On 11/17/97 7:53 PM, Richard Lawson at sterman@sprynet.com wrote:

On Monday, November 17, 1997 3:57 PM, Ranma Al'Thor wrote:

On Sun, 16 Nov 1997, Richard Lawson wrote:

So I dunno.  It's certainly open to speculation.  It's just always 
disturbed me on a fundamental level that the old Queen thought that the 
only way to save her people was to destroy them and allow a select few to 
be reborn.

Well, I am hardly a Sailor Moon expert... but it seems that a lot of the 
time, especially in Grand Sweeping Epics, there *are* fates worth than 
death -- particularly in universes with magical powers. I can't argue 
about whether it would have been possible to successfully intervene 
before the final showdown; I don't have enough information. I do know 
that if it came down to a choice between using that kind of final 
suicidal attack to defeat evil (especially if there's a possibility 
[though I admit it's never stated] that that evil might go on to threaten 
others after it was through with my people) and allowing my people to be 
enslaved by energy-draining monsters that would make 'life' a living 
hell... yes, I would probably make that attack. The stakes are different; 
it's not simply a matter of switching overlords. I'd rather die fighting 
Mordor than live in Mordor, let alone face the existence of those who 
remained in Minas Morgul. 

Of course, there's the other old aphorism to oppose it -- while there's 
life, there's hope. The question is deciding which is true under which 
circumstances. Dueling aphorisms, anyone? ;>

That's not the problem I have with this story, it's the idea of
"Conservation of Evil" which bothers me. In a universe in which such was
true, all human striving to improve the world would be futile, for if you
solved one problem, you would only, and always create another one.  It
also conflates natural evil (Earthquakes, fires, floods) and human/moral
evil.  If you did have progress in fighting natural evil (which clearly
has occurred in at least some respects in our century), then you would
have to lose ground somewhere else.

If evil is TRULY conserved, then every advance you make has to occur at
someone else's expense.  By helping someone, you would have to hurt
someone else.

Ultimately, this story is a tragedy.  Serenity saves her soul at the
expense of humanity.  If evil is truly conserved, then all human striving
is futile.  No matter what our heroes and heroines did, they could not
win, for any victory would have to be balanced by defeat in something
else.

Or am I misunderstanding your point?

Hmm.  How to put this.

It's not so much that there must always be as much evil as good.  Those 
philosophies have always bothered me, too.  It's that Serena's method of 
dealing with evil - by making sure no one ever feels pain, ever - is not 
the right way of diminishing evil.  

That's more-or-less the impression I got from reading it. 

Part of it is my belief in the 
fundamental right of everyone to *choose*.  We must be allowed to choose 
evil, if we want.  Serena was depriving people of that choice, and I 
believe that's wrong.  Of course, we can always hope to create a world 
where no one will ever choose to do evil, where being good is the only 
reasonable thing to do.  But creating a world where the choice is removed - 
that's evil in and of itself.  That's kind of the point "Brave New World"  
and "1984" were making.

I'm not sure I'd put it this way, though, especially about 'choosing' 
evil. :) More like, people are people; the little annoyances, 
frustrations, and even jealousies are part of being human. Trying to 
expunge them completely would mean fundamentally changing human nature, 
to the point that I'm not sure the resulting creature could even be 
called 'human'. That doesn't mean we should give in to them, of course, 
and let them rule our lives; but the work of overcoming them is part of 
what gives life meaning. Or maybe I'm just confused typing at 2 AM. ;>


By the by, have you ever read Pat Wrede's _The Seven Towers_, or _Caught 
in Crystal_? Both of them have some similar themes, especially _Seven 
Towers_.



Travis Butler
(The Professor, formerly of Myth and Magick!, Lawrence, KS;
 tbutler@tfs.net, now from the Wandering Powerbook;
 <http://www.tfs.net/personal/tbutler/>;
 Mac page <http://www.tfs.net/business/tbutler/>)

...Argue ideas, not personalities.