Stephen’s Comments (group member since Dec 01, 2011)

Stephen’s comments from the It's not just a FAYZ group.

Madeleine wrote: " This is the way I think of it: What's the worst that can happen when you ..."

Folks can be changed and sometimes traumatized by what they read and what they watch. How many of us STILL remember (view spoiler)[Bambi's mother being shot (hide spoiler)] or (view spoiler)[Travis having to put down Old Yeller (hide spoiler)]?

Specifically as to the GONE series... thinking about the issues raised in these books can leave scars on one's soul.


Of course many children won't think of the issues that troubled me the most when I read these books.

Alexa wrote: "They actually sound kinda delicious, like a chicken/waffle thing, y'know?"
I was thinking more along the lines of an economy version of a croque monsiuer, but I don't see anything in the combo that doesn't go.

I'm generlly willing to discuss these books anytime. Why not post your questions here and see what everyone can contribute?

Jenn and Charlotte... Wouldn't life in prison perhaps in a work camp where he's forced to contribute something to society be a better punishment?

Eye for an eye is an old testament form of vengence when fewer options were available and it didn't work all that well even then.

When Oscar Wilde was sentenced, he was put into a prison where the inmates were forced to climb a treadmill that powered a machine for beating out oakum. We don't need Oakum much these days but how bout a treadmill that caused them to generate their own (and perhaps others electricity?)

Or as an alternative... the Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro? Deals with a lower class of human... clones/donors. What about declaring these people donors and requiring them to donate blood and organs for medical transplants. Wouldn't this be a less wasteful means of punishing the irredeemables that we currently execute?

While I found the idea initially abhorant, I think that the deterrant effects would be greater than a clean easy execution. And beneficial to society too.

Of course this is the discussion group for the FAYZ books and such punishments are NOT an option there.

Can you expand on that? What's the motivation? the allure? the reason? Can you cite examples from your own life? No names or personal details but enough so that we can understand.

No you sick, stupid creep, I love you. I shouldn't. I shouldn't. You're sick inside, Caine, sick! But I love you. - Diana”

I came across this quote and it made me wonder. Can someone really love some who they believe is morally twisted?

I've never been a parent but I'm guessing that sometimes they can feel that kind of love. And I suppose that two people who have been together for a long time could. but is it realistic that Diana could love Caine?

I know that they have a sort of Bonny and Clyde dynamic going but still...

Charlotte- insert an inside joke here- wrote: "a person who admits to killing a lot of people, shouldn't get just life in jail."

What do you see as the value of a death sentence? Is it retribution or deterrant? The death sentences provided by the state are generally not as scary to hardened criminals as the death sentences they face on the streets. And one criminologist after another has admitted that as a deterrant the death sentance is ineffective. And with the retribution angle aren't we risking more Derek Bentley scenarios? Derek was the young British guy that was hung and then later found not guilty.

BTW... guys I'm NOT just trying to be argumentative here. I'm trying to get folks to voice their opinions and substantiate them. I was always annoyed by Astrid's moral certitude.

lime the cheese cake ninja wrote: (sic) "when sum1 goes in2 the big house for the rest of there lives they might as well be dead..."

Is it impossible to enjoy one's life when locked up? It is possible to reform? To "find God?" Is it possible that by keeping someone alive we acknowledge our own fallibility and a death sentence is something we cannot reverse.

Or as an alternative... Have you read Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro? What about declaring these people donors and requiring them to donate blood and organs for medical transplants. Wouldn't this be a less wasteful means of punishing the irredeemables that we currently execute?

I'm not necessarily advocating such a thing, but it bears thinking about.

Ninja & Super... I'm not trying to suggest that either of you are "in trouble." I am trying to foster a mature discussion.

I'm not willing to concede that Drake is "pure evil" but I will concede that he deserves death. He has killed without anything that I judge as a reason to kill. He shows no remorse and seems willing to kill again. However, when he shot that kid at home, before coming to Coates, I think that he was just yielding to a momentary destructive whim. Not unlike the one Orc yielded to when wielding his baseball bat on Day one in the FAYZ. Orc however has since demonstrated remorse. I don't see him as a danger to the community.

In a society such as ours we have the resources and the ability to hold people indefinately and to render them (through incarceration) harmless to the community. Therefore I'm against capital punishment. In the FAYZ they don't have the same luxuries that we do and I would concede that killing Drake might be the right thing to do.

How do you two feel about capital punishment in OUR society? It doesn't seem to be much of a deterrant, (particularly if done in a humane manner) We HAVE life in prison as an alternative. And it's been shown that capital punishment costs more in legal costs and involved costs than keeping the same prisoner in prison for the rest of their mortal lives.

Is it still a valid sentence? Super & Ninja... What do you think? And please no answering at midnight when you're tired. I'd like a reasoned opinion.

lime the cheese cake ninja wrote: "meh"

OK guys. The intent of this group is to discuss things. Please add new ideas and/or reasons for what you say. Try to substantiate your views. That leads to productive and interesting dialogue. Comments like Meh aren't really helpful in that regard. Perhaps citing an example that proves or refutes the last person's post would be better.

... And Super, can you explain why you think that? Do you actually know someone who "was bad from the start?" Was there any reason that they were that way?

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious wrote: "Actually, U can raise a wolve to protect u. It's just like a dog only it takes MUCH more work to train."

I've seen a number of NATURE programs with naturalists who have tried and they'd tell you that wolves are very aggressive by nature. Also wolves don't have the same genes as dogs. There's a recent study that shows dogs read people's facial expressions the same way that people do. Only dogs and people do that. Wolves won't. I guess in some ways, wolves are NOT just like dogs.

From what I've understood, you MIGHT be able to raise a wolf to protect you. But their propensity to attempt to assert dominance through agression would make them an unreliable pet. Of course that's in general. There may be the unusual exception.

I guess what this question is really asking is do you think that some people just have a higher propensity toward evil than others.

Caine and Sam are a conundrum. It's suggested that they are fraternal twins rather than identical but either way, their genetic make-up is very similar.

Wolves and Racoons make very poor pets no matter how they are raised. It's been found time and again that certain animals are just too wild to be domesticated, so it's not too far a leap to suggest that some people may be that way too.

If one can look to TV for examples, Dexter and his brother are both serial killers and both of Dexter's parents were criminals (albeit the mother was primarily a drug addict)

However, with most humans I am of the opinion that most problems are due to "nurture" rather than "nature."

Suzanne wrote: "I really relate to Sam. ...but I hate having to take control....In school, I would dread group work..."

I've felt that way at times as well, but I've usually attributed it to being saddled with others that are less motivated to succeed. I think that leaders are drawn to leadership roles for a number of reasons, the desire to be in the spotlight, the desire to see something accomplished, the desire to avoid seeing something done less well than it might be, etc.

I've also observed that some people are comfortable assuming the role of leader in some things (like planning leisure activities) while not in others (things they deem more important)

I think Sam's reaction to his change in leadership status in LIES is interesting. I'm looking forward to seeing how he and Astrid develop as leaders in PLAGUE

Welcome everybody! I've posted a few thought I had as I re-read the first three books over the last 2 weeks and I'm keen to have your comments.

Of course everyone can start new topics as well. These books raised so many interesting issues for me I'm hoping that the discussion will be active, informative and thought provoking.

OK

is pretty easy with Sam & Astrid on the front cover and Caine & Diana on the back

has Caine & Diana on the front and Sam & Astrid on the back

has Sam & Astrid back on front but who's on the back? I'm thinking that the tall, lanky kid is Quinn (he doesn't look hispanic enough to motivate all Quinn's comments) I guess it could be Caine but who's the girl in glasses? I was thinking maybe, Orsey but I don't recall any references to glasses when I think back.

In our general discussion I aksed if others thought these books were sexist. I read that in a number of reviews of Gone and Hunger.

It looks like in Lies the author made a contientous effort to change that. Sam is temporarily sidelined. Astrid's running the council and Dekka and Mother Mary are the focus of a good deal of the book. Astrid even gets physical with Neressa

Albert thinks this when being confronted by Quinn.

Are heroes something needed by a primitive society that can be outgrown? Doesn't the fact that Monarchy was such a popular form of governemnt for so long indicate that a society sometimes needs someone who operates above the law (at least to some degree)

I particularly liked the council room scene after the Human Crew's night of arson. Astrid got a taste of what Sam must have been feeling all along. Did anyone else find this scene satisfying in that way?

Catherine wrote: "Well it depends on their maturity level and their parents."

Catherine, I was wonderingif you expand upon your answer. I'm not challenging it but would love to foster some discussion in this regard. Is it the violence/sense of menace, the langauges, or the sex aspects that would concern you most?

I find it strange how Americans tolerate so much in the way of violence but are more censorious about sex and language. I have a number of British friends that are just the opposite.

Part of my reason for wanting this group is to have some cheap group therapy for the PTSD that this series gave me.

And I've had the distrurbing thought that if the characters in GONE were to read books like these about a different group of kids, Drake would be the one to enjoy them the most.

Have you noticed how they're all framed with a POV that puts us below the character's eye level? It's a standard film making trick to light from below when one wants to add a sinister air. I think that these covers sort of do the same thing.