![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cimorenewell, i realise i've been posting not much except about swedish folklore, and that's because i didn't want to post about nothing but prince of tennis. i realise now that a balance is probably better and that i'll post about pot if i want to.
however, first, i will post this. i've had it hanging around on my harddrive for months and i thought i'd polish it up and go ahead and post, get it out of the way. it's about t.e. lawrence, but i treat this more or less as background work for slash (whether it ever gets written or not) based on the ralph fiennes/alexander siddig film a dangerous man: lawrence after arabia. there's no shipper talk below, but i don't have any interest in non-lawrence/feisal pairings based on the original movie. i did a fair amount of reading about the real t.e. lawrence on the internet, however, because i wanted to think more about the character's motivation and history. and i treat a dangerous man as a sort of dramatisation-original bit of rps based on history, not on lawrence of arabia, although that's just my impression of the two.
anyway, this is about back-history about lawrence's motivations during the war (aka the period covered by lawrence of arabia) and his feelings about arab independence (in other words, no mention whatsoever of feisal. this time.)
i'm thinking about the claim--almost certainly justified--that lawrence knew about the french-british agreement to divide the middle east between them. and yet he assured feisal that the british would keep their promise of a free arab state.
in lawrence of arabia he is presented as getting pretty nutty about it towards the end--taking damascus was where it came to a head. and that's a good theory, I think, in terms of the fictional universe of a dangerous man and any potential slash based on it. i think lawrence DID get pretty crazy during all this stuff. people will do a lot to avoid cognitive dissonance.
so i think he knew of their commitments but rationalised them away, in one way or another, and tried very hard to believe what he wanted to believe instead. "the british are honourable; if we can just prove the arabs are WORTHY to rule they will have to acknowledge it." "if we just get to damascus, possession is nine tenths of the law, they won't dare take it back." it's clear that he WAS very fixated, at least, on damascus and on winning.
i think he had discovered he had a problem. he'd gone into the situation with his goal already set out. he wanted an independent arab state. but he was naive. he had studied the culture as an archaeologist, from the outside; he was a *fanboy* of the arabs. it's like suddenly if you suddenly join your favourite band: for one thing you can't write RPS anymore. they're not characters, they're people. and gradually his loyalty had shifted--he had come to understand their culture. he had formed passionate, deep ties to it. and as this was happening he had also developed a clearer view of the situation.
he still wanted the free arab state, but he was realising that before he hadn't truly wanted it. before he had still been, at bottom, an englishman. but then he discovered his ties to the arabs were stronger than that. he ceased to be an englishman who was in favour of a new arab state and figured, oh, i'd love to help out with that! the rest of his worldview was subsumed into the immediate reality out there in the desert.
so, then he couldn't just turn back. he couldn't say now that he was wrong and they couldn't count on the british, because not only would that kill the british goals in the middle east, it would have killed HIS goal--it would have been counter productive to arab independence too. his only chance to achieve that for them was to keep going, and he was seeing the chance getting smaller while he was caring more and more and more.
and the only way out is through, as they say. and doubting what you are fighting for gets in the way of fighting, as everyone knows.
fortunately the human brain is able to make itself forget things and believe counter-factual things for the sake of a goal.
however, first, i will post this. i've had it hanging around on my harddrive for months and i thought i'd polish it up and go ahead and post, get it out of the way. it's about t.e. lawrence, but i treat this more or less as background work for slash (whether it ever gets written or not) based on the ralph fiennes/alexander siddig film a dangerous man: lawrence after arabia. there's no shipper talk below, but i don't have any interest in non-lawrence/feisal pairings based on the original movie. i did a fair amount of reading about the real t.e. lawrence on the internet, however, because i wanted to think more about the character's motivation and history. and i treat a dangerous man as a sort of dramatisation-original bit of rps based on history, not on lawrence of arabia, although that's just my impression of the two.
anyway, this is about back-history about lawrence's motivations during the war (aka the period covered by lawrence of arabia) and his feelings about arab independence (in other words, no mention whatsoever of feisal. this time.)
i'm thinking about the claim--almost certainly justified--that lawrence knew about the french-british agreement to divide the middle east between them. and yet he assured feisal that the british would keep their promise of a free arab state.
in lawrence of arabia he is presented as getting pretty nutty about it towards the end--taking damascus was where it came to a head. and that's a good theory, I think, in terms of the fictional universe of a dangerous man and any potential slash based on it. i think lawrence DID get pretty crazy during all this stuff. people will do a lot to avoid cognitive dissonance.
so i think he knew of their commitments but rationalised them away, in one way or another, and tried very hard to believe what he wanted to believe instead. "the british are honourable; if we can just prove the arabs are WORTHY to rule they will have to acknowledge it." "if we just get to damascus, possession is nine tenths of the law, they won't dare take it back." it's clear that he WAS very fixated, at least, on damascus and on winning.
i think he had discovered he had a problem. he'd gone into the situation with his goal already set out. he wanted an independent arab state. but he was naive. he had studied the culture as an archaeologist, from the outside; he was a *fanboy* of the arabs. it's like suddenly if you suddenly join your favourite band: for one thing you can't write RPS anymore. they're not characters, they're people. and gradually his loyalty had shifted--he had come to understand their culture. he had formed passionate, deep ties to it. and as this was happening he had also developed a clearer view of the situation.
he still wanted the free arab state, but he was realising that before he hadn't truly wanted it. before he had still been, at bottom, an englishman. but then he discovered his ties to the arabs were stronger than that. he ceased to be an englishman who was in favour of a new arab state and figured, oh, i'd love to help out with that! the rest of his worldview was subsumed into the immediate reality out there in the desert.
so, then he couldn't just turn back. he couldn't say now that he was wrong and they couldn't count on the british, because not only would that kill the british goals in the middle east, it would have killed HIS goal--it would have been counter productive to arab independence too. his only chance to achieve that for them was to keep going, and he was seeing the chance getting smaller while he was caring more and more and more.
and the only way out is through, as they say. and doubting what you are fighting for gets in the way of fighting, as everyone knows.
fortunately the human brain is able to make itself forget things and believe counter-factual things for the sake of a goal.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 31 Mar 2006 12:32 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 31 Mar 2006 07:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 1 Apr 2006 11:37 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2 Apr 2006 08:58 am (UTC)