Bed-time musings on character in DWJ (F&H)

Nat Case ncase at
Thu Nov 16 11:17:47 EST 2000

>Hallie wrote:
>I'm still not sure I agree with people wanting to be taken as a part 
>of their being taken (to leave aside the whole question of whether a 
>moral weakness could be inherited!).

People don't know, or don't want to know, what they're getting into. 
Tom Lynn I suspect was all too willing to be "taken by the beautiful 
and glamorous Laurel.

Thomas Rhymer and Tam Lin are two sides of the same coin: in THomas 
the Rhymer, we see the seduction, and in Tam Lin we see the desparate 
desire to get away.
In the span of Fire and Hemlock, we don't see the seduction itself, 
although we see the next victim in Leslie.

I don't see Tam Lin in the ballad as completely amoral. He certainly 
has a lot of what faeries like, but he does admit to being baptized 
(which doesn't mean as much now, but 500 years ago that was an 
accepted indicator of being within the pale of moral society), and 
makes hard, clear promises (to be the baby's father,to stick with 
Janet when he's free, etc.).

All the versions and reinterpretations of "Tam Lin" I've ever read 
end just after the freeing from Faerie, but I really want to see a 
sequel, maybe when the kid is old enough to be taken... What do the 
parents do to keep the kid away, and do they succeed?

The more I think about it, the analogy to addiction is apt. People 
don't get trapped by alcohol, methamphetamines, or Laurel because 
they want to be trapped. They do it because they are promised 
something they greatly want. And while they are getting hooked, that 
promise is delivered. Then the horror of their entrapment takes hold, 
and it is very very hard to get out.

And once you're out, you still have the traces on you. You're never 
totally free until you die.

To unsubscribe, email dwj-request at with the body "unsubscribe".
Visit the archives at

More information about the Dwj mailing list