[Anaximander]

The perspective of a character like Tool can be challenging. I've only read Gardens, but I wonder about how far Erikson goes toward offering reasons to think his pronouncement to Lorn in the middle of the book is wrong.

Maybe I can put it this way:

Depressing Dilemma of Despair:

1. For any person x, either (a) x is mortal, or ( x is immortal.
2. If (a) x is mortal, then everything x does will be undone, all x's projects will be for nothing (e.g., witness all the corpses on the battlefield in Pale)
3. If everything x does is undone, x's life is futile.
4. If ( x is immortal, then x will be caught up in a cycle of petty, meaningless endeavors for eternity (e.g., Tool, or some of Anomander's musings with Baruk in Baruk's chamber, or his conversation with K'rul on the tower belfry)
5. If x is caught up in a cycle of petty endeavors for eternity, x's life is futile. Therefore:
6. For any person x, x's life is futile.

A lot of people in the novel seem to be struggling with something like this here. Crokus isn't, but that's because he's too young to have the requisite perspective. Whiskeyjack is. Lorn seems to be. Paran seems to be. Some of the Ascendants are. Rallick is. And what does SE give us to disarm this depressing problem?

One line seems to come from Mammot. Crokus remembers his uncle's enthusiasm at one of the festivals, where Mammot says something about how stupid people are, but at least we can celebrate something eternal--the rhythms of nature (or some such). This seems like a motif we get from Bambi or the Lion King, but without the schmultz.

Another line seems to come from Rallick and Anomander. Both of these seem to be trying to find redemption of sort sort by living by living up to some principle or other.

Of course, if there's some beatific end state of the sort we get in Western monotheistic religion, maybe there's a way of breaking up the dilemma. But of course that's not in the cards here. (After all, how fun would reading about a conflict be if one of the teams has an omnipotent player? Talk about over-leveled!)

Anyways...I don't know if this theme strikes other readers, or if it's just me. Does SE provide a way out later on?

[nacht]

I challenge your assumption #2. I never perceived this from my reading.

Quote

2. If (a) x is mortal, then everything x does will be undone, all x's projects will be for nothing (e.g., witness all the corpses on the battlefield in Pale)

I do agree that there are some overarching themes similar to

1. People feel they are powerless to influence things for the better (Paran, WhiskeyJack etc.)
2. History does seem to repeat itself with people not learning from their past . This does cause some ascendants to question the value of getting involved.

but this is different from feeling that whatever is done will be undone. (This is actually never true in real life, what has happened can never truly be undone)

[nacht]

I think you misunderstood or over generalized this conversation

Quote

The Imass shrugged before replying. “I think of futility, Adjunct.”
“Do all Imass think about futility?”
“No. Few think at all.”
“Why is that?”
The Imass leaned his head to one side and regarded her. “Because, Adjunct, it is futile.”

I think the futility Tool is referring to here is the futility of giving wise counsel.
And to some extent, he elaborates on the T'lan Imass, who are really bound by a lot of rules, and therefore don't really have free will, and therefore gave up that (the typical "sheep")

[D'iversify]

As an archaeologist, Erikson is informed by the general observed fact that all works, however, great, will come undone, and that meaningfulness in life cannot be grounded on their endurance. Meaningfulness in life must therefore be grounded in the transcendence of brilliant moments and memories that surpass this reality of decay into disorder.

[Puck]

Anaximander, on 20 January 2014 - 06:02 AM, said:

[snip] And what does SE give us to disarm this depressing problem?

The rest of the series.

Also, what has already been said in the thread.

[worry]

I'm in favor of despair. All ways "out" lead downward eventually, where the real horrors await.

[Anaximander]

Thanks, everyone, for the good replies.

D, on 20 January 2014 - 10:26 AM, said:

As an archaeologist, Erikson is informed by the general observed fact that all works, however, great, will come undone, and that meaningfulness in life cannot be grounded on their endurance. Meaningfulness in life must therefore be grounded in the transcendence of brilliant moments and memories that surpass this reality of decay into disorder.

Yes--I was thinking that maybe this was the way that SE was going to go. My only worry about this is that I wonder if it's enough. For instance, both the Nazi and the Allied soldier may experience brilliant moments. But I'd like to believe that one of these soldiers (and not the other) is fighting for a worthy cause. I guess I'm worried about the idea that there is nothing worth fighting *for*, exactly.

Anyway, you're now witnessing the neurosis of someone just beginning his Malazan journey. If what Puck says is right, I'll have much to look forward to.

On the other hand, if worry is right...

[Abyss]

Anaximander, on 20 January 2014 - 06:34 PM, said:

... If what Puck says is right, I'll have much to look forward to.

On the other hand, if worry is right...

And if they BOTH are right....?