The Dresden Files > DF Reference Collection
Why was Molly taken to Arctis Tor?
Starshine:
I guess everybody has their own pet theory!
For me, I tend to take the Occam's Razor approach. I still like Knnns theory best because it fits all the facts we do know, while having the least supposing about things we dont know about. For instance, all this speculation about a deal Lea might have made with the BC is just that. The only deal we know she made is trading Amoracchius for the Athame. And we all saw how that turned out.
Any deal Mab might have made with the BC is again just pure speculation. And why she would want to make any kind of deal with the BC at that point is beyond me. And why would that involve sending her troops to the borders of Summer? If she was fulfilling her part of this supposed bargain, why attack Arctis Tor? Wouldnt the attack abrogate the deal? I mean if Harry's attack allowed Winter to move its troops, why didnt the first attack do the same thing? There are just too many things that dont make sense to me.
Compare to Knnn's theory - which is clean and neat and doesnt need to assume facts not in evidence. It looks at what actually happened, and then tries to discern motive. And somewhere there is a WoJ that says something like "Who says Mab lost the battle of Arctis Tor? Look at what happened as a result and what events got set in motion".
Well, Molly got a reprieve from life as a warlock and became a WC apprentice. I think this is Jim's wink to Knnn's theory.
But like I said, everyone will have their own pet theory.
Starshine:
--- Quote from: Griffyn612 on January 24, 2012, 11:43:18 PM ---Maybe knnn could work on some fine tuning of the "Time Travellin' Harry in PG" theories for me?
--- End quote ---
The way you set it out, it does make sense and it could fit, but I kind of hope you're wrong because Im not a great fan of time travel stories. Ive never read one that I found believeable.
Even in the context of s-f, I have trouble believing the past is something you can go back into and change. Once you allow that, there is no real present. I mean, what would stop Cowl from going back in time and preventing the fall of the Red Court? Or stealing the Book of Kemmler and completing the Darkhaven? Or coming prepared to attack Gard and hold her off long enough for him to kill Harry? Im using Cowl as an example, but Im sure he's not the only powerful entity on the BC.
I dont know - I just think once you allow the possibility of changing the past - why wouldnt everybody do it?
sandman1313:
--- Quote from: Starshine on January 25, 2012, 02:14:43 AM ---The way you set it out, it does make sense and it could fit, but I kind of hope you're wrong because Im not a great fan of time travel stories. Ive never read one that I found believeable.
Even in the context of s-f, I have trouble believing the past is something you can go back into and change. Once you allow that, there is no real present. I mean, what would stop Cowl from going back in time and preventing the fall of the Red Court? Or stealing the Book of Kemmler and completing the Darkhaven? Or coming prepared to attack Gard and hold her off long enough for him to kill Harry? Im using Cowl as an example, but Im sure he's not the only powerful entity on the BC.
I dont know - I just think once you allow the possibility of changing the past - why wouldnt everybody do it?
--- End quote ---
but that is the elegance of harry time traveling in that theory he doesn't change any thing just enact the parts that allowed him to do what he did the first time and that would be a somewhat acceptable breaking of the law cause he all ready did it so for him not to would cause a paradox just my opinion
Now if mab had any deal with the black circle i would guess that it would be to negate the influence of the knife (i am dyslexic and cant spell the "a" word)in exchange for her keeping pressure on the summer court but i doubt she did she is to smart for that
Starshine:
--- Quote from: sandman1313 on January 25, 2012, 06:49:16 AM ---
but that is the elegance of harry time traveling in that theory he doesn't change any thing just enact the parts that allowed him to do what he did the first time and that would be a somewhat acceptable breaking of the law cause he all ready did it so for him not to would cause a paradox just my opinion
--- End quote ---
I dont understand what you're trying to say here. If he changed nothing why did he go back in time in the first place?
I thought the point of the OP was that Harry was severely wounded in the Little Chicago explosion the first time around, which took him out of the game. Future Harry went back to correct this by ensuring LC never exploded. How is that not changing anything? The change is huge and impacts everyone.
So why wouldnt some Black Hat try doing the same thing?
sandman1313:
ok my bad i have not read the original post but but my point is that harry went back in time because he had to not to prevent an explosion in LC although that is a good thing. but if u need a reason for harry to travel back in time say mab needs the knife but knows she cant hold it for long with out going mad so she has harry ,still her knight and therefore not as strictly bound by the laws, travel back in time where harry informs her of the events that r about to happen she then informs the gatekeeper who tells harry about the black magick happening and sets the whole thing off. this explains y mab took molly as well but the main reason for it is that harry already did it and that removes your trouble with time travel the reason cowl doesn't do any of those things is he didn't therefor for him to do so would create a rather large paradox
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version