(no subject)

[eye_of_a_cat]

He's not dead.

This isn't just denial. My favourite characters always die, to the point where my friends consider it a kind of spoiler warning - anyone I mention liking will die, get used to it. (I believe other people have this ability with goldfish or houseplants.) I've had a long time to get used to this, and if I really thought Lennier was dead, I'd be able to accept it with only minimal grumbling. I'm convinced he isn't, though.

Firstly, the toast to 'absent friends' in SiL, which everyone bar me seems to think means 'dead friends'. I know the others mentioned are canonically dead by this point, but 'absent' could just mean 'absent' in Lennier's case, which is what I assumed when I first saw SiL - Delenn just hadn't seen him since Objects at Rest.

Secondly, Morden's hints in Day of the Dead. It's Morden. I don't trust Morden.

Thirdly, the speculation for Crusade, in which both JMS and an abandoned script apparently imply Lennier dies during the Telepath War. It's not directly stated anywhere I can find, but it's implied pretty heavily. Well. Not only do I think this doesn't mean Lennier's dead by the time of Crusade, but I'm halfway convinced that it proves he's not.

I don't trust JMS either (a bit more than Morden, maybe), and I know that in the past he's been very, very secretive about future plot developments. (He's definitely lied about things on at least one occasion to distract people from guessing.) Even with Crusade being cancelled (and the Telepath War predates Crusade), it seems extremely unlike him to give away a plot point involving a character death so lightly. He's not given up working within the B5 universe, so why tell everyone about a plot point which hasn't happened yet? And if he did want to, for whatever reason, why not just say it outright rather than dance around it, all the time dropping hints which are much, much more obvious than all his normal ones? Something is suspicious here.

I think it suits JMS to have people assume Lennier's dead. Giving away future plot points doesn't usually suit JMS, but pointing people down a different route so they won't expect them does, and I think that's what he's doing here.

That's about 75% reasoning with reference to JMS's sneakiness in the past, and 25% clamping my hands over my ears while shouting very loudly "It's not true! It's not!" Which isn't a bad ratio, all things considered.

Comments

[deborah-judge.livejournal.com]

There's also Delenn's "until I see a body Lennier isn't dead" in Darkness Ascending. Which I take as encouragement to have the same attitude. Unfortunatley, it could also mean - if Delenn thinks he's dead (if you take the line in SiL that way) then he most definitely is.

Although, I wouldn't put it past Lennier to fake his own death to keep Delenn from tracking him down. It's what I would do in his position. She's very, very unwilling to let him go - and he really needs to get away from her, at least for a time.

My feeling, though, is that JMS's treatment of Lennier's fate is just JMS going on a homicidal rampage against his own character, which he's not above doing. (Talia is the most obvious example - all that setup, and he kills her in a trivial way. Anna is another example - Sheridan kills her and doesn't care, and we're not supposed to either.) I think that was JMS's intention with the diary - to thow out something so OOC that it undermines anything we might have liked about Lennier. Kind of like 'Everything nice Talia did for Susan was really the program talking' . (grumble) As to why JMS had to destroy Lennier that way - I think in the end he just couldn't stand having a rival for Sheridan. It's just like 'Deconstruction' or Garibaldi's brainwashing - anyone who has anything negative to say (or feel, or imply) about Sheridan must have something wrong with him. It's what I'm most angry at JMS about.

So, I don't see a lot of hope for JMS writing something Lennier-friendly in the future - unless he's gotten over his need to make Sheridan into a Mary-sue, which would be very nice. Still, I do think it is canonically possible.

[eye-of-a-cat.livejournal.com]

My feeling, though, is that JMS's treatment of Lennier's fate is just JMS going on a homicidal rampage against his own character, which he's not above doing.

Ah, that's true. Demonising the other actual or possible love interest for the sake of the OTP really annoys me in fanfic, and while I'd expect JMS to be above it, I can't think of Anna's story as being anything else. (Possibly Talia's, too, in a weird way - canon seems committed to the idea that Ivanova can't be happy in any relationship ever.) And I suppose that's what Lennier's betrayal scene was, or what it could have been with a few slight changes. If Delenn had thought any less of him after it, I'd definitely have been throwing things at the screen and shouting.

I think that was JMS's intention with the diary - to thow out something so OOC that it undermines anything we might have liked about Lennier.

That diary was such a strange thing that the first time I saw OaR, I was tempted to think Delenn was just making it up. (I'm pretty sure she wasn't, though, especially since she's trying to get Sheridan to forgive Lennier at the time.) Honestly, if she'd said "We searched his quarters on Minbar and found that he'd paid three bounty hunters to kill you," I don't think it would have sounded any stranger than the mention of the diary.

It's just like 'Deconstruction' or Garibaldi's brainwashing - anyone who has anything negative to say (or feel, or imply) about Sheridan must have something wrong with him. It's what I'm most angry at JMS about.

Maybe he saw Delenn's scenes with Lennier as doing that in the last two seasons, even without the diary. Although it would have been exceptionally OOC for Lennier to say anything against Sheridan, the way that he was close to Delenn in a way Sheridan just couldn't be meant Sheridan wasn't everything to her. That wouldn't be a bad thing for anyone else, but since it's Sheridan and Sheridan can Do No Wrong...

[deborah-judge.livejournal.com]

Possibly Talia's, too, in a weird way - canon seems committed to the idea that Ivanova can't be happy in any relationship ever.

Yep - because Susan was Sheridan's second, and no one else can compare. (grumble)

And I suppose that's what Lennier's betrayal scene was, or what it could have been with a few slight changes. If Delenn had thought any less of him after it, I'd definitely have been throwing things at the screen and shouting.

And JMS is just too good a writer - he had created characters (and a relationship) so strong that even he couldn't destroy them. Still, the dearth of D/L shippers in the fandom does seem to indicate that he suceeded to some extent.

That diary was such a strange thing that the first time I saw OaR, I was tempted to think Delenn was just making it up.

I thought the same thing. Even if there is something that could have been interpreted that way (like "Valen Sinclair says that the One who Will Be will marry a human" or, alternatively, "The diminishment of Minbari souls didn't start with Valen and therefore what Delenn is doing won't help" or even "Minbari religious law traditionally forbids marriage outside of the caste, and I would think marriage outside the species would be even worse") I just can't imagine Lennier saying flat out that Delenn made a mistake in marrying Sheridan. So even if she didn't make it up, I think she made it sound worse than it was. It may just have been the typical adulterer's instinct to save the marriage by putting the blame on the person they're having an affair with. Or a way to make Lennier seem pathetic, and therefore less of a threat (and not someone Sheridan needs to worry about having around.)

Or...if you see Delenn's behavior towards Lennier throughout the series as basically having an affair with him and asking him to take all the emotional and moral responsibility for it (which is certainly a plausible interpretation) then what she's doing here is just an extention of that. Maybe the diary actually says something like "I am starting to believe that Delenn loves me after all" and Delenn is so desperate not to acknowledge the truth of that, that she puts it all on him.

Although it would have been exceptionally OOC for Lennier to say anything against Sheridan, the way that he was close to Delenn in a way Sheridan just couldn't be meant Sheridan wasn't everything to her.

I think that's it. His existance is an implied criticism of Sheridan, and his relationship with Delenn points to places where Sheridan just can't or won't be there for Delenn. Which is one heck of a lot of Delenn's life, including all her past and all her life on Minbar.

Getting rid of Lennier wipes out part of Delenn's life, because there's no one around that she can share those parts of her life with now. It's terribly cruel to her, and I hate that we don't see how hard it is. Paradoxically, the hardest part might be how easy it is - that without Lennier, there's no one around who remembers her guilt, so she can pretend it doesn't exist. But that's cutting off a part of herself, and I will continue to maintain that she will not be whole until she comes back to it.

[eye-of-a-cat.livejournal.com]

Still, the dearth of D/L shippers in the fandom does seem to indicate that he suceeded to some extent.

I will confess to describing Delenn and Lennier's relationship to people outside the fandom, and asking if they had any idea why the pairing wasn't written more often. They thought it was puzzling, too. I can only think it's a combination of Objects at Rest and the fandom being quite conservative when it comes to the big canon pairing (and anything else which might go against it).

So even if she didn't make it up, I think she made it sound worse than it was.

That's the only way I can imagine it making any sense. Not to mention the strangeness of the whole situation surrounding the diary - why would she have his quarters searched? What was she expecting to find? Even if she wasn't expecting Lennier to harm Sheridan in any way, she knew how he felt about her, and she hardly needed to go searching his possessions for any clues about why he might have a problem with her husband.

Another point about OaR, too. I wish I could remember this quote exactly, but it's when he calls her afterwards to say he's sorry and that he's going away - something very close to "I only wanted to tell you, one last time, I'm so sorry."

I suppose that could mean, "I wanted to say I'm sorry, and since I've already said 'sorry' once a few moments ago, this will be the last time when I say it again." But it doesn't really sound that way, especially since it's very close to the beginning of their conversation that he says it. "One last time" makes it sound as if he's said "I'm so sorry" to her a hundred times before the scene with Sheridan, and he needed to tell her again. Maybe he's just spent so much time thinking it that he can't now remember never actually saying it out loud, or maybe he has told her before, which would raise all sorts of questions about when and why. I don't know which one would be more terribly sad.

Maybe the diary actually says something like "I am starting to believe that Delenn loves me after all" and Delenn is so desperate not to acknowledge the truth of that, that she puts it all on him.

I could very much see that. Especially if the reason she won't acknowledge whatever feelings she has for Lennier is because it would, in some way, lessen her relationship with Sheridan. Far easier to interpret "Perhaps Delenn loves me" as a comment about Lennier rather than a comment about her.

Getting rid of Lennier wipes out part of Delenn's life, because there's no one around that she can share those parts of her life with now. It's terribly cruel to her, and I hate that we don't see how hard it is.

Yes. It must have been so painful for her to realise how much she'd be losing along with him, even if she had seriously thought about what he meant to her before. Lennier trying to kill her husband must have been bad enough, but it's clear that the thought of him leaving is far worse.

Of course, Sheridan saying 'Is it because of me?' when he finds out Lennier's going to join the Rangers means Lennier has to do something bad to Sheridan later on, otherwise the viewers might be tempted into not finding Sheridan entirely blameless...

About that conversation with Morden...

[deborah-judge.livejournal.com]

(Since Morden's been in my head recently, I asked her, er, him a few questions about this conversation.)

First of all, I think the conversation most makes sense as Morden trying to get Lennier to play a part in the destruction of Centauri Prime, in which he quite succeeded. Second of all, the things Morden said are quite ambiguous, and don't really mean anything. As far as I remember, the only two pieces of information he gives are 1) "Delenn does not love you like you love her, and never will." (which, if you are less self-hating than Lennier, would be a simple statement of the obvious - there are many ways in which Delenn's love for Lennier is different than her love for him, not the least that it will never feel unrequited.) and 2) that he will find out if there is life after death "soon enough" (which, since there's no time frame, and any time is soon to someone who is dead or immortal, doesn't mean anything at all. Even if we discount the possibility that he could be destined to find out about life after death in some way other than dying.)

I'm also stuck on the King Solomon reference. If Neil Gaiman didn't notice that by having Lennier ask for wisdom he was making him into King Solomon, well, he should have. (The King Solomon narrative is, as far as I can remember, the only Biblical narrative where God asks 'what do you want' instead of just giving a blessing.) Especially after all the hints (and the occasional outright statement) about Delenn training Lennier to be her successor. If Delenn is the messianic figure, her sucessor would be the Solomonic figure. One would think.

The problem is, JMS didn't write this episode. So maybe we can't hold him responsible for hints and allusions in it. Still, these hints are as canon as anything, certainly as canon as things JMS says he thought of but never filmed.

Re: About that conversation with Morden...

[eye-of-a-cat.livejournal.com]

I asked her, er, him a few questions

*narrowly avoids giggling Coke all over the keyboard*

On Morden's motivation - yes, I think so. As you said in your essay on Lennier, the destruction of Centauri Prime is the one thing we do know Morden wants (and the way he threatens Londo with that when we see him lose control makes me sure he'd still want it, even if he was dead and not serving the Shadows - well, sort of not serving them). He's spent enough time helping other people get what they want, and not having to do too much himself. I think he'd know exactly how to go about getting Centauri Prime to burn.

I also noticed the way Morden kept hinting that he was there because Lennier wanted him there. I suppose that's not completely out of the question, since we don't get told why particular ghosts return to particular people, but he really emphasises it. That would make Lennier doubt himself more, and make him even more likely to interpret anything Morden says in the worst way possible.

Oh, and I just thought - when Lennier tells him something like "I could not betray the Rangers any more than my fingers could betray my hand", isn't that almost exactly what Neroon says to Shakiri (only with 'my caste' instead) in season 4? (I think, anyway.) And at that point, Neroon is betraying his caste, pretty much, but it's for a perfectly justifiable reason. Maybe betraying the Rangers wouldn't have to be so bad, either. Of course Lennier wouldn't see it that way, and it didn't work out so well when he did betray them, but maybe if he'd been able to hear Morden's words differently...

If Neil Gaiman didn't notice that by having Lennier ask for wisdom he was making him into King Solomon, well, he should have.

And Solomon gets his wisdom to the point where people from all lands come to listen, doesn't he? So that could make sense in the context of Meditations on the Abyss, where Rangers from all over the galaxy are asked the 'What do you want?' question that Lennier taught them. (Although admittedly he's not the one asking it of them.) Wisdom from Morden would pretty much have to be knowing how to ask and answer that question, I think.

Re: About that conversation with Morden...

[deborah-judge.livejournal.com]

Another thing about the King Solomon reference - there's a large body of Jewish legends about King Solomon sent into exile by the king of demons because of his sins. It's too much to expect Neil Gaiman to have known about these legends and be hinting at them - but it does reinforce the parallel.

The Neroon reference is a nice one, although I'm not sure where it gets us.

I do think Lennier really wanted Morden there. I think he's the first of the Minbari to get that 'what do you want' is an important question, and to want it asked of him. The problem is, that goes so much against everything he's learned, and he can't forgive himself for it.