Two Opposing Views of Mankind's Future 



'The Salamander Stone' suggests two ways that the human race could develop: Pitt's way and Amber's way.


     Pitt's way

Pitt's school provides a superb free education. Yet he secretly tortures the small aberrant population to harvest Vril and set up a business which is, ironically, 'green'. His way would save humanity and mankind's version of the planet. But can the means (nauseatingly evil) justify even such a laudable end?

    Amber's  way  

Opposing Pitt is Amber. She's a new species of human being, one that, if allowed to flourish, could displace and eventually replace the human species. 

"You make it sound like a war," said Amber.
"It is."
"But what's it all about? I know about Vril and henges and energy lines, but that can't be it, can it?"
"Yes... and no. I suppose it's really about the survival of the human race."
"Who's going to destroy the human race?"
Ophelia glanced at Amber. She seemed to be assessing how much more her granddaughter could take.
"You are," she said flatly. 

Amber is kind, sensitive, moral in the extreme - but ironically her way, though it would save the planet for Gaia (or Nature), would also lead to mankind's destruction.

'The Salamander Stone' makes the non-obvious choice, Amber's way, the attractive one. It's non-obvious because we're human and it takes a lot for us to desert the human cause - or does it?

 Read 'The Salamander Stone'. Make your choice.