The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

I think Murphy is going to get killed here is why

<< < (23/34) > >>

Bad Alias:

--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 on June 04, 2019, 02:21:44 AM ---[1.] Murphy deviating slightly from police procedure cannot be make the evidence to conclude that she is not a good cop. ...

[2.] If Harry has his own reasons to steal Bob and it is understandable, why not Murphy as well?

[3.] Since the books does not focus on Murphy, we know too little to say that Murphy don't have an understandable reason for what she did. ...

[2.] Why does it becomes understandable when it comes to Harry and it is untolerable when it comes to Murphy?

--- End quote ---

1. I think you're underestimating the seriousness of the legal offense. To add to what Nadia said, it is a constitutional violation of due process rights. That's literally fundamental the the American justice system. I don't know where you are on how bad of a policing mistake Murphy made was. It was a very bad mistake in my opinion. Granted, I have very limited experience in law enforcement and only a little more in criminal law.

Question 2. is answered by statement 3. It's harder for an author to explain the motivations of a character if they aren't a POV character, but the author still needs to do it for the story to make sense.

I'm not saying it's an intolerable mistake. I'm saying it is an unexplained mistake because it is such a grave offense and mistake. I don't understand what made Murphy so mad. I understand that she was so mad that she made a very bad mistake. It is never explained why she was so mad. It may be later if/when her dad's death is explained more. My theory is that this isn't an isolated instance, and it's the reason she's in S.I. in the first place. My problem with Murphy is that I have to come up with half baked theories to explain the actions of a character who has been in every book. "She has anger issued because of her dad's 'suicide' that landed her in S.I. and is the reason she loses control at times" isn't much of a theory.

I just remembered that Murphy has issues with dogs that are in the neighborhood of a phobia. A case in which large supernatural canines are eating people may be enough to explain what unnerved her. Such fear with her POV explanation in Aftermath that she often has a "KILL IT WITH FIRE" reaction to Dresden helps me understand how she would be on unstable ground leading to such a reaction. Though, I don't think she has experienced Dresden in a "KILL IT WITH FIRE" situation at this point in the series. Partly because she's worried about "taking a civilian along" in at least the first book when the truth is, when it comes to the supernatural, she is the civilian.

huangjimmy108:

--- Quote from: nadia.skylark on June 04, 2019, 03:48:50 AM ---No. Seeing Kim dead incapacitated Harry. He was non-functional before Murphy punched him--it's one of the things that, as I have stated before, makes her actions worse.

Why does Murphy feel betrayed? You've acknowledged yourself that she doesn't trust Harry all that much.

This is a straw man argument. Please do not use them in serious discussions. Saying that Murphy would refuse to listen to Harry for all eternity is ludicrous, which is why no one's said that, and no one who bothered to think about it would assume so. What is being said is that Murphy would refuse to listen to Harry for somewhere between a few days and a month--somewhere in that time range.

Are you actually reading my posts? I feel like you're not, because I responded to exactly this in my last post. Here, I'll re-post it:
Do you honestly believe that assaulting a suspect repeatedly is only "deviating slightly from police procedure" (emphasis mine)? Because either you live somewhere with a far worse law enforcement system than where I live, or there is something wrong here. It is a felony-level offense committed by an officer of the law. That is extremely serious. That is the equivalent of Michael deciding to murder someone because he thought they might be a denarian--a grievous violation of all that a cop/Knight (cop referring to Murphy, Knight referring to Michael, if that wasn't clear) is supposed to stand for.

I recall no evidence that Murphy ever apologized prior to Proven Guilty, and her apology there (not knowing the extent of the damage she did to Harry) indicates that such an apology did not take place. As such, I will continue believing that she did not do so until someone provides specific book quotes with evidence to the contrary. As to her apology in Proven Guilty, I will again quote my last post:
I'm going to be blunt here: Harry in Fool Moon acts like an abused spouse when it comes to Murphy. His entire attitude is "I'm sorry I made her hit me." Seriously, switch the genders and replay that scene and the discussion Harry has about it with his subconscious.

Yes. There are times and places that make this kind of thing understandable. This is not one of them.

Murphy is not being betrayed by her close friend who she has lost her job over and defended to all comers.

Murphy is not attempting to extract information from Harry that would save lives.

Harry is not smug or gloating about what happened. (Quite the contrary, actually.)

Murphy has not been personally assaulted by Harry, nor has anyone she cares about.

These are all reasons that I would consider to make Murphy's behavior understandably--but none of them apply.

See above for the answer to this. Harry provides reasons; Murphy does not, nor does the text of Fool Moon, nor the text of any of the other books.

This quote reminds me irresistibly of Xenophilius Lovegood. No, you can't prove a negative. However, we have 15 books and assorted short stories worth of Murphy, and in all of that I can't find an understandably reason. As such, I assume that there is not one, for the same reason that I assume that gravity is going to continue working. I may not be able to prove definitively that it won't stop working at some point in the future, but there's plenty of evidence that it hasn't yet, and that's good enough for me.

Yeah, but even Murphy doesn't believe that Harry's the actual killer. She's arresting him for conspiracy. That means that arresting him won't actually save lives, and wouldn't even if he were guilty.

Probably less badly than if she were brought up on charges for a felony-level crime committed during the commission of her duties.

It makes her being angry understandable. It does not make her assaulting Harry understandable.

Once again, you are not reading my posts, and once again, I will repost what I have said on this topic in my last post:

--- End quote ---

I only want to say that Harry, as the main protagonist of the story, is not that much of a loser. If six years pass and Harry acknowledge Murphy's apology and even felt ashame digging it up in an argument, I must assume that Murphy has already properly apologize and the matter is over and done with. There is no need to show it on the screen. I trust Harry's judgement at least that much.

During FM, Murphy and Harry has a working relationship. Harry is her trusted employee. It is a betrayal from an employee instead of a close friend, but it is a betrayal regardless, at least in her point of view at the time.

If you understand her anger in FM, we are in accord. She punching Harry is a mistake, we both agree about that as well.

Using this mistake to conclude that Murphy won't listen to Harry afterwards however, is another story. After Murphy punch Harry and blew up some steam, she is likely to back to herself. The way JB is portraying Murphy, Murphy punching Harry should be an isolated incident, a means to portray Murphy's angry state of mind at the time, not an indicator of Murphy's character.

nadia.skylark:

--- Quote ---I only want to say that Harry, as the main protagonist of the story, is not that much of a loser. If six years pass and Harry acknowledge Murphy's apology and even felt ashame digging it up in an argument, I must assume that Murphy has already properly apologize and the matter is over and done with. There is no need to show it on the screen. I trust Harry's judgement at least that much.
--- End quote ---

I, on the other hand, read the books well enough to understand that Harry has a guilt complex, and that such is a part of his character.


--- Quote ---During FM, Murphy and Harry has a working relationship. Harry is her trusted employee. It is a betrayal from an employee instead of a close friend, but it is a betrayal regardless, at least in her point of view at the time.
--- End quote ---

Trusted? What books are you reading? Murphy has demonstrated repeatedly and consistently, in both Storm Front and Fool Moon, that she does not trust Harry.

And if he were her trusted employee, it still wouldn't be enough of a betrayal to warrant her actions.


--- Quote ---If you understand her anger in FM, we are in accord. She punching Harry is a mistake, we both agree about that as well.
--- End quote ---

Actually, we're not in accord, because you think that her punching Harry is a small thing and an isolated incident, and I feel that it reflects a pattern of behavior that continues through Skin Game (albeit, not directed at Harry much in the later books). Her reasons for punching Harry are exactly the same reasons she cites in the beginning of Skin Game for why she should not pick up a Sword.


--- Quote ---Using this mistake to conclude that Murphy won't listen to Harry afterwards however, is another story.
--- End quote ---

...using her actions, ie her physical assault of Harry when he tries to speak for the purpose of preventing him from speaking and her verbal confirmation that she does not want him to speak, to provide evidence for my claim that she is not going to listen to him? How is that in any way even controversial? If, when I open my mouth and try to speak, someone punches me in the face and says "no more talking," I am going to assume, like a rational person, that they aren't interested in listening to me talk. Are you honestly saying I would be wrong to do so?


--- Quote ---After Murphy punch Harry and blew up some steam, she is likely to back to herself.
--- End quote ---

No, she isn't. We know this because we saw her not being back to herself later in the book.


--- Quote ---The way JB is portraying Murphy, Murphy punching Harry should be an isolated incident, a means to portray Murphy's angry state of mind at the time, not an indicator of Murphy's character.
--- End quote ---

Really? Have you read Ghost Story? What about Skin Game? The way Jim has written Murphy, her actions in Fool Moon are an extreme manifestation of negative character traits which she is shown to continually struggle with.

Bad Alias:

--- Quote from: huangjimmy108 on June 04, 2019, 04:08:51 AM ---Using this mistake to conclude that Murphy won't listen to Harry afterwards however, is another story.

--- End quote ---

It's not just the punching. It's the repeated shutting down of him attempting to speak to her. It's her arresting him thus giving him additional constitutional protection form self incrimination. It's her reading him his rights while they are battling MacFinn. It's her still wondering if Harry is playing her while they are on Marcone's estate. Honestly, the punching is the least of it when it comes to my opinion that she's not going to listen to him any time soon.

huangjimmy108:

--- Quote from: nadia.skylark on June 04, 2019, 04:29:10 AM ---I, on the other hand, read the books well enough to understand that Harry has a guilt complex, and that such is a part of his character.

Trusted? What books are you reading? Murphy has demonstrated repeatedly and consistently, in both Storm Front and Fool Moon, that she does not trust Harry.

And if he were her trusted employee, it still wouldn't be enough of a betrayal to warrant her actions.

Actually, we're not in accord, because you think that her punching Harry is a small thing and an isolated incident, and I feel that it reflects a pattern of behavior that continues through Skin Game (albeit, not directed at Harry much in the later books). Her reasons for punching Harry are exactly the same reasons she cites in the beginning of Skin Game for why she should not pick up a Sword.

...using her actions, ie her physical assault of Harry when he tries to speak for the purpose of preventing him from speaking and her verbal confirmation that she does not want him to speak, to provide evidence for my claim that she is not going to listen to him? How is that in any way even controversial? If, when I open my mouth and try to speak, someone punches me in the face and says "no more talking," I am going to assume, like a rational person, that they aren't interested in listening to me talk. Are you honestly saying I would be wrong to do so?

No, she isn't. We know this because we saw her not being back to herself later in the book.

Really? Have you read Ghost Story? What about Skin Game? The way Jim has written Murphy, her actions in Fool Moon are an extreme manifestation of negative character traits which she is shown to continually struggle with.

--- End quote ---


Harry has a guilt complex, but he always get things right in the end. He is slow, but he'll get there eventually. Six years has gone by, if Harry still can't straight things out in his mind, he is not worthy of his wizard title.

With all those rumors running around, Murphy would not have involve Harry in the investigations if she do not trust Harry. So if you say there is no trust and thus no betrayal, it is wrong.

If I want to talk and someone punch me in the face to shut me up, I will indeed assume that this person don't want to talk to me. In my anger and humiliation, I even may assume that this person will never talk to me again. But if I calm down and think rationally, I will realize that we should be able to talk again after both party calms down.

You say Murphy won't listen to Harry. I say Murphy won't listen to Harry at the moment.

Murphy has a temper. It is a character flaw. The same as Harry's character flaw which is his guilt complex. Maybe arrogance and some trust issue too. The character flaw causes problem from time to time. There is nothing wrong with that. If you call this a patern, than perhaps it is. Murphy is not the only one who has it though.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page