The Dresden Files > DF Reference Collection
The Gatekeeper fixed LC and other PG musings [spoilers up to CD]
Ms Duck:
--- Quote from: aShorty21 on February 12, 2013, 09:19:47 PM ---Gotcha, so TTHarry being a posiblity isn't a reason to discount The Gatekeeper as one.
--- End quote ---
each possibility needs to be evaluated on its own merits and problems. just disproving one does not automatically prove another.
the fun thing about Rashid is the more I think about it, the more plausible it becomes. What if all the hints Jim has dropped in the last three books about 'Mab fixed it' are just red herrings?
wyltok:
--- Quote from: Ms Duck on February 12, 2013, 12:31:04 AM ---Serack did an excellent analysis a few years ago that was the basis for many ideas about the gatekeeper being the culprit; it should be in reference someplace.
--- End quote ---
I know! But I couldn't find it. And since Elegast's theory index does encourage linking to a source, and we now know more about Rashid's mindset, I figured, may as well make an updated one. Of course, anyone with better search-fu than my own (which I admit is severely lacking) is welcome to provide links to Serack's excellent work.
--- Quote from: Ms Duck on February 12, 2013, 12:31:04 AM ---I still hold Mab as suspect number one though; some of the comments in CD:
- she knows what Harrys apartment looks like
- she knew about bob all along
- sidhe can walk thru thresholds
all seem to me to be less cluebats and more of " good grief, haven't you all solved this one by now?" On Jim's part
--- End quote ---
There are two big issues to Mab being the culprit, and a few little ones. The big ones, of course, is that she doesn't seem able to see the future (demonstrated, in my mind, by her failure to see Lily's future at the end of Cold Days) and the fact that so long as she was defending Harry as Lea's proxy, she was limited to act only as far as Lea could. So unless Mab cheated somehow, she could only fix LC as well as Lea could, rather than as well as she herself could.
--- Quote from: Ms Duck on February 12, 2013, 09:23:29 PM ---each possibility needs to be evaluated on its own merits and problems. just disproving one does not automatically prove another.
the fun thing about Rashid is the more I think about it, the more plausible it becomes. What if all the hints Jim has dropped in the last three books about 'Mab fixed it' are just red herrings?
--- End quote ---
Seeing as we now know exactly how close in purpose the Gatekeeper and Mab are, I can't help but wonder if maybe they actually worked together. Certainly the two of them working together could easily explain all aspects of this. I can't quite picture the chain of events for that, though...
Ms Duck:
--- Quote from: wyltok on February 12, 2013, 09:32:23 PM ---I know! But I couldn't find it. And since Elegast's theory index does encourage linking to a source, and we now know more about Rashid's mindset, I figured, may as well make an updated one. Of course, anyone with better search-fu than my own (which I admit is severely lacking) is welcome to provide links to Serack's excellent work.
There are two big issues to Mab being the culprit, and a few little ones. The big ones, of course, is that she doesn't seem able to see the future (demonstrated, in my mind, by her failure to see Lily's future at the end of Cold Days) and the fact that so long as she was defending Harry as Lea's proxy, she was limited to act only as far as Lea could. So unless Mab cheated somehow, she could only fix LC as well as Lea could, rather than as well as she herself could.
Seeing as we now know exactly how close in purpose the Gatekeeper and Mab are, I can't help but wonder if maybe they actually worked together. Certainly the two of them working together could easily explain all aspects of this. I can't quite picture the chain of events for that, though...
--- End quote ---
not to derail, but both of those have been answered:
seeing in the future is not a static future, but a potential future; what she sees are what may happen. As to if she can, even Harry (in CD ) says she does, hes just not sure how far or how well.
second is answered in text as well, in DB: she says she is required to do what lea would have done, but she is not limited to it. For example, lea knows little about the word of Kemmler, but Mab does, and she told harry things Lea does not know because she decided to.
;)
I rate WAGs based on how many serious objections there are; right now there are none for Mab that I am aware of, Jim nailed down the last loose boards in CD.
Rashid has very few if any, the only big one being why?
all the other theories have several serious objections or more.
;)
wyltok:
This is a reply to wizard nelson's three replies which were written one after the other. They are inside the spoiler as a reference. These posts, in summary, discuss four points:
1. Thomas was groggy and grabbing his face like he had a bad dream when Harry came in.
2. Mab, as acting Godmother, can know about Little Chicago's flaw without needing to see into the future.
3. In a multi-book series, it is possible to provide the clue explaining a mystery in a book that takes place after the one where the mystery takes place.
4. If Rashid knows something from foresight, then temporal inertia means that Rashid will have a hard time stopping it from taking place.
My replies in order.
1. I don't think we're looking at the same part of PG. The part I'm talking about is when Harry goes back to his place and Thomas shoves the shotgun in his face. This is followed by Thomas moving out. There's no mention of Thomas being groggy.
2. Agreed. But if that's the case, what was Mab planning to do to stop Harry from blowing his head off before Molly's phone call? It makes more sense that whoever fixed LC knew that Harry would not get a chance to use it until just before the Arctis Tor raid, and that sort of knowledge still requires foresight.
3. Agreed. But when the book with the mystery includes a discussion about how sending a message to the past works, and solving the mystery seems to require sending a message to the past, I kinda have to go with Occam's razor and assume the two are related.
4. Let me see if I understand what you said here:
During the stolen car example in PG, Bob stated that if foresight shows the car being stolen, one can change the future, but the "stolen car" aspect of it will remain the same. From that you concluded that whatever was seen of the future couldn't have been "Harry's head explodes using LC", because that would fix the future, and changing it would be a paradox. Which of course, just means that whatever was seen of the future only suggested that LC was broken, rather than being something that outright showed Harry's head exploding, for example.
Please let me know if I understood your point correctly, and then I'll work on a more suitable reply. I must admit, it's actually a really good idea!
(click to show/hide)
--- Quote from: wizard nelson on February 12, 2013, 02:10:35 PM ---umm thomas was also groggy and grabbing his face like he just had a bad dream. givin the very similar nature of WC demon and half reds i'd say its possible to intrance either.
its actually far more likely for mab to know as acting godmother, i think your forgetting rashid was unsure of harry till atl TC. mab was in better position and with more power and incentive. like its totally mentioned that the FBI headquarters links up with erlking in FM? oh wait... its a mystery so laying everything on the table and making it obvious is kinda lame. not sure what telling you past self harry popped his head has to do with novikov?point was if GK got his knowledge from forsight then it would have been WAY too much, list-LC exists, it has flaw
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: wizard nelson on February 12, 2013, 02:35:00 PM ---(continuation) and harry popped his head. now if harry already popped his head then GK can't change this. if rashid only(name another way he'd know?) knows from forsight he cant change this per odin as it already happened and he learned it ATF. as someone else pointed our GK doesn't screw around like that with time, pretty sure thats directly against the 'current' to even attempt the impossible of changing the past.
:o
not entirely sure how to respond to alot of what you said because(and maybe we're just on two totally different wavelengths) i don't understand its relevance? it does seem to me your twisting facts to suit theory instead of theory to fit facts, a holmesian no, no btw.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: wizard nelson on February 12, 2013, 02:41:09 PM ---i really should sleep before trying to explain things but.... this isn't changing the past. abby sees possibilities and uhhh argh!
just go watch that nicholas cage movie knowing (or know?) it has everything you need to figure it out yourself.
--- End quote ---
Griffyn612:
--- Quote from: wyltok on February 12, 2013, 09:54:08 PM ---This is a reply to wizard nelson's three replies which were written one after the other. They are inside the spoiler as a reference. These posts, in summary, discuss four points:
1. Thomas was groggy and grabbing his face like he had a bad dream when Harry came in.
2. Mab, as acting Godmother, can know about Little Chicago's flaw without needing to see into the future.
3. In a multi-book series, it is possible to provide the clue explaining a mystery in a book that takes place after the one where the mystery takes place.
4. If Rashid knows something from foresight, then temporal inertia means that Rashid will have a hard time stopping it from taking place.
My replies in order.
1. I don't think we're looking at the same part of PG. The part I'm talking about is when Harry goes back to his place and Thomas shoves the shotgun in his face. This is followed by Thomas moving out. There's no mention of Thomas being groggy.
2. Agreed. But if that's the case, what was Mab planning to do to stop Harry from blowing his head off before Molly's phone call? It makes more sense that whoever fixed LC knew that Harry would not get a chance to use it until just before the Arctis Tor raid, and that sort of knowledge still requires foresight.
3. Agreed. But when the book with the mystery includes a discussion about how sending a message to the past works, and solving the mystery seems to require sending a message to the past, I kinda have to go with Occam's razor and assume the two are related.
4. Let me see if I understand what you said here:
During the stolen car example in PG, Bob stated that if foresight shows the car being stolen, one can change the future, but the "stolen car" aspect of it will remain the same. From that you concluded that whatever was seen of the future couldn't have been "Harry's head explodes using LC", because that would fix the future, and changing it would be a paradox. Which of course, just means that whatever was seen of the future only suggested that LC was broken, rather than being something that outright showed Harry's head exploding, for example.
Please let me know if I understood your point correctly, and then I'll work on a more suitable reply. I must admit, it's actually a really good idea!
(click to show/hide)
--- End quote ---
Ugh, I hate supporting the Mab-Did-It theory, just out of boredom. But...
2) If Mab saw with her purported precog ability that it was highly likely Harry would be going home to use LilC, she could have sent Maeve out to delay him. Thus Maeve would have been driving the car that hit Harry. Likewise, similar to my TTH point that maybe TTH plugged the phone back in so Harry wouldn't miss Molly's call, Maeve could have done the same by crossing the threshold veiled, and plugged it back in. It doesn't say in the book that he unplugged it, but it's a point that he would have normally, and must have been to groggy in the head to remember. The thin part is that Mab nor Maeve should have been able to see enough of the future to be sure that Molly would call Harry prior to his using LilC that night.
TTH side note: How ironic (read: foreshadowing) would it be if Bob gave the 'stole a car' example about time-travel, and then Harry ended up time-traveling back to PG and had to steal that old chrysler to hit himself to make sure he didn't use LilC pre-maturely?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version