader's "redemption" is the ultimate example of a bad redemption arc, as it ticks all these boxes. Vader saves his son in the last moment, not really showing the actual change, as it was rash and under pressure. Vader also had to die, as no one would accept him as a "redeemed" man, as the movie wants you to think. And Vader only saved his son, which is not the same thing as becoming a better man; people are not that simple.
Angus' redemption arc works because it really isn't a redemption arc, not exactly. It plays out realistically. Angus' change is not some drastic sacrifice in the heat of the moment, though Donaldson teased as much when he breaks the panel on his EV suit. Angus also does not die. Most importantly, the entry openly accepts that someone like Morn, at best, has mixed feelings about him, and he can't live around Earth, knowing that he will assuredly die. And he does not just flip on a dime, as if there was a black and white view of morality. Even after he saves Morn and Davies and the rest, representing his change, he still takes pleasure in fighting and killing (though not in cold blood). And the entry ends with him personally killing Holt Fasner in probably horrific ways. He has and he hasn't changed.
I think one of the best redemption arcs is that of Zuko in the Avatar: The Last Airbender series. Zuko's change comes from experiencing failure and suffering as his victims have, and finally coming to terms with his actions. When he changes, he has to crawl through hell.
Working this on someone like Angus is obviously questionable, given his actions, even if it implies that he was shaped this way by his mother, who abused and probably sexually abused him, herself. And Zuko was never really a cruel person, if we are honest—just young and misguided. (And perhaps that says something on its own about the possibility of redemption).
Finally, beyond the topic of redemption, I did like the connection that Angus had with Holt's mother. Their connection and his choice to finally release her was the perfect way to end that character.
Holt Fasner
I
Since Holt is the mixed bag of this entire series, I have a bit of negatives to go through with regards to his character.
Something I especially did not like was in the beginning, when Hashi put forward the rather radical notion that Holt himself was the person behind the Kaze attacks. Lol. This was so blindingly obvious to me that I thought he was the red herring from the moment the original attack happened. But then the fifth entry opens with this? I was honestly in denial. When I look through my notes, I can see that I speculated they were putting forward the wrong idea; I was hoping that Holt was being framed, at the very least.
And I thought the idea that Vertigus being targeted by coincidence, instead of in response to his surprise Bill of Severance, was a ridiculous assumption. Another thought was that they had guessed right about Holt, but underestimated how much Holt knew, by making this assumption. But they were apparently right. This was very poorly handled.
II
To make another point, this entry helped clarify a point or two about Holt's motivations. I remember that Dios is the one who proposed to Holt that they send the Angus cyborg to Thanatos Minor. I kept wondering why Holt agreed with this—and maybe the answer was technically given in prior entries—but I liked the comment suggesting that the destruction of Thanatos would help prolong the tensions between the Amnion and humans. This makes sense.
Tied to this is another point about Holt's motivations that were incredibly annoying. Why the hell did he not fire Dios? That he lacked a good replacement is not a good enough excuse. From the way the story was written from that first Holt chapter, Donaldson seemed to suggest that he was in on Dios' plans to some degree. I thought he was pulling strings behind the scenes, to maneuver Dios, even as the latter maneuvers him. But then Holt tells Dios to his face that his mother suspects him. He still ignores it, even as Dios does not inform him of an act of war, says nothing when he garrisons earth, and more in the previous entries. How stupid is Holt? And how is that compatible with the threat he is supposed to pose?
Apparently, Holt is this clever and successful man, but we never see that on the page. We only see Dios taking advantage of him. I kept telling myself that this would change once Holt reveals his hand, but we got nothing. I thought there would be in the end, when we get the second chapter from Holt and see his overview of the Amnion threat. I remember grinning widely and writing in my notes that Holt was the Chad of Chads, lol. But it all fell flat.
Holt's downfall, relative to his character, is just lame.
An example of a character being defeated in expert fashion would be Gus Fring, from Breaking Bad. (Yeah, I know, the cliché. But it's cliché for a reason). Fring does not suddenly become stupid at the very end. Or worse, is portrayed as stupid throughout, while apparently not being so. Fring has a personal connection that is exploited by Walter that leads to his own downfall. Everyone has some irrational impulse within them, you just need to establish one to make it clear.
For Holt, this is hardly what we get. Worse than him becoming dumb for no reason, he is also not intimidating at all in the story. The closest thing to a reason for making a mistake is that he is arrogant. But that is not good enough. Gus Fring was also arrogant. He still needed more to justify his mistakes at the end of season four. Not only that, but Holt does not really behave like someone who is wholly arrogant. More accurately, he does and he doesn't. His character is honestly just inconsistent in a way that baffles me.
On one hand, there are the really ham-fisted displays of megalomania that are thrown in, where he just considers other people to be inferior. But he is also willing to acknowledge his mistakes. He admits that he should have listened to his mother when she fingered Dios, and when he failed to destroy the GCES. This is not something a megalomaniac would do. He says he admits it to himself, if not other people, but admitting it to himself is precisely what matters. I don't really know why his character seems so inconsistent, but I suspect it's because Holt (a megalomaniac) being forced to admit his mistakes is apparently satisfying to the reader.
Finally, for the inconsistencies, we see Holt fall into delusion when he realizes that he left behind a copy of his files and assumes that Dios would use them to take his power. He is clearly assuming that Dios is as cynical as he is. But this doesn't really fit what we saw from Holt in his first chapter, where he openly acknowledges that Dios is an idealist, unlike himself. You could push back by suggesting that Holt means something different than myself when he uses the word "idealist," and I'll accept that, but this is why some clarification is necessary.
Why would Holt's mother know where Holt's escape ship would be?
Holt Fasner's Plans
I
We get to see Holt's plans in response to the Amnion, finally. Throughout the series, I was hoping for more to his character than the mere desire for profit, or to live forever, or even to be a God. I wanted a plan to address the Amnion threat. And we technically get that here. His idea is to accept that humanity is destined to lose in the long term, and then use the Amnion technology to evolve and change themselves so that they become some superior. If humanity could translate their minds across generations, they could have consciousnesses that essentially live forever, replicating themselves similarly to the Amnion. They could build up knowledge and power through these replicating consciousnesses and outmaneuver the Amnion in that way.
I thought that this was a fascinating plan to consider in more specific terms. I wanted more engagement with the ideas, regardless if I would ultimately agree with them. This is the ideal function of villains: to explore ideas that you normally would not consider.
But there was no exploration of his ideas at all. Donaldson never considers the question of identity and consciousness that Holt's plan excites. For example, if humanity simply replicates by transferring consciousness from body to body, then is that really the same life continuing? Has death really been escaped? Davies seems to negate that. But the story never proposes this question, let alone answers it. I just wanted more. Donaldson simply throws it in one chapter near the end of the story and leaves it at that.
II
This leads to another point that annoyed me about Holt's character. It's a trend in storytelling that I just hate. Basically, some interesting idea is presented, usually through a villain character, and the author either does not engage with it or they poison the well by making the villain so nasty and irredeemable that the author does not have to engage with it in any serious manner.
A good example of this would be Death Note. The idea of using a death note to punish criminals is a fascinating question. I would love a story that asks this question and engages with it in a serious manner. But it is clear that the author of Death Note is not interested in that. Instead, they poison the well by making Light a megalomaniac, and then dismiss the idea of using the death note based on this incidental characteristic.
Crime declined. War was ended globally. What of that? What if the note was used by someone like Stannis Baratheon or even Ned Stark? Would that change your position? Even Ned executes criminals, like the man who ran from the wall in the very beginning of ASOIAF.
Likewise for Holt Fasner. What if he wasn't a megalomaniac? Would you support his corporatism? What if he was replaced by someone like Stannis Baratheon or even Ned Stark? This is the kind of question I want to engage with.
Climax
I
I've already mentioned that the climax in this book was amazing. What we see is Calm Horizons choosing to go to Earth ahead of Trumpet in an attempt to stop the spread of the immunity, but mainly to get their hands on Davies before he slips out of their grip. The immunity has technically spread beyond their control, since the Valdor System has gotten their hands on it, so the primary reason comes down to Davies. So, the UMCP base and the GCES building are both under direct threat from this massive Amnion defensive.
While Holt ultimately is revealed to be rather lackluster by the end of the series, the Amnion have always been a major threat. Calm Horizons in particular has basically always been the central threat representing the Amnion as a whole, so I associate the name and the presence with serious dread. That ship alone is the threat.
I know that some people have criticized the set up for this climax, namely asking why the Amnion didn't just get their hands on another human being and do to them what they did to Morn and Davies (force growing). I did wonder the same thing, as a result, but now that I have thought it over, I don't think that would be as viable an option as it seems on its face.
The Amnion cannot get their hands on people all that easily. They have to rely on people like Angus to give them test subjects. And with Thanatos Minor gone, it is now even less easy. I think the strongest critique would be to ask why they don't invade some space station, rather than going to Earth, and taking hostages take back to their base. After all, they had already committed an act of war at that point. Unfortunately, this is probably the best critique. I think it is possible to contrive a reason why they don't do that (they can't let humans use Davies to counter their efforts), but I don't think Donaldson did a good enough job ruling that option out.
I'm not a huge stickler for points like this. I understand that much of writing comes down to justifying plot developments that need to happen for the story, but you still need to patch it up so the developments make sense.
II
Cleatus Fane is a motherfucking chad. That is the one major thing that stands out to me during the climax. The council meeting was, by far, the most engaging part of the story. Forget the invasion of Calm Horizons. People sitting and talking is far more intense. Watching this man spin narratives was quite simply jaw dropping. Donaldson's ability to twist the truth into something useful to Holt's ends is enviable to an extreme degree. Namely, Fane's response to Morn's testimony was particularly deft and devastating to the protagonists' side. He did what Holt was supposed to do as a character: not make destructive mistakes repeatedly. He actually twisted fortunes for a serious period of time, creating tension . . . as there should have been.
Unfortunately, there is one side effect that does come to mind. After the narrative is spun by Cleatus Fane, I am left to wonder how much Morn's testimony actually influenced the decision to separate the UMCP from the UMC. The final nail in Holt's coffin was the evidence provided by Hashi, and I don't think any of that had any bearing on whether Fane's interpretation of Morn's testimony was correct or not. It seems the reader is expected to interpret the truth holistically, rather than on a case-by-case basis. I just don't understand why anyone would see Morn as anything but what Fane made her out to be; even Donaldson (and his characters) understood just how plausible—even likely—this interpretation was. Hopefully I am wrong about this, though. I will have to reread the story to refresh my memory on the specifics, however.
III
One problem/not problem is the question of why the Council did not relocate the second the threat against their lives showed up. Donaldson does some offhanded explanation, suggesting that there was not enough time to evacuate. Fair enough. However, one part of me wonders whether people would settle for this. To my mind, people would evacuate regardless of the futility because of fear alone. The particulars of the situation aren't clear, so getting into arguments over whether this would be possible is pointless. It just strikes me as significant that they all knew they could die, but remained to deliberate anyway; the whole of them aren't that virtuous, to stay under that kind of threat. But perhaps the Council wasn't aware, only the people above. I can't remember.
Another bit of the climax would be at the very end, where Dios manages to convince a young soldier who believed in Holt to help him blow up Holt's station. This was just a cringy, romantic display that made me roll my eyes. There is no way a young man like that would change so easily.
Ending
I
The GCES should have been exterminated.
I was really hoping that Donaldson would have the balls to do this. Not only would it be a devastating development that would have made the ending as a whole more complicated, but it would have also made Holt seem more intimidating, instead of him simply being neutralized two seconds after him taking action. And in the aftermath of the Council’s destruction, the prospect of rebuilding would have been that much greater. An ending where the remnants of the UMCP would have to take out (an effective) Holt would provoke the possibility of autocracy, just as there was before. This could then lead to an ambiguous ending that might have the downfall of Holt, but also the looming specter of what could replace him.
At the same time, I really like that the Amnion were not defeated by the end of the series. I think the reason Donaldson gets away with this ending is because Holt is treated as the primary threat, with the Amnion being the force of nature in the background. We still do not know how the Amnion function all that well, and that reflects the ambiguous nature of the ending, at least in this respect.
II
I also like the very ending of the book, where Hashi is recalling Min Donner’s declaration that she is going to be honest and straightforward with the Amnion. I honestly cannot tell if Donaldson wants the reader to cheer her on or criticize her. Basically, she suggests that she would have told the Amnion that she would destroy Thanatos Minor directly if they don’t comply with her demand to dispense with the location themselves. She would then follow through on the threat.
On one hand, the honesty is refreshing, and even Hashi seems to understand this on some level. The Amnion do not appreciate humanity’s fickleness. But Hashi concludes that he will oppose her every step of the way. And I actually think I agree.
While they may appreciate the honesty, they are also dishonest in their own way. They play tricks with their language and trap people in situations when it suits their interests. They are not human, by any means, but they will still take Min’s threats seriously. And the fact that Thanatos Minor exists, even as it purportedly violates the contract she claims it does, also suggests something. It is important to remember that they are “honest” insofar as they are incapable of lying, and are—by extension—not practiced in the art of lying. They communicate via pheromones to one another, so lying is not exactly an option to them—unless they are interacting with humans.
Another point to consider is that human beings are not as hive-minded as the Amnion are. Min Donner might be honest, but other people will not, as you can imagine. So how will her honesty be seen in light of the rest of humanity? And the fact that the book ends on a note of human discord is rather telling in its own way.
III
Finally, I did not think that the series was as morally grey as I wished it would be. And this actually got me thinking about the different ways in which stories can be morally grey, so I have some thoughts to parse here.
I think there are (at least) five ways in which a story can be morally grey:
Main characters have both kind and cruel aspects to their nature.
Both coalitions have both kind and cruel aspects to their goals.
The cruel aspects match or outweigh the kind for the main characters and their coalition.
The development in character and/or plot involves no change or it involves the cruel overcoming the kind aspects.
A cruel atmosphere.
I think the darkest stories are the ones that have all of these qualities, especially with (3) and (5) maxed out. And the degree to which a story has these qualities is also continuous, though that should go without saying.
Some stories have a little (1) but a lot of (4) and (5), for example. In other words, ASOIAF. Or they can be high in (1) and (5) but low in (4). In other words, Berzerk. The First Law is very high in all five, but with the caveat that (5) is mediated by humor. The Second Apocalypse is all five maxed out to the extreme.
Donaldson’s Gap series has a little of (1), barely has (2), a little of (3), nothing of (4), and a lot of (5) in the beginning, though it lessens over time. Angus alone is what gives (1) and (3) their modicum of truth for the cast overall. Dios is similar, though his schemes are what brings (2) into the mix. Beyond that, this story really isn’t that dark. Most of the characters are simply flawed in realistic ways, and other than Angus, this is not for moral reasons; Dios is obviously in the right, Holt is obviously not, so there are clear good and bad sides; and there are obvious positive arcs over the course of the story that ensure that even (especially) Angus is given time to change so that his cruel side diminishes.
This is not necessarily a criticism, I just thought some of the selections could have been dialed up a bit. In addition to what I’ve mentioned throughout, the happy ending for all the main characters, especially Dios, seemed a bit contrived, which made the atmosphere of the story less ominous than it was in the beginning. The Amnion still being out there is a start, but I wanted more.
Complaints
Before I get to the actual complaints that I have for this story (other than the complaints that I have already mentioned), I want to mention one mistake I made in the last review. I asked why the VI System was not used to chase after Trumpet in the wake of the events of the third entry. Basically, I wondered why Punisher had to be used, when they could have just used a ship that was closer to the system in question. I thought that the VI System not being in the Council was the reason, though this undermined the hegemony that was established. But all of this was wrong. I simply forgot that Dios had no reason to think Trumpet would go to the VI System in the first place. They went to ComMine first, then to the VI System.
One minor complaint in the beginning of the story was the “brilliance” of pulling the chip when Angus’ goes into stasis. This isn’t brilliant. Since when was rebooting a system a groundbreaking solution? This was a contrived way to make Davies seem relevant.
The connection between Min Donner and the Hylands should have been mentioned earlier. The connections mentioned later in the entry kind of fell flat when we did not really have any build up or notion of this connection beforehand.
The overlapping scenes in the entry started to get very old by the end. It really affected the pacing of the story. There is nothing inherently wrong with this. But there are ways to address this that don’t involve pages of more or less the same event, except from a different perspective. At the very least, they should have been less lengthy.
I also could not appreciate the excessive use of character motifs in the story. The idea itself is fine. I use them myself. But the usage in the story started to become exhausting. They were fine in the first entry. But in a long story like this, it just happens way too much. And the motifs themselves were too long. A single line is best. And when you are just repeating motivations over and over again, that is particularly annoying. Not to toot my own horn (but actually I am), I use the sentence “His jaw tightened,” or some variation on that for one of my characters. This is a very simple motif that I repeat over and over again. I personally think it works because it's short and it doesn’t communicate too much information. It simply communicates the stubborn, uptight nature of the character.
I thought the Marc Vestibule chapter was unnecessary. This might be controversial, but my criticism is not so much that the idea of this chapter is bad, but more that the execution left me wanting. The idea of getting inside the head of an Amnion is cool. The problem was that this chapter didn’t really do that, instead existing to explain the motivations of the Amnion, which could have been done from other perspectives. And by omitting this, you also get the benefit of a shocking arrival, as the Amnion show up before Earth out of nowhere.
Finally, I feel like a Chekov's gun failed to go off with regard to the Amnion. One of the previous entries had a whole section on how little humanity understands the Amnion; there were two competing theories on how they worked. I don't care about the answers for their own sake. What I care about is the failure to make this relevant to the conflict. There needed to be a setback as the characters realize how their limited knowledge of the Amnion has led to a near-fatal mistake. That was what I had in mind when I read that section, at least.
Donaldson's Ideology
Finally, I want to talk more about the ideology presented in this entry, in the context of what I talked about in my last review.
For the most part, nothing about my perspective has changed. Min Donner is the woman of character who takes the place of Dios, and it is implied that humanity is moving in a more positive direction. The extent to which Hashi's excerpts at the end suggest otherwise is moreso an open question.
After thinking about it more, I am still a bit mixed on the question of how you change systems over time to become more benign to its citizens. Donaldson is arguing that men and women of character are required, while I was suggesting that systemic forces have to align the interests of leaders with their subjects.
A good example of what I am talking about is George Washington's ascension to the Presidency of the United States. In the book A Patriot's History of the United States (the reply to Howard Zinn), they argue that Washington was a man of character, someone who gave up a potential Crown for a Republic for the sake of others. This was in reply to Zinn's history, which suggests that people are primarily motivated by selfishness. On the other hand, in the book I mentioned in the last review, The Dictator's Handbook, it was argued that Washington was not necessarily acting outside of his own ambitions. They point out that the colonies at the time did not necessarily see themselves as some greater whole; they saw themselves as separate colonies, first and foremost. And not all of them would have accepted Washington as their King. So, the choices were not simply: be King or be a President in a Republic. They were: be a King of a few colonies, or be President of all of them. By becoming President, Washington managed to convince all of the colonies to stay under his power. In other words, this decision allowed him to acquire a wider scope of power.
The first option might seem more optimistic and hopeful, but it also makes the American founding seem like a luck of the draw. If another had been in his position, it could have led America toward a Kingship. For the second option, individual people seem to have no agency, instead making decisions in the context of decentralized power structures. At the same time, it does not necessarily suggest that Washington was consciously making power hungry decisions; however, it does suggest that a competent, power hungry person would have made the same decision as him.
I obviously tend to agree more with the latter view. Power is largely decentralized. Even in absolute tyrannies, the ruler has all the power and none of the agency. If I had written the series, I would probably put in a section where Donner is forced to consider her options. Because the Council is dead (as I suggested earlier), she could either take a more authoritarian position to deal with the Amnion, or subject herself to a newer council that would replace the old. And then I would bring up the fact that the more authoritarian she makes herself, the less likely that all of the systems would agree to her leadership, leading to less scope to her power, and less unity among humans. Maybe it's a decision of character, maybe not.
Conclusion
Overall, I did like the ending. I think I will give it a 7/10, which was revised down from an 8 because of the handling of Holt Fasner. The thrilling climax was significantly better than the rest of the entries. But a failure to make the major threat of the series . . . a major threat . . . is kind of annoying.
Comments
Post a Comment