The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

Murphy in Peace Talks (WoJ spoilers)

<< < (28/74) > >>

Quantus:

--- Quote from: LordDresden2 on August 17, 2017, 04:05:33 AM ---Do we know that Aurora was Nemfected?  Has JB confirmed that?

--- End quote ---
I mean, I thought Titania confirmed it; what else would make her admit that her daughter had to die?  And we have WOJ that Sidhe of queen or Erlking level shouldnt be capable of /considering/ destroying the Natural Order. 

But to my knowledge there's been no direct WOJ on Aurora's Nemfection.  We actually have very few that reference Nemesis directly, at all. 

Mr. Death:

--- Quote from: DonBugen on August 16, 2017, 09:41:13 PM ---Hey Mr. Death, I just want to start with saying this:  I’m totally cool if this is just a debate back and forth.  But I’m a little concerned that I might be hitting a nerve or be pushing too far.  No need to turn a friendly debate into an argument.  If I’m coming across as a jerk or something, let me know and I’ll walk away.  No big deal.
--- End quote ---
It's got less to do with you and more to do with Murphy -- she gets bashed a lot on these forums, and the bashers tend to make a lot of the same arguments you are, including that she was supposedly never supposed to have the Swords.

Anyways, to answer your questions:

--- Quote --- And, again: Is instant violence the kind of response that the rightful custodian of the Swords should have?  Depends.  Michael knew that Harry was the keeper of the sword of Faith in the same time period that he knew that he had touched a coin and was under a Fallen’s influence.  Yet Michael never stepped in and took the sword from him.  I think that Michael defers to the judgment of higher powers rather than his own, and I don’t think that the servants of TWG are as swayed by momentary actions as much as the heart and choice of the individual.  They also have a different perspective than the average mortal.
--- End quote ---
Lash's influence is a different beast than the Mantle's. Lash started subtly, and Harry caught on pretty quick. Lash also didn't push him to the kind of mindless, instant violence the Mantle is.

Also note that "violence against someone who doesn't deserve it" is literally the exact thing we see make the Sword vulnerable. Twice. Someone who is prone to take one of the exact actions that make the Sword vulnerable isn't the sort of person who should have the Sword, just like an incurable alcoholic probably shouldn't be managing a liquor store.


--- Quote --- Tell me what text in the books indicates Murphy is "manipulating" him. Tell me what text in the books indicates that Harry should have the Swords in that time and place.  Of course, you know that it never explicitly says that Harry should have had the swords in the text of the book.  The only one who can determine who *should* have the swords is TWG, and we only see his will as expressed through his servants.  Uriel can be trusted to reflect his master’s will; Michael, to a lesser extent – he is human, after all.  But it is to be noted that both Michael and Uriel both act with faith and trust in Harry, and so far that faith and trust has not been misplaced.  Harry’s actions, while out of character, are completely in character of someone under the power of the Winter Mantle.  The only thing out of character are the choices that Harry makes.
--- End quote ---
Yes, and he's acting out of character for a custodian of the Swords. Someone who's acting in such a way that would make the Swords vulnerable -- by, say, attacking his friends and allies -- shouldn't have the Swords.


--- Quote ---As for manipulating, I feel like you’re taking this in the “HAHAHA, I have you now!” kind of sneaky dark manipulation.  Murph knows that Harry wants and values her trust and loyalty.  She makes it very clear that she’s willing to give it IF Harry goes along with her requests.  She doesn’t sit down calmly with Harry and say, “Hey, I’m worried that you have these two things, can I maybe hang on to them for you?”  No, she specifically states that her actions will all depend on how Harry responds to her.  That’s a kind of manipulation.  Harry makes his decision knowing that he will win or lose Karrin’s trust by agreeing or disagreeing with her.  She even poses that question directly to Dresden right before he submits – if you want my trust, you have to give me trust.
--- End quote ---
It's tough love. Harry doesn't need someone to coddle him. Harry can be a little thick sometimes; sometimes he needs soft and subtle (like Murphy is later in that same scene, where Harry muses that she knows what he's going through), and sometimes he needs a brick to the head. 


--- Quote --- Michael did not see Harry nearly pound Murphy's head into the wall. Michael did not see Harry having to mentally hold back from viciously raping his daughter. Michael did not see Harry agreeing to "watch the world burn" to get what he wants.  Nope.  But for the first two, I do believe that Michael would see them as Harry learning restraint with the Winter Mantle.  He directly addresses the last one in Skin Game, and acknowledges that he doesn’t know if he would do any differently.
--- End quote ---
Key word is learning. He's still working through the Mantle. He's like a teenager -- you don't give them the keys to the BMW until they've finished learning how to drive. You don't give it to him when he's still running his old VW Bug into light posts.

Just because Harry was at one point a fit custodian doesn't mean he is at all times and in all places a fit custodian.


--- Quote --- Michael soulgazed Harry more than a decade ago. A lot has changed in Harry's life since then.  True, but remember that the soulgaze is a view of a person’s fundamental self, and Harry has stated more than once that if a person has changed drastically since them they would trigger a new soulgaze.
--- End quote ---
A soulgaze is also affected by someone's current mindset and emotions. Soulgazing Winter Knight Harry is going to be very different than soulgazing Pre-SF Harry, even if it'ts not a complete personality change.


--- Quote --- Tell me how putting her trust in Harry is "letting fear and doubts" guide her.  Because she’s not trusting Harry.  She doesn’t trust that he won’t turn evil – she doesn’t get that until Skin Game.  At this point, she’s just at the ‘wait and see’ stage.  She gives Harry a limited amount of trust IF he also surrenders these articles of power to her.
--- End quote ---
And then for the rest of the book she does things like drive her motorcycle onto Lake Michigan surrounded by the Wyld Hunt. That kinda sounds like trust to me.


--- Quote ---That's all Murphy was doing. You cannot ignore that Harry is working through a lot of dark stuff in Cold Days.  Agree with all of these things, and also with what Murph was doing.  I swear, sometimes it sounds to me like we’re making the same argument.  However, I do think that Karrin’s making the wrong decision here.  Is it easier to make the right decision if your friends tell you that they have faith in you and believe in you, or is it easier if they treat you like you could turn into a monster at any point?  Skin Game Karrin has a different opinion on the matter than Cold Days Karrin, and came to that conclusion seemingly independent of rampaging Dresden.
--- End quote ---
Harry is acting in a manner that would, if he was holding the Swords, make then vulnerable and unmake them. In Grave Peril, "lashing out with violence against the Swords' mission" is literally the thing Harry does that lets Lea grab the Sword, and in Skin Game, that's exactly what he's a hair's breadth from doing to Murphy before he realizes what he's done.

In that book, Harry shouldn't have the Swords because his actions are exactly the thing that would put the Swords in danger.


--- Quote ---I’m not ignoring that Dresden’s going through some really dark stuff.  I know how close he is to violence.  I know that he relies on his friends to point him in the right direction.  But he also relies on them to believe in him.  I know you keep telling me to “reread Cold Days” or “reread Skin Game” – I know these books; it’s not inexperience that’s giving me this viewpoint, despite the large difference in our postcounts on this online forum.  And Karrin taking the swords and Bob at this point is a clear display that she just doesn’t have faith in him to not turn bad at some point in the future.  It’s as simple as that.
--- End quote ---
Murphy does believe in him, and she proves that in the rest of the book. It's not that she doesn't have faith in him for the future -- it's that she sees what he's doing right now.


--- Quote ---Karrin is who she has always appeared to Dresden to be when he’s seen her with the Sight:  tattered, torn, worn by the world, but trying to do the right thing.  I don’t hold it against her that she makes this decision; anyone else might do the same.  But I’m not going to look at it and say that she’s doing something good for Dresden, because she’s not.  She loves and cares for him, but she has a duty to protect others, and that comes first.

--- End quote ---
So what happens if she gives him the Swords then and there, and doesn't force him into the realizations he has in that scene? I don't see a scenario there that doesn't end with the Swords breaking.

(Will get to the subsequent posts later because hoo boy. You take one night to go have drinks and come back to several walls of text X.x)

Mr. Death:

--- Quote from: DonBugen on August 16, 2017, 09:58:40 PM ---A. Is nearly punching your friend and ally's head off because you're angry the proper behavior for a custodian of the Swords of the Cross?  Dunno.  See above.  Merlin wasn’t a saint, and Michael was OK with Harry carrying both a coin and a sword.  I would loosely say that whether or not a person should carry a sword seems to be something that is not directly related to their personal code of conduct.
--- End quote ---
I don't see how you could think that. Why would someone's conduct not be relevant? Do you think Harry was chosen just because he's Harry Dresden, or do you think he was chosen because he's a good man? Would Harry still be entrusted to the Swords if he was a bad man?


--- Quote ---B. Why is Butters exempt from any criticism for his clear distrust of Dresden, which directly led to the Sword being broken?  He’s not.  But the same fear and distrust that Butters puts voice to is the same exact fear and distrust that Murph voices in her entrance and exit from Cold Days.  It’s not that Butters is exempt from it; it’s that Murph is also not exempt from it.  And my WAG puts suspicion on Murphy because despite her sudden realization and faith and trust in Harry, the results of her actions are negative.  Nothing more.
--- End quote ---
Except Butters' distrust is in Skin Game, and it's what directly leads to the Sword being broken. In all the discussions where people are accusing Murphy of everything from being an arrogant blowhard to intentionally getting the Sword broken, this is never brought up.


--- Quote ---C. Why is Murphy slammed for hiding something from Dresden, while Dresden is not at all criticized for hiding information from Murphy? The information they're hiding is for the same reasons, and neither intended on telling the other that something was hidden.  Don’t remember slamming Murphy for this, so maybe someone else can handle this one.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, this one is directed more toward Mira.


--- Quote ---D. How is Harry correct in his assessment that in his state of mind and situation he should give Bob back, but thirty seconds later, he's suddenly absolutely the right and only person who should have the Swords, which are just as important as Bob, and which are at greater risk?  Personally, I think that his emotional reaction is because being the custodian of the swords means something to him.  Bob, he acknowledges, is just a very powerful tool that’s dangerous in the wrong hands.  Harry has a sort of respect for the swords and all it represents, and it hurts to be told he's not worthy anymore.

However, whether or not Harry thinks he is a good custodian of the sword is irrelevant – the only one who can really have an opinion on who should and should not be a custodian is TWG.  The swords have been awarded to Harry despite his flaws and darker nature on many occasions, not because he’s some sort of paragon of virtue, but because higher beings on some other plane of existence see it fit that he should have it.  Murphy and Dresden are second-guessing those beings, and Dresden's assertion that they were given to him is an assertion of that higher power.
--- End quote ---
As pointed out, Bob ought to mean just as much as the Swords. He's had Bob since he was 16, so we're talking 25-30 years. He's been a friend.

Harry asserting he was given the Swords is an assertion of the Mantle. Do you think The White God is driving Harry to nearly pound Murphy's face in and strangle her? That doesn't sound like his style.


--- Quote ---E. Sanya, a Knight of the Cross, says that someone who is sure they should have the Swords is not someone who should have the Swords. Harry, in Cold Days, is sure he should have the Swords. Is Sanya wrong?  Sanya’s human, and the most junior of the Knights.  It’s kind of like the old cliché – anyone with a desire for power or leadership has proven that they’re not fit to wield it.  I think that these words of Sanya’s aren’t some sort of hard-and-fast code of “What must one do to be a custodian of the Swords?” but rather him stating his personal opinion: “Look, the fact that you’re second-guessing this means that you respect the danger and will not abuse it.”  And yes, that’s my opinion, but I feel that it’s sound.

--- End quote ---
I thought the only indication from TWG was through his agents. So is Michael's word more ironclad than Sanya's? Why should Sanya's words not be given the same weight?

Turn it around: If what Sanya is saying is, "The fact that you're second-guessing this means that you respect the danger and will not abuse it," doesn't that in turn mean, "The fact that you're so damn sure about it means you've lost some of that perspective, and you might abuse it"?

I mean, we have Harry exhibiting behavior that Sanya -- the longest currently-serving Knight of the Cross, in whose counsel (and vodka) Harry finds comfort and guidance -- would take to mean Harry should not have the Swords. That seems to make things pretty clear to me.

forumghost:
TBH the main issue that I have with the whole Swords Debacle is that the entire confrontation was so unnecessary. Harry doesn't ask for the Swords back- Murphy just gets in his face and says "Fuck off Dresden, Mine now or we aren't friends".

Which... well, you can call it tough love (which it arguably is) you can call it the right decision re: the Sword's safety (which it almost definitely is) but it is still her acting like a witch with a B and deliberately trying to trigger Harry's berserk buttons to make him concede.

Like, if she'd confronted Harry about Bob with the same aggression she does about the Swords, I think the reaction would be just as violent. The whole confrontation was her deliberately setting him off.

Personally I agree that her reasons for doing so are benevolent, but yeah... people don't like people that act like a dick, and Murphy was doing so quite deliberately there, so it's no surprise she gets some flak for it.

Mira:

--- Quote from: forumghost on August 17, 2017, 02:07:38 PM ---TBH the main issue that I have with the whole Swords Debacle is that the entire confrontation was so unnecessary. Harry doesn't ask for the Swords back- Murphy just gets in his face and says "Fuck off Dresden, Mine now or we aren't friends".

Which... well, you can call it tough love (which it arguably is) you can call it the right decision re: the Sword's safety (which it almost definitely is) but it is still her acting like a witch with a B and deliberately trying to trigger Harry's berserk buttons to make him concede.

Like, if she'd confronted Harry about Bob with the same aggression she does about the Swords, I think the reaction would be just as violent. The whole confrontation was her deliberately setting him off.

Personally I agree that her reasons for doing so are benevolent, but yeah... people don't like people that act like a dick, and Murphy was doing so quite deliberately there, so it's no surprise she gets some flak for it.

--- End quote ---

Which pretty much gets at my problem with her these days...  I do think her intentions were good, and I wouldn't say she got into Harry's face quite the way you are saying.. However I agree with the gist of what I think you are saying, Murphy tends to jump to conclusions because she thinks she knows Harry, tells him how he is screwing everyone over, but that isn't helping except to make him feel bad.  But the truth is, she knows nothing about this Harry, never asks questions about coming back from being mostly dead, struggling with the Winter Mantle, just why he couldn't leave the island for a year.  Did she ever ask him one question about his headaches or why he was wearing an earring now?   Things a very concerned close friend who professes love for this person should know or have some idea about..  One might ask if her insisting on keeping the Swords with vague justification in Skin Game was more of a power trip or trying to maintain power than concern that Harry might go postal...

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page