3 ms·
The animal separation part is confusing to me. Not because of any "mind versus matter" dilemmas but because of desires. The author says that the animal wants t
by kkoncevicius 5y ago
The animal separation part is confusing to me. Not because of any "mind versus matter" dilemmas but because of desires.
The author says that the animal wants to relax and lie down. But where is the distinction here? If you drink coffee when you feel the urge - that's on you, but if you relax when you feel like it - then it's the animal? Can it be that all those desires for working hard and having coffee and alcohol was part of the animal instinct?
I don't see how to decouple those, even thou I am sympathetic to the animal / inside animal distinction.
- kayodelycaon 5y ago> The author says that the animal wants to relax and lie down. The author does not say this. She said her body needed this and she ignored that need. The animal being talked about is her body and everything else is her regrets of not taking care of it. That's all.
- robscallsign 5y ago> The animal separation part is confusing to me. Have you read her fiction, particularly the Farseer and Tawny Man trilogies? Her fantasy universe, and the main characters, involve bonding with an animal so completely that you are essentially one combined being that inhabits both bodies. An emotional peak of the series involve the slow process of aging, and eventual passing of one of the main characters, who happens to be a wolf that is bonded. Her phrasing here isn't just whimsical musings, but a bit of creative writing that combines her reflections on aging with an homage to her fictional work and style. Her words and message here will connect deeply with those familiar with her work, or at least it did with me.
- remify 5y agoGreat explanation, thank you
- phyzome 5y agoIt's right there towards the end: She wishes she had treated her body as well as she would have treated any other animal.