The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Did Michael lie?
morriswalters:
--- Quote ---There are two problems with this. The first is that I see no evidence that Harry's magic reinforces the existence of the shadow. The second is that I don't accept your interpretation of "waste away." If that was the sense in which Michael was using it, then he was being deliberately misleading.
--- End quote ---
You don't need to accept it, it serves as an alternative explanation. We'll never know unless Jim tells us.
When I memorize numbers I reinforce them by repeating or using them. This is the sense in which magic reinforces the Shadow.
If your going to use the word lie than give me a why. I can accept a continuity error, are you suggesting something more?
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---When I memorize numbers I reinforce them by repeating or using them. This is the sense in which magic reinforces the Shadow.
--- End quote ---
I have trouble with this. I absolutely believe that drawing on hellfire for his magic causes Harry to reinforce behavioral patterns that are to the shadow's benefit, but I'm not sure why it would reinforce the shadow itself.
--- Quote ---If your going to use the word lie than give me a why. I can accept a continuity error, are you suggesting something more?
--- End quote ---
I'm interested in exploring the priorities of the Knights in general and Michael in particular. Specifically, I'm looking for an answer to the question "to what extent will a Knight do something that they would normally consider wrong to preserve a soul/souls?" We know the answer isn't that they never would, because I can't imagine a world in which Michael thinks that it is right to stand by and let a person be tortured under normal circumstances. We also know that they will refuse to compromise their beliefs most of the time no matter what is at stake, based on their refusal to threaten/kill Cassius themselves and refusal to go after the Denarians preemptively in Small Favor (even though they had taken a hostage and it really would have been a rescue mission).
I want to know where they draw the line, and establishing whether it is more likely than not that Michael has lied to Harry will help answer that.
(I may be slightly biased: I personally believe that letting someone else darken their soul by torturing someone is a worse act than torturing someone yourself, because you're letting someone else be harmed rather than risking yourself. I realize it wasn't intended to be read this way, but emotionally it feels like the Knights were saying that their souls had more value than those that would be hurt if they did nothing. Having Michael be lying makes me like him more, because it shows that he is human and fallible, just trying to do the best he can to help people even if it's not something he's comfortable with (meaning he didn't think what Harry did to Cassius was actually all that bad, and just objected for form's sake) rather than the perfect paladin who would never do that (meaning he stood by and let his friend corrupt his soul without even trying to intervene). )
If you can find evidence that Michael wasn't lying, though, I'm fine with that. I've seen one or two explanations posted to that effect that make sense.
Mira:
--- Quote ---I have trouble with this. I absolutely believe that drawing on hellfire for his magic causes Harry to reinforce behavioral patterns that are to the shadow's benefit, but I'm not sure why it would reinforce the shadow itself.
--- End quote ---
Dependency, the more the potential host uses it, the greater the influence which eventually leads to the acceptance of the coin which is the goal of the shadow. Consider, on one level Harry was resisting Lasciel, but at the same time over time he became more and more dependent upon the use of things like hellfire, and he wasn't aware of how it was changing him.... It took Murphy's sit down and the incident with Molly and the fireball for him to realize how the shadow was changing him.
--- Quote ---I'm interested in exploring the priorities of the Knights in general and Michael in particular. Specifically, I'm looking for an answer to the question "to what extent will a Knight do something that they would normally consider wrong to preserve a soul/souls?" We know the answer isn't that they never would, because I can't imagine a world in which Michael thinks that it is right to stand by and let a person be tortured under normal circumstances. We also know that they will refuse to compromise their beliefs most of the time no matter what is at stake, based on their refusal to threaten/kill Cassius themselves and refusal to go after the Denarians preemptively in Small Favor (even though they had taken a hostage and it really would have been a rescue mission).
--- End quote ---
The Knights have a narrow lane with in to work, like for angels the rules are very strict. The mission is enable redemption by getting the Denarian they are fighting to give up their coins, or kill them in the process.. However once the coin is given up, it is out of their hands. That is why they refused to
mess with Cassius once he gave up his coin... Free will, it didn't matter what Cassius had done or was, without the coin he now had a chance to live the rest of his life redeeming himself ultimately or not, it was out of their hands.
--- Quote ---(I may be slightly biased: I personally believe that letting someone else darken their soul by torturing someone is a worse act than torturing someone yourself, because you're letting someone else be harmed rather than risking yourself. I realize it wasn't intended to be read this way, but emotionally it feels like the Knights were saying that their souls had more value than those that would be hurt if they did nothing. Having Michael be lying makes me like him more, because it shows that he is human and fallible, just trying to do the best he can to help people even if it's not something he's comfortable with (meaning he didn't think what Harry did to Cassius was actually all that bad, and just objected for form's sake) rather than the perfect paladin who would never do that (meaning he stood by and let his friend corrupt his soul without even trying to intervene). )
--- End quote ---
That is the "catch 22" of free will, Harry's choice to punish and seek revenge over Cassius.. That isn't the job of a Knight, that is for the Almighty, what Cassius chose to do from there on out was his..
Mr. Death:
--- Quote from: morriswalters on February 20, 2019, 03:25:46 AM ---It draws its power from its Fallen.
--- End quote ---
Where is this stated? To my knowledge, the only explanation anyone has ever given for what powers the Shadow is that it's powered by Harry's magic.
Mira:
--- Quote from: Mr. Death on February 20, 2019, 12:54:08 PM ---Where is this stated? To my knowledge, the only explanation anyone has ever given for what powers the Shadow is that it's powered by Harry's magic.
--- End quote ---
I think it is a little of both, the shadow has the knowledge, but being a wizard, Harry has the power.
A big example of that I believe is hellfire, it isn't something that any Denarian automatically gets or can use, it takes a Denarian who is also a wizard. The shadow of Lasciel enabled the channels that Harry could use as a wizard to throw hellfire around. So technically the shadow isn't drawing the power for it from the coin, Harry is drawing from himself. However what the shadow is doing is pushing Harry's emotional buttons that makes it all possible..
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version