To E, Part 3

[rthstewart]

 

Gosh, this makes me want to pick up Harold and Morgan again!  Thanks so much, E.  A couple of things, I guess, other than a humongous thank you.

Thank you for the comment on consistency as I see some definite inconsistencies, especially with Morgan and Lucy.  My ideas on Lucy really firmed up after working on Palace Guard and some of TQSiT, so she’s much more developed in H&M.  Your comment about the quote at the beginning of the Foolish Faun chapter from PC and then the tale itself are indeed going to precisely the deux ex machine point.  I developed it further in TPG with Lucy excpecting Aslan to save her.  It’s actually sort of interesting to think about – for a 100 years, they were probably wishing Aslan would save them and he doesn’t.  The despair during the rise of the Telmarines would have been even greater.  It would be hard to see how Narnians could assume Aslan would fix everything when he didn’t for so long.  Lucy, on the other hand, doesn’t have that experience of waiting and disappointed expectation.

The Bahamas were exactly what I was thinking of as off shore tax havens.  The idea of bias and favoritism in corporate and tax policy is well established – the benefit of home ownership in the US, or sin taxes on soda pop, deductions for dependents.  I just read on article on how high tariffs on Chinese made ironing boards have kept the only American manufacturer of ironing boards in business.  As you point, economic espionage and protest were rampant during WW2 – I’m reading now how the French sent all their bad wine to the Wehrmacht during the occupation.  Unfortunately, I’m really rubbish at finance and numbers so I was just making up so much of this as I go along and now I am stuck with something I know nothing about as people said they kinda sort liked how Edmund and Morgan had something they were doing together that was important apart from Tru Lurve and/or hawt, sweaty timez.

 

I have, at the moment, given the barest thought to the organization of the banking syndicates, except to assume that the individual houses operate like a Lloyd’s of London, who are independent and competitors but also work cooperatively to pool and share risk.  I had thought that for whatever reason that Narrowhaven ends up being a sort of financial capital, possibly because of very lax oversight by Narnia.  Were I to go on in H&M, a lot of this would have to be explored and I did envision a storyline involving what it means politically that a Linch banker has aligned with the Narnian monarchy.

 

OK, last, about the princesses.  When I wrote those lines about manipulating and being manipulated, I had not even thought the final chapter of the story would happen.  It was going to end with Jina in the corset.  Ha.  But, having gone down that road, I have been thinking a lot about women using their sexuality for advancement on the one hand and how embracing of personal sexuality is a tool of empowerment.  As I was working on TQSiT, some of the “Tarkheenas” of the story  really gave me pause.  The men of that milieu were treating women as toys.  Why was it bad that these powerful women – politicians, power brokers, socialists, and newspaper owners -- were playing a man’s game in a very male dominated world, and succeeding at it?   I found something grudgingly admiring in their seizing of what they wanted.  That notion of seeing, wanting, looking, and maybe acting (but thinking, refraining from acting, and making good choices) ended up finding its way into Susan’s characterization as I wanted to attack the fandom convention of Susan’s frequent sexual victimization. 

 Then, of course, I turned it all on its head with Jezebel and the princess discussion in H&M.   It does show something of how Susan and Lucy come to be the strong characters that they are and shows something of how oblivious Morgan can be and that, as if I needed any more proof of it, that she is wholly not of that world view but will sort sell people into it if that’s what she’s paid to do. I admit I’m also taking another swipe – there is a persistent idea in some communities that a young woman should pass from care, custody, and control of her father, directly to that of her husband.  I think that is a real life thing for some people in this fandom community and so I was putting it into Narnia.

 Phew.  That’s all.  Thanks so much.  Glad you caught the discussion you sparked and I’m very grateful

Comments

[min023.livejournal.com]

Right, so this is my two cents worth (lengthy, sorry), which you can take or leave, as you please. Yes, like the others, I'm reading because what you write is not only different, but interesting. You've taken a tack, and dealt with issues, that are quite different from the generic themes that are prevalent in much of the fanon, and I find that very refreshing, particularly since I'm well beyond the 'maiden' cohort of your readership.

As you doubtless already know, I'm one of your "read everything" readers, and to be perverse, I like your Golden Age stories just as much (and in some parts, better) than your Spare Oom writings. If I had to nail down my preference between Part 1 and Part 2 of TSG, I'd probably also say Part 1, but not for the reasons you might expect.

I like the light-heartedness of some of the interactions, which thematically didn't fit quite so well with Part 2. As a general comment, you write the witty repartee very well indeed, and there's a bit more scope for that in Part 1. We also saw more of the 'genuine' Good Beasts in Part 1 than Part 2 (where they were more part of the cypher, than themselves), and that, too, was part of the attraction.

I think for me, it's simply that I don't channel Susan nearly as well as the other Friends, so I find it harder to empathise with her character than any of the others. That said, I prefer your characterisation of Susan to any other that I have read. I am absolutely delighted with the way that you've thrown many of the fanon conventions about Susan (and to a lesser extent, the other Pevensies) straight out the window. The stupid, vapid, (sometimes) victimised, party-girl annoys the crap out of me, and I'm not a fan of Suspian either.

I don't have a problem with Susan/Tebbitt, nor with anyone else/OC, provided the OC is well-written and fits the tale (which yours undoubtedly are and do). Yes, there was an initial 'squick' factor, given the age difference, but it didn't become a big problem, particularly given the fact that you had Susan take ownership of herself, her desires and emotions. I can see how this might become a hot button for some of the readership, but I'm delighted to find an assertive women, not a rag doll. Intellectually, I do understand the 'morality' complaint - I think it's rubbish, myself, but I won't answer for anyone else.

Maybe it's partially the subject matter. Issues like the Holocaust and the nastiness of wartime intelligence work still cause quite a lot of squirm factor seventy years after the event, and even fictionalised, I can see that it may be uncomfortable for some. Is it just that it's not as 'fluffy' as Part 1? I don't know - I wish I had a better handle on it, and could give you better insight, but I haven't. Don't know whether there's anything here that's of any use to you, but that's my thoughts...

At any rate, I'm here for the long haul, and I do hope that you decide to continue.
: )

[rthstewart.livejournal.com]

Thanks, Min. I do appreciate it. It's all grist for the mill. I keep turning over in my head, this is supposed to be fun and what happened with the plummeting decline was decidedly not fun. Pause for inverse Sally Field moment. "You don't like me!" "WAHHHH!" Right then. But I write too often when it really matters and there's nothing so humbling as having your work picked over line by line by a committee of fifteen on a 3 hour conference call. I don't put the same level of care into derivative work, but if there's something wrong, I am going to try to fix it.