Author Topic: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?  (Read 435 times)

Offline g33k

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 314
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #30 on: May 17, 2019, 07:35:14 PM »
The problem is that when you can change the past, stable time loops don't work.

It's like this. There is the original timeline, iteration 1. Then someone from iteration 1 goes back in time, creating iteration 2. If the timeline cannot be changed, then iteration 1 and iteration 2 are identical, and you also end up with iterations 3, 4, 5, etc. that are also identical, as the same person from each iteration goes back in time. This is a stable time loop.

However, if the timeline can be changed, then iterations 1 and 2 cannot be presumed to be identical, so the question remains "but what happened in iteration 1?"

Not accepting that argument.

The stable time-loop is ONE timeline (that includes a loop).  There is no "iteration 1" & "iteration 2" &c... they are identical, in the sense of "sharing identity" -- they are not successive iterations, but a singular stream of events.

I agree that they cannot be "presumed to be" identical.  Mortals are fallible, and screwups happen.  In fact, with time-travel they are overwhelmingly likely to happen.  Then you would indeed have different iterations, and paradox, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!

But it CAN be identical.  The later-in-life person can do all the things that the TT-person did, and fulfill all the actions perfectly, and create no paradox or separate "iterations."  It's just horribly unlikely (which is part of why it's Against The Laws).


Offline nadia.skylark

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #31 on: May 17, 2019, 07:51:59 PM »
Quote
The stable time-loop is ONE timeline (that includes a loop).  There is no "iteration 1" & "iteration 2" &c... they are identical, in the sense of "sharing identity" -- they are not successive iterations, but a singular stream of events.

Sorry, I should have specified that any iteration that is identical to another is the same timeline. The iteration thing is just a way of expressing it. If a=b=c=d=etc. where a, b, c, d, etc. are all numbers, then there is only one number.

Quote
I agree that they cannot be "presumed to be" identical.  Mortals are fallible, and screwups happen.  In fact, with time-travel they are overwhelmingly likely to happen.  Then you would indeed have different iterations, and paradox, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria!

But it CAN be identical.  The later-in-life person can do all the things that the TT-person did, and fulfill all the actions perfectly, and create no paradox or separate "iterations."  It's just horribly unlikely (which is part of why it's Against The Laws).

Maybe, sure. If the person going back in time was someone who was completely dedicated to not causing trouble and disrupting things, even though it meant that innocents got hurt, then I can see it maybe working.

But the person going back in time is Harry. And by saying "everything is completely the same between iterations (ie Harry did not change anything)" you are asking me to believe that Harry is the kind of person who would allow innocent people to die without trying to save them, the kind of person who would allow an innocent girl to be permanently stained with darkness without trying to prevent it--and I don't. I 100% don't believe that Harry could go back in time to that point and not try to change things, because for him to do so would be fundamentally antithetical to his character.

Therefore, in order for Harry to be the one who went back in time to fix Little Chicago, then either A) he would have to be centuries older, so that the character change makes sense--but this is almost certainly outside the scope of the time covered in the books; B) he would have to have tried to change things and failed utterly and completely, while at the same time not leaving any evidence that he was trying to change things--but Harry is not a quiet or subtle person, so I don't believe that this is possible; or C) he must have actually changed things, and the version of events we see is the result of these changes. 

Offline morriswalters

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 475
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #32 on: May 17, 2019, 09:59:05 PM »
So what your telling me is that Harry never died.  Because had he, there would be no future Harry, unless I'm missing something.  So what is the narrative point?  Why do it?  So Harry and Bob can have that conversation? 

Offline groinkick

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 6836
  • Strike first. Strike Hard. No Mercy! - Cobra Kai
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #33 on: May 17, 2019, 11:31:28 PM »
I'd suggest rereading Proven Guilty with the specific purpose of looking for something that stands out as odd.  With the knowledge that something is going on under the surface.  With that point of view it may be possible to find something.
Stole this from Reginald because it was so well put, and is true for me as well.

"I love this place. It was a beacon in the dark and I couldn't have made it through some of the most maddening years of my life without some great people here."  Thank you Griff and others who took up the torch.

Offline morriswalters

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 475
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #34 on: Yesterday at 12:15:45 AM »
Whois Sandra Marling?

Offline nadia.skylark

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #35 on: Yesterday at 12:48:36 AM »
Quote
I'd suggest rereading Proven Guilty with the specific purpose of looking for something that stands out as odd.  With the knowledge that something is going on under the surface.  With that point of view it may be possible to find something.

I've looked, and while there is plenty of odd stuff, I've yet to notice anything that looks like "TT!Harry is running around trying to save Molly and assorted innocents."

Offline kbrizzle

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #36 on: Yesterday at 09:03:54 AM »
@g33k
Fair enough, my main point against Mab is that she had so much else going on that directly threatened her realm at the time that her nipping out to Chicago to fix Harry’s magical artifact seems like a bit much.

@nadia & g33k
I could see Harry forcing himself to not change the past apart from a few little things here & there - it would be hard & character-building, but technically things work out for him & his allies in PG (no one dies).

Also recall that Odin says to Harry in CD that once an event has happened it takes an almost insurmountable amount of energy to change that event - the law of conservation of history. However Bob points out with his car being stolen example that subtle enough oblique hints can alter the outcome enough that the event that is coming to pass may be somewhat mitigated.

@morriswalters
If you’re being serious about the question regarding Sandra Marling - likely a Black Council agent or a BCV stooge.

@groinkick
I believe a lot of us have done exactly that which is why PG keeps coming up in this forum. Out of curiosity, have you found anything interesting from your rereads?

Here are some of mine:
https://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,52162.msg2314055.html#msg2314055
and
https://www.paranetonline.com/index.php/topic,52161.msg2314053.html#msg2314053

Offline nadia.skylark

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #37 on: Yesterday at 11:42:59 AM »
Quote
I could see Harry forcing himself to not change the past apart from a few little things here & there - it would be hard & character-building, but technically things work out for him & his allies in PG (no one dies).

Innocent people die.

Offline morriswalters

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 475
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #38 on: Yesterday at 01:18:17 PM »
Quote
@morriswalters
If you’re being serious about the question regarding Sandra Marling - likely a Black Council agent or a BCV stooge.
Almost every thread of the book is explained by Cold Days when Maeve is killed.  The notable exceptions being, who fixed LC and who is Sandra Marling.  And as a minor point, how did the Gatekeeper know there was Black Magic afoot in Chicago.

Offline kbrizzle

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #39 on: Yesterday at 04:58:40 PM »
@nadia
Sure, but we’ve seen what happens to people when they try to interfere when it’s someone else’s time to die. Marcone saving Harry in DB from the Corpsetaker has terrible consequences for him down the line. Harry trying to read Gard’s expression in SmF also doesn’t end well for Michael (since it was the gun being carried by Harry that Tessa used to shoot him).

So while I think Harry will be sorely tempted to change the fact that innocents die in the phage attacks, he will realize that he shouldn’t change the past; or that changing the past will simply create an alternate timeline where he is able to save them, & one where he doesn’t.

@morriswalters
I don’t know that every thread is solved by CD. Here are some of them:
  • Who invites Madrigal Raith to SplatterCon!!! a year ago? Has Maeve been Nfected for a year at this point?
  • Why is Mab in the Winter garden? What is the purpose of the garden? What are the other statues in the garden?
  • Who all were involved in the attack on Arctis Tor? When did it occur?
  • Who hits Harry’s car in the beginning?
  • Why were Summer & Winter forces aligned at the border for months against each other despite the Ramps encroaching on their territory?

Regarding your earlier question about the Gatekeeper - he seems to be able to sense black magic outside of linear time - no doubt his mantle & eye help.

Offline kbrizzle

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #40 on: Yesterday at 05:09:11 PM »
I could definitely see it being Summer, particularly Mother Summer or one of her agents.  Elaine could have been playing a really really deep game, secretly  in Mother Summer's employ, for example.

I had considered Elaine because she likely has the skill to get through Harry’s wards, get around Bob & fix LC (if she knew she needed to fix it). My only issue here is the timing & the doubts I have about Elaine’s loyalties. Elaine’s last 2 ‘sponsors’ were Justin & Aurora - I don’t think MS would want to risk allowing a possibly Nfected/ thrall/ Black Council Agent access to Harry’s apt at this critical time when Nemesis is in the middle of a big play

Offline nadia.skylark

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #41 on: Yesterday at 10:39:53 PM »
Quote
Sure, but we’ve seen what happens to people when they try to interfere when it’s someone else’s time to die. Marcone saving Harry in DB from the Corpsetaker has terrible consequences for him down the line. Harry trying to read Gard’s expression in SmF also doesn’t end well for Michael (since it was the gun being carried by Harry that Tessa used to shoot him).

Marcone I'll grant you, but Uriel specifically told Harry that his interference saved both Michael's and Harry's lives, and that this was Michael's happy ending.

Offline morriswalters

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 475
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #42 on: Today at 12:40:13 AM »
@morriswalters
I don’t know that every thread is solved by CD. Here are some of them:
  • Who invites Madrigal Raith to SplatterCon!!! a year ago? Has Maeve been Nfected for a year at this point?
  • Why is Mab in the Winter garden? What is the purpose of the garden? What are the other statues in the garden?
  • Who all were involved in the attack on Arctis Tor? When did it occur?
  • Who hits Harry’s car in the beginning?
  • Why were Summer & Winter forces aligned at the border for months against each other despite the Ramps encroaching on their territory?

Regarding your earlier question about the Gatekeeper - he seems to be able to sense black magic outside of linear time - no doubt his mantle & eye help.
Sandra Marling.  Unless you have a simpler theory this is a foreshadowing of the events in White Knight.  Somebody wanted the finger pointed at Madrigal.  Harry was more than likely supposed to go all Harry on him, leaving a corpse. Yes, Maeve was infected by the time of Dead Beat, because at that point Lea is detained by Mab although she is unaware that Maeve is compromised.  After that point she couldn't have gotten to Maeve.

Mab is watching, see the final paragraph.  A prison.  The other statures are described by JB in some WOJ.

We know the identity of the Denarian involved although no one else in particular. In the description we know that the deaths of the guard is caused by hellfire thus placing the Denarian and his identity is revealed in Small Favor.   The attack occurs sometime during the events of Dead Beat. Somewhere around the same time the Reds attack the Senior Council calling in the aid of Outsiders.

Ace is the driver, Murphy describes the attack as an attack of opportunity.  The only other candidate is Cassius.  But  no wizard could safely make the bombs used later.  And Cassius can still use magic as evidenced by his attack on Mouse in the museum.  By the time of Cold Days it is fairly obvious that Ace has been following Harry and in point of fact has stolen from Harry's repertoire.  As evidenced by his use of the Wyld Fae.  Consider his father is the Red Cap and remember Harry's description of him.

The attacks on the Winter Court were designed to pin Mab to the borders of Winter and to keep her from retaliating against the Reds.  While Maeve was doing her whisper campaign against Mab she was using Lilly as a pawn.  This serves to keep Mab in the dark about the degree of Summers involvement.  Down two of her primary allies Mab has restricted freedom of motion and must react as if Summer is preparing to attack even though she suspects otherwise.

The attack itself probably had no other purpose.  There is no indicator that shows that other than kicking down the door that anything else occurred.

Lea's involvement in Changes is almost certainly payback for the events of Arctis Tor.  Changes, Cold Days and Skin Game are all payback books, where Mab wreaks vengeance of those who wronged her.  The Reds, Maeve and Nicodemus.

I suspect that Mab told the Gatekeeper.  She's on a war footing and is watching everything.  Mab's plan is designed to expose the traitor or traitors within Winter.  Her involvement consists entirely of warning Harry.  After that it's all about watching the pieces move. Mab simply turned the light on in a roach infected kitchen(our illustrious wizard) and watched where everybody scurried.  Scarecrow was acting under someones orders, probably Maeve's.  This is the simplest explanation of his behavior. Lucius Glau was coopted by somebody, probably in Egypt.  A number there will turn up on his sisters phone in Turn Coat.  She could have back stabbed him, that's questionable and I won't support it. Taking Molly to Arctis Tor has no benefit to Mab, but plays to Maeve's story that Mab is crazy.  Mab will tell Harry in Cold Days that she had another purpose in mind for Molly.

Offline nadia.skylark

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 554
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #43 on: Today at 04:10:49 AM »
Quote
Ace is the driver, Murphy describes the attack as an attack of opportunity.  The only other candidate is Cassius.  But  no wizard could safely make the bombs used later.  And Cassius can still use magic as evidenced by his attack on Mouse in the museum.

Also, Cassius is dead at this point. Remember, he was killed in Dead Beat, which is the book before Proven Guilty.

Unless you're claiming that Cassius is the time traveller...it would certainly be an original theory.

Offline kbrizzle

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Re: Motivation for fixing Little Chicago?
« Reply #44 on: Today at 06:40:52 AM »
@morriswalters
Wow, a lot to unpack here. I will point out that almost everything you’re saying is a theory (some with strong evidence). The main thing CD confirms is that it is Maeve & not Mab who has “gone insane”.

Who is pointing a finger at Madrigal in WN? IIRC Madrigal is the one who wants to involve Harry. Madrigal & Vito are hatching a plan to usurp the White throne (which is the main plot of the novel). I guess you could say that Cowl/ the Circle are using Madrigal.

There is also evidence that the garden is more than just a prison - Mab was curing Lea there. I don’t recall the WoJ about who the statues are.

Just knowing the identity of one of the Denarians involved is not enough regarding the attack unless you think Thorned Namshiel mounted the assault on Artis Tor by himself. The point is that the attack was concerted effort by what was likely an army - the point is whose army?

As @nadia points out, Cassius is dead at this point. There is strong evidence that it was Ace using an opportunity- but it could also be TT Harry.

There is no evidence that Mab positioned most of her forces at the Summer border ready to attack just to flush out a traitor (it’s possible, but it’s just a theory) - the fact that Mab has done this is used by Maeve to convince Harry that Mab has been Nfected.

My own theory is that Maeve told Mab that Lily, like Aurora, had also been Nfected causing Mab to expect Nemesis’ next attack to come from that direction. Maeve used the fact that the Winter armies were at the Summer border to attack Arctis Tor, besieging Mab (who was able to hide out in the Winter garden) & outing herself in the process. Maeve is able to convince Mab of this because we see how well she’d ingratiated herself with Lily by PG - she was manipulating Lily into doing Nemesis’ dirty work (as shown in CD) more overtly than herself - painting a subtle target on Lily’s back.

« Last Edit: Today at 06:45:32 AM by kbrizzle »