i think a large point has been missed here. greta shaw was not jake's nanny. she was the housekeeper and there is a huge difference. if she were the nanny she would have had a responsibility to do certain things, behave in a certain way, and maybe even provide certain affections (whether she felt them or not).
she was the housekeeper. yet she showed caring for jake. she praised his papers. she remembered how he liked his sandwiches. he was sure she would save him from the deathfly or whatever it was (remember that little tidbit??) not to mention the tyranasorbets rex.
she showed him that grownups could be stable, non-affair having, non-drug using, non-pretentious, sane people whose purpose in life was to be exactly what they appeared to be. no more, no less.
I gotta go with Turtlesong. She did show Jake mayhap the only positive stable thing that was there for him on Earth and mayhap if Jake never met Gretta, he wouldn't be as stable as he was in Mid-World thus perhaps causing Roland and Co. many problems due to his instability.
Opinion in politics, and politics, is an evil which has caused many a fellow to be hung while he’s still young and pretty.
This discussion is fascinating. I'm actually swinging a bit towards obscure on this one too. Personally, it think you can't be "on the fence" where kids are concerned. You either need to be there for them or don't.
Greta was always very clear that she went home at night. End of story.
So on one hand she made it clear to Jake that he was not his mother and made sure that he never thought that way about her.
and here comes the mixed message...
she cut the crusts off his sandwiches, looked at his school work and generally acted like a mom when it was convenient to her. I don't blame Greta for what she did, it was a difficult situation but I think if she wanted it professional, she should have left it professional.
I always considered Jake a gunslinger in spite of the people who were in his life prior to Dutch Hill, including Greta.
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
yeah. but professional people have a job to do. and then a life to get back to. i had to learn that the hard way. they can't be there 24/7 when they have their own lives.
would you have preferred that she come in, vacuum the rugs, clean the kitchen, scrub the toilets, dust the shelves, prepare the food, and ignore jake completely? would his life have been better that way?
he would have been a fucking basket case. and the tet would have failed. without jake nothing could have been accomplished. without jake the center doesn't hold. you need all the spokes on the wheel for the wheel to turn - without greta's stability, without greta showing him signs that people can care for you without fucking you up, he would've gone insane. one spoke down, the wheel is unbalanced and the tower falls.
(and damn i love this discussion! )
A person can be a professional at what they do, and still be a compassionate human being while doing it.
Greta showed Jake compassion at times when she felt she needed to. Should she have been an automaton in order to be a professional at what she did?
I'm just not getting the 'mixed message' that you fellas are getting...
There's no doubt that Jake achieved his gunslinger status on his own.I always considered Jake a gunslinger in spite of the people who were in his life prior to Dutch Hill, including Greta.
I'm not saying Jake wouldn't have made a gunslinger without Greta's influence or anything like that,
just that she added a little stability to his shaky foundation.
Hyberbolas doesn't even begin to describe this. The tet would have failed without Greta Shaw? Is that what you're saying? Sorry turtlesong, I appreciate most of your post, but this, well, I can't think of anything that wouldn't come off derogatory. I guess we just disagree to the fullest extent possible, at least in this regard.*
Good points Matt. I was beginning to think I was the only one even leaning that way.
And for the last time, yes, it would have been better if she just left Jake alone.
*I usually really dig what you have to say and I am really glad you're here, so don't take me the wrong way.
I don't think that Jake would have failed without Greta. Jake was born to be a gunslinger and he knew how to stand and be true.
As I have said it many times I am sure Susannah would have appeared between Detta and Odetta without help, too however it might have been different from Susannah we know and love in the series.
But I still say Great did no harm for Jake. She just showed him that there are other worlds than these..
Roland would have understood.
Opinion in politics, and politics, is an evil which has caused many a fellow to be hung while he’s still young and pretty.
don't you all attach exaggerated importance to her, this or that way???
Ask not what bears can do for you, but what you can do for bears. (razz)
When one is in agreement with bears one is always correct. (mae)
bears are back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have to agree with Jean about exaggerating her importance. However, I feel her influence was both positive and negative. Positive because Jake did need a personal touch that his parents couldn't or wouldn't provide, and negative because she didn't go that extra mile to really connect. Everything was surface caring. For a child, however, surface caring can be better than no caring at all, depending on the child's personality of course. For Jake, I do think it was primarily positive.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns,
A whole lot more than riches and muscle.
The hands of the many must join as one.
And together we'll cross the river.
Puscifer, "The Humbling River"
I totally agree and understand what you are saying. I have no personal beef with Greta, I think she was in over her head is all.
I'm sure what happened between them happens regularly in those types of relationships. I think that is why I could never perform in a "care giver" role to someone else's kid. I would just get too close and they would become my kid.
I think Great should not have send a mixed message to Jake and the effect made him an even more confused boy than he already was. But it was a hard situation so I don't think she was a bad person or anything.
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
i didn't say the tet would have failed without greta. i said the tet would have failed without jake. and that by providing him with some semblance of stability, greta helped to make jake able to withstand some of what he had to go through before he reached the tet for the final time.
seriously, i need some more from you about why you hate her so much. you're not giving me anything to hang onto. she wasn't his nanny so i'm not taking that you just hate all nannies crap seriously. do you really feel like she led him on? just because she was nice to him? so are all people who are nice to you just leading you on?
i thought Greta Shaw was the maid that took care of Lizabetrh and the other daughters in Duma Key. The lady who worked fro the Chambers was... oh crap, I'm shutting up now.
Nope, the maid from Duma was actually Sara Laughs.
(that woman from Bag of Bones, I can't remember he name)
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
I thought Sarah laughs was the name of that house on turtleback lane.
I think it is, and I also think its what that woman in Bag of Bones is referred to by her friends. I may be wrong though.
The kindness of close friends is like a warm blanket
It's Cara Laughs on Turtleback Lane
I couldn't agree more, and my response is twofold:
1) I didn't start the thread
2) I only jumped in because I couldn't believe how many people thought she was a superhero. I'm almost expecting to see some Greta Shaw tattoos in the DT body art thread.
Turtlesong, I'll quote some passages from DT 7 when I get some time this weekend or early next week.
Jayson, good to see you, as always.
A quick word:
Yes, she led him on, and when he responded in typical child fashion (by wanting more), she didn't give it to him.
"First comes smiles, then comes lies, next comes gunfire" -Roland
I think this is a good metaphor for what postmodernist philosopher Richard Englehardt calls "contracting for morality." We all pleasantly muddle along, but the majority of it is bullshit. Genuine benevolence is earned and is cheapened by the majority of the way people act. So, yes, most nice people lead one another on, to act contrary would be to ensure mutual self destruction. No time for further elaboration.
-----> Will name my next fish Greta, bc they tend to have short life spans. j/k
i think this is kind of sad; even though i know it's true. yes, a lot of life's encounters are bullshit. let's face it, 97% of the time when we ask someone how they are we don't really give a fuck. we're just being polite and if they give us an honest answer we just kind of stare and then say "oh, gee, that's too bad" or some other bullshit.
and yes, "genuine benevolence" is earned. but good, decent, honest behaviour should be the norm damnit. and i don't mean saying someone looks like shit when they ask you if this top makes them look like a box, or if those pants make them look fat. i mean acting as if you care for another human being. not walking through life acting like a prick simply because you're walking through life. i mean making a concerted effort to ensure that you are treating other people with respect, dignity, and kindness as often as humanly possible.
condemning someone for being nice to the child of her employers and then going home at the end of her work day? that just sucks man. again i ask. should she have just done her job and ignored him completely? isn't that exactly the kind of behaviour that you're advocating against?
i know i'm being unfair here because you said you'd have a longer answer later, but please take your time and post whenever. i always look forward to reading your answers.
p.s. when you get your fish named greta make sure you post pics in the pets and children thread. just make sure it's not a turtle!!
i'll be looking forward to your post.
and as for point #2:
Turtlesong, I quoted someone else (actually two people if you count Roland) to give my answers a little objectivity. I wasn't necessarily phrasing them as my own, but I'm a fan of authentic. I like people whose actions spring from a defined world view.
I have to ask how is "decent honest behavior" and "97% bullshit" not necessarily mutually exclusive? I think this is where we differ and why I'm a postmodernist in the vein of Wittgenstein/Aristotle and how they've been appropriated by recent moral philosophers like Englehardt and Alisdair MacIntyre. I would rather just e mail you a paper than derail this thread, honestly. Send me your e mail address if you are interested, or not.
I'm a nice guy, and fiercely loyal to my friends. Not everyone gets that loyalty. Its a classical view of friendship, and one that is based around common ideals related to virtue.
I really am a nice guy.