The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Did Michael lie?
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---The only basis for this "lie" that I can see is the unsupported assertion that Michael must have -- factually and accurately -- learned that giving up magic cannot in fact get rid of the Shadow.
There is, frankly, no reason to make this assertion. You're really making this more complicated than it needs to be.
In the first, Michael tells Harry that the only way he knows to get rid of the Shadow is to give up his magic.
Harry doesn't give up his magic. Ergo, the one way that Michael knows of to get rid of the Shadow is obviously not in play. They both know this.
So later, when Michael says nobody's ever gotten rid of the Shadow, he says that including, by implication, the thing he said before because he knows it is pointless to bring up.
Harry hasn't given up his magic and isn't going to give up his magic, so Michael has no reason to retread a thing that he knows is not on the table.
There's no lie of omission. There's just Michael not bringing up something that is pointless to bring up.
--- End quote ---
I guess we just interpret what Michael said differently. You appear to interpret "no one has ever gotten rid of a shadow" as "you can't have gotten rid of Lasciel's shadow because you obviously haven't used the method I know to do so," which would, indeed, mean that Michael has not lied. I interpret "no one has ever gotten rid of a shadow" to mean "no one has ever gotten rid of a shadow," which would mean that something is wonky to the point where the only viable explanations that I can see involve either a lie of commission or a lie of omission on Michael's part.
Bad Alias:
--- Quote from: Mr. Death on February 26, 2019, 08:59:34 PM ---So later, when Michael says nobody's ever gotten rid of the Shadow, he says that including, by implication, the thing he said before because he knows it is pointless to bring up.
--- End quote ---
I think it is a stretch to say that the set aside your power way is in the conversation by implication. Michael said "no one." (Emphasis original). He stressed the point. That's why I think the statements are contradictory.
And one thing no one has mentioned, Michael could have told Harry over the intervening two years between Proven Guilty and Small Favor, Michael and Harry are probably spending a lot of time together since Harry is training Molly. Michael could have easily told Harry that he was wrong about how to get rid of the Shadow.
Or Jim made a mistake, and it's just a continuity error.
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---I think it is a stretch to say that the set aside your power way is in the conversation by implication. Michael said "no one." (Emphasis original). He stressed the point. That's why I think the statements are contradictory.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---And one thing no one has mentioned, Michael could have told Harry over the intervening two years between Proven Guilty and Small Favor, Michael and Harry are probably spending a lot of time together since Harry is training Molly. Michael could have easily told Harry that he was wrong about how to get rid of the Shadow.
--- End quote ---
This is the lie of omission I keep talking about.
Mr. Death:
In Proven Guilty, Michael never says there's a documented case of someone getting rid of the shadow by walking away from their power. He only says that's the only way he knows how.
It's entirely possible that this is a theory that someone in the Church came up with based on what they know of the Shadow and how they work.
It's also entirely possible -- probable, even -- that the average magic user who gets a Shadow into their head has the exact same reaction as Harry to the suggestion.
Ergo, even if your interpretation of Michael's line is correct, there's not necessarily a contradiction.
After all, Michael and half the villains know how to unmake one of the Swords; but it's apparently something that's never happened. Knowing how to do something doesn't mean that something has actually happened before.
In the meantime, I'd like to see something that indicates that Michael definitively learned that he was wrong. Where did he do the research (of records that Nicodemus regularly destroys)? Did he find another magic user in the intervening two years that -- again, in that time frame -- gave up the power and still had the Shadow?
Where are we positing that Michael learned this?
Bad Alias:
--- Quote from: Mr. Death on February 26, 2019, 09:19:43 PM ---In Proven Guilty, Michael never says there's a documented case of someone getting rid of the shadow by walking away from their power. He only says that's the only way he knows how.
It's entirely possible that this is a theory that someone in the Church came up with based on what they know of the Shadow and how they work.
It's also entirely possible -- probable, even -- that the average magic user who gets a Shadow into their head has the exact same reaction as Harry to the suggestion.
Ergo, even if your interpretation of Michael's line is correct, there's not necessarily a contradiction.
After all, Michael and half the villains know how to unmake one of the Swords; but it's apparently something that's never happened. Knowing how to do something doesn't mean that something has actually happened before.
In the meantime, I'd like to see something that indicates that Michael definitively learned that he was wrong. Where did he do the research (of records that Nicodemus regularly destroys)? Did he find another magic user in the intervening two years that -- again, in that time frame -- gave up the power and still had the Shadow?
Where are we positing that Michael learned this?
--- End quote ---
My problem is that his statement in Small Favor is so absolute.
Honestly, I just think it is a continuity error that can be explained away in a manner that reminds me of a Babylon 5 quote.
--- Quote ---"Captain. If I were you, I would quit while I was ahead. Back on Minbar, there was a saying among the other rangers. Only way to get a straight answer from Ranger One was to look every reply in a mirror while hanging upside-down from the ceiling."
"Did it work?"
"Oddly enough, yes. Or, after a while you passed out and had a vision. Either one, the result was pretty much the same."
-- Marcus and Sheridan in Babylon 5:"War Without End #1"
--- End quote ---
What are the explanations? Here are the one's I remember in no particular order.
1: The Proven Guilty statement is implicit in the Small Favor conversation.
2: Michael changed his mind
2a: and didn't tell Harry.
2b: and told Harry off page.
3: Michael lied because [reasons], but those reasons are no longer there or are superseded in Small Favor.
4: The Proven Guilty statement was a theory that hasn't been tested.
5: It's a continuity error.
6: The statements are in no way contradictory.
I don't think anyone is proposing that Michael was lying in Small Favor.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version