The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Murphy in Peace Talks (WoJ spoilers)
Mr. Death:
--- Quote from: DonBugen on September 05, 2017, 05:00:33 AM ---Mr. Death, you are an excellent debater.
I really don’t like admitting it, but I can’t at the moment argue against your points. You’re making a far more logical argument than I am. I do see your point. The magical attack against Butters acts as proof that Harry was, in fact, impeding the chase earlier. It demonstrates his intention and does not really leave room for ambiguity. And the fact of the matter is, Warden Dresden would not use magic to kill Butters.
I haven’t exactly abandoned my line of thought as “obviously wrong,” but it has holes that I can’t ignore. And until I think of something else that supports it or counters your arguments, I’m going to proceed under the assumption that Nicodemus recognized that Harry’s force blast of Butters was the piece of evidence he needed argue beyond reasonable doubt that Harry was not working in good faith.
That makes Karrin’s position here all the more difficult. Because the truth of the matter is, if Nicodemus is right to kill Harry AND Karrin, then whatever way you slice it, Harry dies – either by Nick’s hands, or Mab’s. This thought makes me uncomfortable, because it would mean that unless there’s some real literal deus ex machina happening right then, Karrin calling Nicodemus’ bluff could very well mean that it’s not a bluff anymore, and Harry essentially dies.
I need to think about all this for a while. Thanks for the awesome debate. I’ll be back probably in 12-32 hours.
--- End quote ---
Thank you. I enjoyed it as well, and you ended up making me see new aspects to the scene that I hadn't realized before.
Mira:
--- Quote from: Mr. Death on September 04, 2017, 05:26:59 PM ---Butters knows too much, therefore he's a risk to the operation. None of that armchair analysis would factor in Nicodemus's thinking.
Nobody planning that kind of crime is going to look at someone who was actively and deliberately spying on their planning session and say, "Nah, they're not gonna tell anyone what we're up to, we can just leave him be." The very idea makes no sense whatsoever.
--- End quote ---
I stand on what Nic said....
--- Quote ---"Why, it was no more an attempt to kill you than was your participation in the chase of the little doctor a betrayal of Mab's word that you'd aid me."
--- End quote ---
Point is, once the Sword was broken, Nic no longer insisted on Butters being killed... Butters' knowledge of the operation was no less than it was minutes before the Sword was broken. Butters was just as much a threat after the Sword was broken if what you say is true, than he was before when Harry was chasing him.. But once the Sword was broken, Nic stopped insisting that Butters be killed, not even an insistence that he be confined to Michael's place and all forms of communication be blocked from him... So the idea that Butters at any time was a serious threat to the operation is bogus and not born out by the facts.. Because if Butters really was a threat, he wouldn't have stopped being a threat with the breaking of the Sword.
Mr. Death:
Mira, we've already pointed out all the flaws in taking Nic at his word in that, first and foremost that that sentence is Nicodemus outright admitting he's doing the same as Dresden -- lying his ass off.
Just repeating that quote over and over again isn't going to change the context of the scene or basic common sense for someone like Nicodemus planning a heist.
DonBugen:
--- Quote from: Mira --- Harry's little blast to put Butters out of danger wasn't a betrayal of anything... Think about it, if it was, Nic would be the first to make a HUGE stink about it to Mab...He would of demand anything from Harry's immediate execution to insisting that Harry not be allowed anyone on his team on the mission, which would have been greatly to Nic's advantage.. Nic is all about gaining advantage... But he didn't. Why? No agreement was broken in any of it..
--- End quote ---
Hey, still working on a response, but I thought I’d squeeze in here to reply to this.
Nicodemus doesn’t have to appeal to Mab in order to off a traitor. He doesn’t have to demand Harry’s execution, for example, because he worked against Nicodemus and essentially stained Mab’s honor. When Mab repays a debt, it is repaid.
For Mab to regain her honor in such a situation, she would have to provide a replacement who is at least as competent as Harry. Nick wouldn’t even have to appeal in this case. If it was clear that it was a case of betrayal, Mab must fulfill it in order to keep the scales balanced.
In this case, you argue that the fact that Nicodemus doesn’t immediately appeal to Mab is conspicuous. The Genoskwa does immediately attack after Harry’s action, followed by the fight. He does an extremely excellent and brutal job of almost executing Dresden, and the only reason that the execution is not carried out is because Karrin has Nicodemus trapped, who commands the Genoskwa to hold. I do not see this as conspicuous; this is the way that the situation would logically play out if both Denarians recognized this as the moment that all bets were off.
--- Quote from: Mira --- Nic won, supposedly nothing else had changed if you go by the argument that Harry should have been killed because he broke the agreement with Mab.. He wasn't, if that was the intent it would have happened instantly as soon as the Sword broke and Murphy started to bleed on the sidewalk. It would have happened before anyone in Michael's yard could make a move. Didn't happen. Why? Because Nic never intended for him to die.
--- End quote ---
This is the one argument that you’re making that I thinks makes the most sense, and I can’t reconcile with huangjimmy’s and Mr. Death’s logic. And to be clear guys, I *do* still think that the Death/Jimmy version of events makes more sense. But I was hoping that either Mr. Death or huangjimmy might be able to address this one directly, to clear it up, because I just can't think of how this makes sense.
Normally at this point, I would include a quote from Skin Game, but the particular section I want to reference just is far too long. From the moment that Fidelacchius is shattered to the moment that Michael steps out of his house, there is an extraordinarily long period of time in which the Genoskwa is doing nothing but just holding Harry’s head tightly. He’s not torturing him, he’s not banging him around, and he’s certainly not increasing pressure. Harry describes the Genoskwa’s grip two separate times in this period, and both times he talks about how he just can’t do a thing to Gen – not how Gen responds with pain, like he did when trying to warn Murphy earlier. Harry never says a thing about pain at all; at most, he just says that he sees things through a red haze.
This scene, estimated, probably goes on for between five to eight minutes in-book. Nicodemus has the opportunity to say fifteen sentences to Murphy, calmly and casually, between acts of brutal violence. It’s clear from the first exchange or two that Murphy no longer poses any threat to Nicodemus. So why continue to hold Harry for this long? The Genoskwa is not making it hurt; at least, not to an extraordinary level. He’s also not killing him. He’s just holding Dresden back.
Could either of you respond to this specific point? If Nicodemus was in his rights to kill Harry at this point, there was no further proof needed to Mab to demonstrate his betrayal, and the Genoskwa was really honestly going to kill him, then what’s with Gen’s relative pacifism while watching Nicodemus gloat?
Arjan:
"Should have been killed" should be "could have been killed". Nicodemus is continuously trying to get even more out of the situation. He was too greedy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version