From Book 3 of 'The Deeds of Paksenarrion', by Elilzabeth Moon
Master Oakhallow - Courage is not something you have, like a sum of money, more or less in a pouch – it cannot be lost, like money spilling out. Courage is inherent in all creatures; it is the quality that keeps them alive, because they endure. It is courage, Paksennarion, that splits the acorn and sends the rootlet down into soil to search for sustenance. You can damage the creature, yes, and it may die of it, but as long as it lives and endures, each living part has as much courage as it can hold. You think of courage as an eagerness for danger, isn't that so?
Paksenarrion – I suppose so. At least being able to go on, and fight, and not be mastered by fear.
Master Oakhallow – Right. But the essence is the going on. A liking for excitement and danger is like a taste for walnuts or mushrooms or the color yellow. Most people have a little – you may have noticed how small children like to scare themselves climbing trees and such – but the gift varies in amount. It adds to the warrior's ability by masking fear. But it's not essential, Paksennarion, even to a warrior. The going on, the enduring, is. Even for the mightiest warrior, a danger may be so great, a foe so overwhelming, that the excitement, the enjoyment, is gone. What then? Is a warrior to quite and abandon those who depend on his courage because it isn't fun?
(Pax shook her head.)
Master Oakhallow - No, and put that way it's obvious. You may remember such times yourself. It's true that one who had no delight in facing and overcoming danger would not likely choose to be a warrior, except in great need. But consider your own patron Gird. According to legend, he was no fighter until need – his own and his neighbors' – drove him to it. Suppose he never enjoyed battle, but did his best anyway: does that make him less worthy of veneration?
|