The Dresden Files > DF Spoilers

Drakul/Dracula- Blood of the Dragon.

<< < (4/5) > >>

g33k:

--- Quote from: Bad Alias on January 26, 2020, 06:14:13 PM --- And there is enough contradictory material to argue that we don't know the origin of the Black Court. What's said in the books conflicts with some of the WoJ about it...
--- End quote ---

But the "facts" in the books are clearly & explicitly from the POV's of the characters, and limited by their biases and by what they know, including false information that they "know."

WoJ is explicitly clear about the origin of the BC (with support for that account hinted-at in various books; the fact that other origins are hinted-at only confirms that the characters themselves do not know the true facts ... ).

--- Quote ---...Dracula was <Drakul's> half-human child, who ... creat(ed) himself as the first Black Court Vampire...
--- End quote ---
(https://wordof.jim-butcher.com/index.php/word-of-jim-woj-compilation/woj-on-vampires/)

The only supportable idea that we "don't know the origin of the BC" is the possibility (very unlikely, IMHO; but not impossible!!!) that Jim has decided to actively deceive the fans, presumably so he can spring a surprise alternate-origin...  We do have WoJ that he admits to a few active lies to the fans, in the furtherance of dramatic tension &c in the DF series... or maybe just his own twisted amusement... whatever: so long as he keeps on writing Dresden, we forgive him!

Bad Alias:
@g33k: I feel like you completely ignored both the link and my sentence saying I don't subscribe to the "if it isn't in the books, it didn't happen" mentality. Said mentality is a supportable idea that we "don't know the origin of the BC." Jim has gone back on WoJ before, said things that were clearly incorrect, and explained that it does happen because he has at least six or seven versions of each book in his mind. I'm not sure if that should be counted as another "idea" or just support for the anti-WoG mentality.
--- Quote from: Bad Alias on January 26, 2020, 06:14:13 PM ---See generally https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WordOfGod. I generally take WoJ at face value, though.

--- End quote ---

g33k:

--- Quote from: Bad Alias on January 29, 2020, 08:06:56 PM --- @g33k: I feel like you completely ignored both the link and my sentence saying I don't subscribe to the "if it isn't in the books, it didn't happen" mentality. Said mentality is a supportable idea that we "don't know the origin of the BC." Jim has gone back on WoJ before, said things that were clearly incorrect, and explained that it does happen because he has at least six or seven versions of each book in his mind. I'm not sure if that should be counted as another "idea" or just support for the anti-WoG mentality.
--- End quote ---

Hmm.  I'm unclear, reading this...

On the one hand, you say:
--- Quote ---I don't subscribe to the "if it isn't in the books, it didn't happen" mentality
--- End quote ---
which (stripping out the double negative) I interpret to mean that you prefer to consider both the books AND the WoJ sources.

On the other hand, you said: 
--- Quote ---Jim has gone back on WoJ before, said things that were clearly incorrect, and explained that it does happen because he has at least six or seven versions of each book in his mind. I'm not sure if that should be counted as another "idea" or just support for the anti-WoG mentality.
--- End quote ---
  And the link to the tvtropes seems to be how "WoG" content is dubious at best.

So, ummm... I feel like you've prompted me to engage further with you, but I honestly don't know what to be SAYING; I don't understand your POV, to speak to it.  I think I'd better go take more caffeine!

Bad Alias:
I think WoJ should be considered at least as authoritative as the texts (unless we have good reason to believe otherwise, like he said something before book X and the opposite happens in book X).

On the other hand, I'm not willing to say that someone who says "if it isn't in the books, it didn't happen is wrong." The tv tropes link is just to demonstrate that this is a belief people have (including literary professor types).


--- Quote ---Jim has gone back on WoJ before, said things that were clearly incorrect, and explained that it does happen because he has at least six or seven versions of each book in his mind. I'm not sure if that should be counted as another "idea" or just support for the anti-WoG mentality.
--- End quote ---
My point here is that Jim has basically stated that he is often an unreliable narrator even if he isn't intentionally being deceptive. This admission could be evidence in support of the WoG isn't canon position or as support of a "we need to be cautious about it" position.

Con:
Well my original quote that gave the notion was from Michael in text, at Bianca's Ball immediately after having run into Ferrovax and talking about Siriothrax. So even if you doubt or disregard the WOJ entirely, there's still in text reference.

Besides which Ebenezar later confirms the Dracula teenage rebellion thing in Blood Rites.

Most common theory about Black Court is that they are tied or created to something wholly evil. Appathetic at best, outright bloodthirsty at worst. Usually this is taken as meaning they are tied to Outsiders, which is a more than possible way that Dracula tried to boost himself to Daddy Dragon dear Drakul's level.

However the fact remains Michael in his role as KotC considers them to be 'Blood of the Dragon'.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page