The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers
Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---Huge difference, the end may be the same, but there is a difference..
--- End quote ---
I'm not saying that there isn't a difference; I'm saying that the difference is not as large as people might think.
--- Quote ---Oh and please give page and book so things can be read in context..
--- End quote ---
Sorry, can't. All my books are in storage. Also, I kinda figured that anyone who's on this forum would remember that quote--it's pretty memorable.
--- Quote ---One of the come backs that Uriel had to your quote... Ghost Story page 458
--- End quote ---
Thanks for finding more support for my claim! The fact that an archangel steps in to help convince Harry to regret his actions really demonstrates what I'm trying to say here.
Mira:
--- Quote ---Sorry, can't. All my books are in storage. Also, I kinda figured that anyone who's on this forum would remember that quote--it's pretty memorable.
--- End quote ---
The quote, yes, everyone remembers it but context is important... Without context it can be made to mean almost anything... Harry said it, is is memorable, but then did he coldly go on to plan the burning of the world? Obviously not, but then what stopped him?
--- Quote ---Thanks for finding more support for my claim! The fact that an archangel steps in to help convince Harry to regret his actions really demonstrates what I'm trying to say here.
--- End quote ---
However Harry didn't let the world burn. Did he? What Uriel was trying to tell him that the world is made up of people like Molly. And Harry answers he is starting to get that.. What I am saying is there is a vast difference between saying in an emotionally charged moment, let the world burn, and actually coldly planning for the world's burning..
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---The quote, yes, everyone remembers it but context is important... Without context it can be made to mean almost anything... Harry said it, is is memorable, but then did he coldly go on to plan the burning of the world? Obviously not, but then what stopped him?
--- End quote ---
The context was that Murphy was saying that the supernatural world was on a precipice, and Harry's actions might be what pushed it over.
--- Quote ---However Harry didn't let the world burn. Did he?
--- End quote ---
In context, yes he did. Harry destabilized the supernatural world, allowing the fomor to move in causing what appears to be a massive loss of hope around the world (based on Ghost Story and what Butters says in Skin Game about the state of things).
It has always been my contention that Harry's actions in Changes caused as much damage as Nicodemus's plague would have. It may not have been his intention, but he was warned about the possible consequences of his actions well before he acted, and specifically chose not to care about them.
Mira:
--- Quote ---The context was that Murphy was saying that the supernatural world was on a precipice, and Harry's actions might be what pushed it over.
--- End quote ---
Page please, book, please....
--- Quote ---In context, yes he did. Harry destabilized the supernatural world, allowing the fomor to move in causing what appears to be a massive loss of hope around the world (based on Ghost Story and what Butters says in Skin Game about the state of things).
--- End quote ---
Did anyone tell him if he wipes out the Red Court the Fomor would move in before hand?
That was an unintentional consequence, not what he planned.. Harry did not have an agenda to destabilize the supernatural world.. He never pre-planned to reverse the bloodline spell, the spell was set up by the Red King in the first place. He is the one who didn't care or was so arrogant he didn't think it possible that Harry or anyone else could reverse it, and that he and all the RCVs could die as a consequence. Sure, Harry could have just surrendered and let his daughter, himself, and his grandfather die.. Perhaps the natural balance between vamps and humans wouldn't have been destabilized, but then again what would have been the consequences if Eb's bloodline had been wiped out? A bloodline that includes a starborn.. Context please, what the author is saying, not you.. That is why if you are going to use quotes you need to sight chapter and verse that goes along with them, otherwise things can be twisted...
The difference isn't that Nic didn't care about what the plague would do, it is he planned to do, if it worked it would do what he intended for it to do, it was part of his agenda.. Getting the artifacts is on his agenda, killing his daughter is a step towards that...
nadia.skylark:
--- Quote ---Page please, book, please....
--- End quote ---
Are you incapable of reading? Because I specifically said that I don't have the books with me--they're in storage.
--- Quote ---Did anyone tell him if he wipes out the Red Court the Fomor would move in before hand?
--- End quote ---
Not specifically. But he was told that something really bad was likely to happen.
--- Quote ---That was an unintentional consequence, not what he planned.. Harry did not have an agenda to destabilize the supernatural world..
--- End quote ---
If I shoot a gun through my apartment wall and kill someone, I may not have had an agenda to kill them, but I am still legally liable for murder/manslaughter because I have acted in a way that shows incredible recklessness and disregard for human life.
--- Quote ---He never pre-planned to reverse the bloodline spell, the spell was set up by the Red King in the first place. He is the one who didn't care or was so arrogant he didn't think it possible that Harry or anyone else could reverse it, and that he and all the RCVs could die as a consequence.
--- End quote ---
The fact that the Red King was arrogant/didn't care does not actually absolve Harry of all consequences of his actions.
--- Quote ---Sure, Harry could have just surrendered and let his daughter, himself, and his grandfather die..
--- End quote ---
You know, I actually responded to you saying essentially the same thing back on page one. Here is my response:
--- Quote ---I don't think there was a better way at all, but that doesn't change the fact that it was horrible.
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---Perhaps the natural balance between vamps and humans wouldn't have been destabilized, but then again what would have been the consequences if Eb's bloodline had been wiped out? A bloodline that includes a starborn..
--- End quote ---
And Harry knew none of this, so it has no relevance. If I shoot a gun through my apartment wall and end up hitting someone who's trying to rape my next door neighbor, that doesn't absolve me of my recklessness or my disregard for human life, because I didn't know that it was going to happen.
--- Quote ---Context please, what the author is saying, not you.. That is why if you are going to use quotes you need to sight chapter and verse that goes along with them, otherwise things can be twisted...
--- End quote ---
First: Spelling. It's "cite," not "sight."
Second: You are free to post the text surrounding my quotes if you feel it is important. I would do it, but as I've said, I can't. If you don't cite it (or provide reasons why you can't), then I will consider your argument regarding citations invalid and assume you're bringing it up to cast unfounded doubts on my argument because you can't think of anything better.
Third: Yes, please cite what we know of starborn, and what evidence you have that losing one particular starborn would be so disastrous.
--- Quote ---The difference isn't that Nic didn't care about what the plague would do, it is he planned to do, if it worked it would do what he intended for it to do, it was part of his agenda.. Getting the artifacts is on his agenda, killing his daughter is a step towards that...
--- End quote ---
This makes no sense. It's Harry that didn't care about the consequences of his actions, not Nicodemus. The difference between Nicodemus and Harry is the difference between first degree murder and 2nd/3rd degree murder (I'll look up legal codes when I'm not in class).
Edit: I looked it up. What Harry is guilty of is the equivalent of somewhere between second degree murder and voluntary manslaughter (it turns out that 3rd degree murder only exists in a few states).
Wikipedia:
--- Quote ---Second-degree murder: any intentional murder with malice aforethought, but is not premeditated or planned in advance.
Voluntary manslaughter: sometimes called a crime of passion murder, is any intentional killing that involves no prior intent to kill, and which was committed under such circumstances that would "cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed". Both this and second-degree murder are committed on the spot under a spur-of-the-moment choice, but the two differ in the magnitude of the circumstances surrounding the crime. For example, a bar fight that results in death would ordinarily constitute second-degree murder. If that same bar fight stemmed from a discovery of infidelity, however, it may be mitigated to voluntary manslaughter.
--- End quote ---
I'm not sure which it is: I would consider "malice aforethought" to be Harry's "let the world burn" thing, but he was already emotionally disturbed at the time, so I'm not sure how that would play out legally.
(Also, to be clear, I'm talking about the genocide thing, not Harry's murder of Susan specifically.)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version