The Reverse of the Medal: Thinky Thoughts
Dec. 5th, 2009 10:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Thoughts about the 11th book in the Aubrey-Maturin series, which I just finished rereading earlier today. VERY SPOILERY! Do not click if you haven't read the book; this will spoil the finest moment in the entire series (IMHO).
If you consider the series as one long, enormously satisfying book, the eleventh chapter (i.e., the 11th book, The Reverse of the Medal) has to be its climax. The first time I read it, something about it struck me; I had the same thought this time around, plus one more.
Thought the First: After Jack is arrested, his wiser, more worldly friends realize things will go very badly, and try to help out by hiring the best lawyer available, an investigator, bodyguards, etc., none of which helps much at all. Jack, on the other hand, is hopelessly naive, believing that his innocence and really his innate goodness will see him through.
At first we say, oh, poor Jack, he's completely wrong, and the outcome of the trial proves it. But then, when he's actually pilloried and in very real danger, danger clearly spelled out by a chilling discussion among the other characters, there's that incredible, brilliant scene where the seamen come pouring in with their fierce loyalty and not only stand guard so that no one can hurt Jack, but actually cheer for him. And you know why?
Because of his INNATE GOODNESS. Jack was RIGHT.
Thought the Second: Tolkien spoke of something he called a "eucatastrophe" - a seeming catastrophe that turns out well - as the effect he was striving for at the climax of the Lord of the Rings when Frodo can no longer resist the pull of the Ring, the same literary device, if it might be so described, as the Resurrection, the astonishing victory when defeat seemed most certain. This scene fits that paradigm splendidly.
If you consider the series as one long, enormously satisfying book, the eleventh chapter (i.e., the 11th book, The Reverse of the Medal) has to be its climax. The first time I read it, something about it struck me; I had the same thought this time around, plus one more.
Thought the First: After Jack is arrested, his wiser, more worldly friends realize things will go very badly, and try to help out by hiring the best lawyer available, an investigator, bodyguards, etc., none of which helps much at all. Jack, on the other hand, is hopelessly naive, believing that his innocence and really his innate goodness will see him through.
At first we say, oh, poor Jack, he's completely wrong, and the outcome of the trial proves it. But then, when he's actually pilloried and in very real danger, danger clearly spelled out by a chilling discussion among the other characters, there's that incredible, brilliant scene where the seamen come pouring in with their fierce loyalty and not only stand guard so that no one can hurt Jack, but actually cheer for him. And you know why?
Because of his INNATE GOODNESS. Jack was RIGHT.
Thought the Second: Tolkien spoke of something he called a "eucatastrophe" - a seeming catastrophe that turns out well - as the effect he was striving for at the climax of the Lord of the Rings when Frodo can no longer resist the pull of the Ring, the same literary device, if it might be so described, as the Resurrection, the astonishing victory when defeat seemed most certain. This scene fits that paradigm splendidly.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 05:19 am (UTC)Russell Crowe and a friend supposedly did a screenplay treatment of The Reverse of the Medal to try to get an M&C sequel made -- he talked about it in an interview -- this just makes me so happy, even if it doesn't get made, that he wanted to badly enough to try to make it happen.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 05:26 am (UTC)I had not heard about that - that is great to hear, just for the reason you said!
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 04:04 pm (UTC)B and I very recently picked up the film of M&C for a great price. It's been remaindered. I wish we could have another one!
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 04:18 pm (UTC)I'd LOVE to see another M&C movie - I was really impressed by the one they made!
no subject
Date: 2009-12-06 04:57 pm (UTC)Nothing draws me more than a redemption or resurrection story.
Isn't it breathtaking how what is called "naive" turns out to be the plumb line of a genuine visionary? The unencumbered heart seeing the end from the beginning before the event unfolds.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-07 04:18 pm (UTC)It is indeed, and how beautifully said!
no subject
Date: 2009-12-08 05:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-09 11:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-10 03:20 pm (UTC)Then again (again), be foreigner, learn other syntax, learn English stuff, learn Swedish + French + German stuff, possibly not find Chaucer as difficult as "Huh? What? French hard, you mean we should learn something else as well as English people?" types. And that's the enterprising ones who did learn French.
It just seems weird, that's all. It's your language, people, how can it be that hard for you to get?
no subject
Date: 2009-12-12 03:35 am (UTC)I think you've put your finger on the problem. [you mean we should learn something else as well as English? ] I don't know about the British, but most Americans are monoglots. I know that I didn't really learn the ins and outs of English grammar until I took French and then Latin. (I didn't get German or Greek until college.)
The students I get in Latin class have often had a year or two of Spanish in high school, but somehow they manage to resist learning anything about Spanish or English! I generally wind up teaching them basic parts of speech and how to identify subjects, objects, and so on, because you can't learn an inflected language without knowing that stuff, but REALLY. *sigh*
no subject
Date: 2009-12-12 11:49 am (UTC)It gets difficult to grasp how people would be taught languages without the basic building blocks, unless you foreign language teachers then have to waste your time on doing that as well. Basically, I'm not saying anything you aren't, so... all that. And I did know all the rules about are-will-may and whatever it was, were-would-could, just, meh when it's been so many years from school and spoken language in a way. *sigh* I can't even remember the specific rules or meaning for lies and lays and that one which I think was lay-lay-lay in all three forms, so much forgotten.
Coincidentally, I voted your cold icon for third place in Elserealms, being partial to woobie or something. I recognized your text style in the other two, hence figured that might be from you as well by distribution, in the talk had elsewhere. Not that it mattered.