ParanetOnline

The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: Lady Inez on February 15, 2019, 04:17:11 PM

Title: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Lady Inez on February 15, 2019, 04:17:11 PM
The other thread on Michael and lies reminded me of something that's been bothering me since Skin Game. When he confesses to Michael what happened at Chichen Itza, does Harry intentionally lie about Martin having enraged Susan with knowledge of his betrayal when in fact Harry forced her to face that and thus set off her rage, leading to her death? Or, worse, is he lying to himself, possibly with the help of the mantle, and so he remembers the events in a way that makes him seem slightly less guilty? Is Harry ashamed of having weaponized Susan's condition in that moment, but craving Michael's approval and forgiveness, or has he insulated himself from what he did? I was really surprised that he didn't tell Michael the truth later in the book, forcing a moment of soul searching in Michael; that doesn't happen, so I'm not certain how to read his version of things.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Con on February 15, 2019, 08:02:21 PM
I thought he was pretty honest about his guilt having to sacrifice Susan, and it was her choice to be sacrificed which Michael notes that theirs a price for Harry to pay with that. Honestly I think the topic was covered well in that scene and dealt with well. The 'soul' Uriel mentions isn't just about Nicodemus and the Squires it's Harry's soul as well, Murphy explicitly says so to Butters.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Lady Inez on February 15, 2019, 08:13:49 PM
I agree, it is a great scene, probably my favorite in the book, but in it Harry explicitly blames Martin for having set off Susan's wrath when in fact Harry made her focus on what Martin had done in order to enrage her enough to kill Martin. Harry tells Michael almost exactly what happened, and is obviously racked with guilt, but he distorts that one detail (arguably the worst thing about what happened, because it intentionally caused Susan's death, however necessary it was to save Maggie). My question is why the distortion: shame or mantle-assisted self-delusion?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 15, 2019, 08:47:27 PM
Harry clearly tried to manipulate Susan. He told her Lea's spellwork would protect her from iron. He knew that wasn't true. I say he was trying to manipulate Susan because I think Susan would have gone along with Harry's plan if she had been fully informed. Harry didn't need to manipulate her, but did so anyway because he had to do it to get anyone out of there.

Another explanation for Harry not telling Michael the whole truth is that he doesn't remember the whole truth. We know Harry doesn't remember a large chunk of that night. He is probably missing several smaller pieces. Memory is pretty unreliable in the best of situations.

Without getting into why I think so (happy to if anyone cares), the books we are reading are the case files written by Harry years later (in universe, not really because they're clearly fiction written by Jim). If this is the case, there are all sorts of reasons for continuity errors. In character Harry remembers less than author Harry or vice versa. Author Harry could remember more because magic. For example, the antechamber to the tunnels on Demonreach is for "MEMORY" "REFLECTION."

Also it could just be a continuity error, which is always an option.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 15, 2019, 08:51:36 PM

   It is tricky,  while Harry letting Susan know about Martin's betrayal set her off, it was still her choice to allow herself to be set off..  It was also Martin's betrayal in the first place that put everyone in the position they were in...  Bottom line all would be dead or vamps anyway if Harry hadn't acted.. Little Maggie would be dead, then Harry, then Eb.. Susan would have then gone postal and been turned in any case..  If anything Harry was taking on too much responsibility for something where the only good choice was to allow Susan to act to save their daughter... Then she willingly let him kill her as her final act of humanity to save their daughter.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on February 15, 2019, 09:22:25 PM
I think Harry has subconsciously rewritten his memory of the incident because he couldn't reconcile the contradictions in what happened any other way (memory is not notoriously reliable--this happens a lot).

Because think about it: what happens?

Harry forces a standing KotC into a position where awful things happen to her, culminating in him sacrificing her in a ritual spell that causes widespread destruction on a scale sufficient that, based on Ghost Story, huge numbers of people are losing hope/compromising their principles--basically, exactly what Nicodemus was trying to pull off in Death Masks.

And then he dies--fair enough, he believes that people who do this kind of thing deserve to die.

Then comes the problem--because everyone says that things were worse because he died. More than that, he was manipulated into dying by one of the Fallen.

And then he comes back, and the only thing that any of his friends and allies object to is that he's the winter knight. They're worried about what he might become, sure, but none of them see a problem in what he's done aside from killing himself.

And he can't cope. He knows he's a monster, knows he deserves to die, because no matter how awful he feels about it he knows that he would do the same again if it were necessary. And yet, all the people whose judgement he trusts above his own don't see the problem--don't acknowledge that there could be a problem. Hell, Karrin is still willing to back him up when he goes to work for Nicodemus of all people, and she was chosen by the Sword of Faith. And Harry knows something is wrong, knows that none of this makes sense but he's not the most self-reflective person, he can't put the problem into words, much less solve it. Something has to give--and I think what gave is Harry's memory about what happened.

None of which, of course, explains why Nicodemus never brings this up, but that's a slightly different issue.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 19, 2019, 03:28:06 PM
Quote
Harry forces a standing KotC into a position where awful things happen to her, culminating in him sacrificing her in a ritual spell that causes widespread destruction on a scale sufficient that, based on Ghost Story, huge numbers of people are losing hope/compromising their principles--basically, exactly what Nicodemus was trying to pull off in Death Masks.

  Susan wasn't forced into anything,  she wanted to save her daughter.  It was Harry who chose her to wield the Sword of Love, because she was going out of love to save her daughter.  She accepted..  In desperation to save their daughter and everyone else he revealed to her Martin's treachery.  Let's not lose sight that his betrayal is why little Maggie was on the chop block to begin with.. Yes, it pissed her off, but she had been pissed off before, this time she chose to change and rip Martin's throat out..   With her last human breath she begged Harry to end her life to save their daughter. Again, if the above hadn't happened, little Maggie, Harry, and Eb would have died, Susan still would more than likely have changed as soon as little Maggie's heart was cut out..  The spell itself was of the Red King's making to rid himself of Eb and his family,  all Harry did when he killed Susan was reverse the spell and kill the Red King's family....  If you can think of a better way or a less monstrous way to save little Maggie and her rescuers, feel free to write..   

Quote

And he can't cope. He knows he's a monster, knows he deserves to die, because no matter how awful he feels about it he knows that he would do the same again if it were necessary. And yet, all the people whose judgement he trusts above his own don't see the problem--don't acknowledge that there could be a problem. Hell, Karrin is still willing to back him up when he goes to work for Nicodemus of all people, and she was chosen by the Sword of Faith. And Harry knows something is wrong, knows that none of this makes sense but he's not the most self-reflective person, he can't put the problem into words, much less solve it. Something has to give--and I think what gave is Harry's memory about what happened.

Murphy was only chosen as a Knight for the night they went to rescue little Maggie..  As of Skin Game she was no longer a Knight, won't go into the problems that occurred afterwards..  However you neglect to mention that Uriel loaned his Grace to Michael, retired but still a Holy Knight so he could physically accompany Harry on the mission, it was that important..  Also Harry was never really working for Nic in the first place, it was all a double cross orchestrated by Mab, Kringle with a lot of help from Mr Gray...  Harry manages to keep all relics except the Grail out of Nic's hands and selects the next Holy Knight, Butters..   Do you think any of that would happen if Harry was really this deluded monster who is just kidding himself? 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Talby16 on February 19, 2019, 05:31:25 PM
Who knows if Susan would have either reached the same conclusion Harry did on her own and acted or if her desperation to save her daughter would have left her with her only alternative to embrace her inner vamp. Harry couldn't chance a delay and gave her a push to get her there out of desperation.

I truly believe that suffered from PTSD due to that event and may have unconsciously blocked out some of the more traumatic moments.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 19, 2019, 06:57:12 PM
Who knows if Susan would have either reached the same conclusion Harry did on her own and acted or if her desperation to save her daughter would have left her with her only alternative to embrace her inner vamp. Harry couldn't chance a delay and gave her a push to get her there out of desperation.

I truly believe that suffered from PTSD due to that event and may have unconsciously blocked out some of the more traumatic moments.

I agree about the PTSD not just from this but a number of things...  I doubt that Susan would have stood by and watched her daughter, then Harry die and not be affected by it..  Nor do I think she would have just stood there helpless as the Red King proceeded to cut her daughter's heart out.. She would have attacked, either way she was going to die.
Quote
I agree, it is a great scene, probably my favorite in the book, but in it Harry explicitly blames Martin for having set off Susan's wrath when in fact Harry made her focus on what Martin had done in order to enrage her enough to kill Martin. Harry tells Michael almost exactly what happened, and is obviously racked with guilt, but he distorts that one detail (arguably the worst thing about what happened, because it intentionally caused Susan's death, however necessary it was to save Maggie). My question is why the distortion: shame or mantle-assisted self-delusion?

Because of his guilt, he has a hard time admitting to it, yes shame, he cannot face his daughter because he killed her mother... If it was mantle assisted self-delusion, he would be able to rationalize what he did and like a good social-path, feel no guilt at all...
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on February 19, 2019, 08:11:11 PM
Quote
Susan wasn't forced into anything,  she wanted to save her daughter.  It was Harry who chose her to wield the Sword of Love, because she was going out of love to save her daughter.  She accepted..  In desperation to save their daughter and everyone else he revealed to her Martin's treachery.  Let's not lose sight that his betrayal is why little Maggie was on the chop block to begin with.. Yes, it pissed her off, but she had been pissed off before, this time she chose to change and rip Martin's throat out..

In Changes, the narration makes it pretty clear that Harry believes that he intentionally manipulated her, and that it was an awful thing to do. I don't have the book with me, but I believe that it was something like "god forgive me for what I did next, because I never will."

Quote
Murphy was only chosen as a Knight for the night they went to rescue little Maggie..  As of Skin Game she was no longer a Knight, won't go into the problems that occurred afterwards.. 

I agree with you, but I think Harry doesn't.

Quote
However you neglect to mention that Uriel loaned his Grace to Michael, retired but still a Holy Knight so he could physically accompany Harry on the mission, it was that important..  Also Harry was never really working for Nic in the first place, it was all a double cross orchestrated by Mab, Kringle with a lot of help from Mr Gray...  Harry manages to keep all relics except the Grail out of Nic's hands and selects the next Holy Knight, Butters..

None of this was clear when Harry told Michael what happened during Changes, and in the same conversation Harry made it clear that he felt that working for Nic contributed to him feeling like a monster even though he was planning to double cross him.

Quote
If you can think of a better way or a less monstrous way to save little Maggie and her rescuers, feel free to write..

I don't think there was a better way at all, but that doesn't change the fact that it was horrible.

Quote
Do you think any of that would happen if Harry was really this deluded monster who is just kidding himself?

I don't think Harry is deluded or a monster--quite the contrary. I think that Harry is a genuinely good person who was put in an impossible situation, coped with it admirably at the time, and fell apart a little afterward. If he wasn't a good person, he would have no reason to feel bad about what happened.

Human brains rewrite memories all the time. It can even be triggered by someone asking questions the wrong way--this is why police officers need to be careful when questioning witnesses. I think Harry is less susceptible to this than most people because he's trained his memory as part of being an investigator, but short of having an eidetic memory no one is immune to it completely.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 19, 2019, 09:16:57 PM
I find nadia.skylark's posts quite insightful and tend to agree with her analysis.

I agree with that Harry took the best, perhaps only, overall option. Harry did manipulate Susan. I don't think he needed to.

Susan probably wasn't going to get the chance to watch anyone die. Once Maggie died, Susan would too.

It doesn't matter whether or not we think Harry did a terrible thing at Chichen Itza. Harry does. People who survive accidents that were in no way there fault often feel guilty. Susan died because of Harry, one way or another. (I mean that in a cause and effect sort of way, not morally). He's going to feel guilty and blame himself. That's Harry.

My position can be summed up in three points. 1. Harry did what he had to at Chichen Itza. 2. He is going to feel guilty about it no matter how right or wrong I am in point 1. 3. He probably doesn't remember it exactly right. He did suffer serious trauma during and after.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 19, 2019, 10:28:11 PM
Quote
It doesn't matter whether or not we think Harry did a terrible thing at Chichen Itza. Harry does. People who survive accidents that were in no way there fault often feel guilty. Susan died because of Harry, one way or another. (I mean that in a cause and effect sort of way, not morally). He's going to feel guilty and blame himself. That's Harry.

  Susan didn't die because of Harry,  the seeds of her death were planted way back in Storm Front, long before Harry.  She liked to write about the supernatural, expose it, used Harry, though yeah came to love him, to gain fame and fortune in her career...  She gave lip service to believing what she saw and experienced but she never paid it enough respect, so like a great many dangerous things it bit her in the ass...  Even if she had never met Harry in my opinion Susan was destined to die by some supernatural means or another simply because brave as she was and smart as she was, she was always in over her head.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on February 19, 2019, 11:29:53 PM
Quote
Susan didn't die because of Harry,  the seeds of her death were planted way back in Storm Front, long before Harry.  She liked to write about the supernatural, expose it, used Harry, though yeah came to love him, to gain fame and fortune in her career...  She gave lip service to believing what she saw and experienced but she never paid it enough respect, so like a great many dangerous things it bit her in the ass...  Even if she had never met Harry in my opinion Susan was destined to die by some supernatural means or another simply because brave as she was and smart as she was, she was always in over her head.

I agree with you. However, I'm fairly certain that Harry wouldn't.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 20, 2019, 02:14:34 AM
  Susan didn't die because of Harry,  the seeds of her death were planted way back in Storm Front, long before Harry.  She liked to write about the supernatural, expose it, used Harry, though yeah came to love him, to gain fame and fortune in her career...  She gave lip service to believing what she saw and experienced but she never paid it enough respect, so like a great many dangerous things it bit her in the ass...  Even if she had never met Harry in my opinion Susan was destined to die by some supernatural means or another simply because brave as she was and smart as she was, she was always in over her head.

If she never got involved with Harry, she may very well never have had the chance to get involved enough with the supernatural to get killed. Or she could have learned about them slow enough to respect the danger. Harry gave her access.

If she hadn't had a child with Harry, she could have continued to fight the Red Court at arms length instead of a direct confrontation.

Susan is at fault for what happened to her in Grave Peril. She was stupid to ignore Harry saying it was dangerous. The woman who replaced Susan hasn't gotten into any serious trouble in part because Harry keeps her at arms length because of what happened with Susan.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Snark Knight on February 20, 2019, 02:45:35 AM
The other thread on Michael and lies reminded me of something that's been bothering me since Skin Game. When he confesses to Michael what happened at Chichen Itza, does Harry intentionally lie about Martin having enraged Susan with knowledge of his betrayal when in fact Harry forced her to face that and thus set off her rage, leading to her death? Or, worse, is he lying to himself, possibly with the help of the mantle, and so he remembers the events in a way that makes him seem slightly less guilty? Is Harry ashamed of having weaponized Susan's condition in that moment, but craving Michael's approval and forgiveness, or has he insulated himself from what he did? I was really surprised that he didn't tell Michael the truth later in the book, forcing a moment of soul searching in Michael; that doesn't happen, so I'm not certain how to read his version of things.

Much as Harry jumped on helping him implement it out of necessity at the last moment, it was still Martin's plan that Susan should kill him and turn. Harry caught that in the soulgaze with Martin; that why he asked Martin how the Reds found Maggie.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on February 20, 2019, 03:50:23 AM
Quote
Much as Harry jumped on helping him implement it out of necessity at the last moment, it was still Martin's plan that Susan should kill him and turn. Harry caught that in the soulgaze with Martin; that why he asked Martin how the Reds found Maggie.

As I remember it, Harry realized what Martin's plan was after he had independently made the choices that allowed it to work.

Also, I personally think that Martin could not possibly have planned things that specifically, and that his actual plan was just to put Harry in a position where he had to use the bloodline curse on the Reds rather than necessarily that he would manipulate Susan into turning. I feel that if Susan hadn't had Amorrachius, then there would be too much chance of Susan dying/not getting as far, and that Martin couldn't reasonably have planned for her getting Amorrachius.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 20, 2019, 12:52:44 PM
As I remember it, Harry realized what Martin's plan was after he had independently made the choices that allowed it to work.

Also, I personally think that Martin could not possibly have planned things that specifically, and that his actual plan was just to put Harry in a position where he had to use the bloodline curse on the Reds rather than necessarily that he would manipulate Susan into turning. I feel that if Susan hadn't had Amorrachius, then there would be too much chance of Susan dying/not getting as far, and that Martin couldn't reasonably have planned for her getting Amorrachius.

Martin was a double agent, it was him who planned the kidnapping of little Maggie in the first place..
Martin had calculated this moment for a couple of centuries, he maneuvered both sides to eventually bring them to the moment when Harry reversed the blood curse thus bringing an end to the Reds...  The flaw in all of his plans was he underestimated Harry and disregarded Susan..  Harry saw it and it desperation revealed all of Martin's treachery to her, which in turn set her off, to kill Martin, to turn, to be killed by Harry, thus setting off the blood curse..  In a way Martin did achieve his goal, the Red Court had been brought down.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 20, 2019, 09:03:41 PM
Martin probably planned on turning and being the sacrifice.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on February 21, 2019, 12:51:11 AM
Quote
Martin probably planned on turning and being the sacrifice.

This.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Talby16 on February 21, 2019, 09:46:43 PM
Martin probably planned on turning and being the sacrifice.

Precisely. In the beginning he had no way of knowing that the bloodline curse came into play. His goal was most likely to keep the war ongoing and keep the WC involved so that the maximum amount of damage would be done to the Reds. At some point he learned of this plan and thought of how awesome it would be to wipe all the Reds out. I fully agree that his first plan was to turn himself and force Harry to kill him wiping out the Reds. Circumstances made it more feasible to insert Susan in his role.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Talby16 on February 21, 2019, 10:11:07 PM
I agree with that Harry took the best, perhaps only, overall option. Harry did manipulate Susan. I don't think he needed to.

Susan probably wasn't going to get the chance to watch anyone die. Once Maggie died, Susan would too.

It doesn't matter whether or not we think Harry did a terrible thing at Chichen Itza. Harry does. People who survive accidents that were in no way there fault often feel guilty. Susan died because of Harry, one way or another. (I mean that in a cause and effect sort of way, not morally). He's going to feel guilty and blame himself. That's Harry.

Excellent post. I completely agree. In the end, however Harry actually remembers the incident or chooses to remember the incident pales in comparison to the guilt he feels about Susan's fate. At that moment, besides that altar, I think he took the only action he could have to save Maggie. After that, he could have let his former love live as a monster or have her death mean something. Despite virtually having no choice with regards to Susan's fate he still feels guilt because that is Harry.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Talby16 on February 21, 2019, 10:19:11 PM
  Susan didn't die because of Harry,  the seeds of her death were planted way back in Storm Front, long before Harry.  She liked to write about the supernatural, expose it, used Harry, though yeah came to love him, to gain fame and fortune in her career...  She gave lip service to believing what she saw and experienced but she never paid it enough respect, so like a great many dangerous things it bit her in the ass...  Even if she had never met Harry in my opinion Susan was destined to die by some supernatural means or another simply because brave as she was and smart as she was, she was always in over her head.
If she never got involved with Harry, she may very well never have had the chance to get involved enough with the supernatural to get killed. Or she could have learned about them slow enough to respect the danger. Harry gave her access.

If she hadn't had a child with Harry, she could have continued to fight the Red Court at arms length instead of a direct confrontation.

Susan is at fault for what happened to her in Grave Peril[/i]. She was stupid to ignore Harry saying it was dangerous. The woman who replaced Susan hasn't gotten into any serious trouble in part because Harry keeps her at arms length because of what happened with Susan.

Susan is a tragic character due to her fate, but I think that her end definitely overshadows the choices she made that put her in that position in the eyes of some readers (as illustrated by the above posts). One of the biggest decisions (that I disagree with) was her choice of where Maggie should grow up. I can see her concerns about the safety around Harry, but she thought the better alternative was a family she personally knew within the Red's sphere of influence. She joined the Fellowship and was an active fighter against the Reds and a known associate of their greatest enemy. She knew that Maggie would be a target because of her parentage and didn't take any more precautions than putting her with friends.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 21, 2019, 10:48:44 PM
he still feels guilt because that is Harry.

Exactly.


Susan is a tragic character due to her fate, but I think that her end definitely overshadows the choices she made that put her in that position in the eyes of some readers (as illustrated by the above posts). One of the biggest decisions (that I disagree with) was her choice of where Maggie should grow up. I can see her concerns about the safety around Harry, but she thought the better alternative was a family she personally knew within the Red's sphere of influence. She joined the Fellowship and was an active fighter against the Reds and a known associate of their greatest enemy. She knew that Maggie would be a target because of her parentage and didn't take any more precautions than putting her with friends.

I never even thought about that angle.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 21, 2019, 11:02:55 PM
Quote
Susan is a tragic character due to her fate, but I think that her end definitely overshadows the choices she made that put her in that position in the eyes of some readers (as illustrated by the above posts). One of the biggest decisions (that I disagree with) was her choice of where Maggie should grow up. I can see her concerns about the safety around Harry, but she thought the better alternative was a family she personally knew within the Red's sphere of influence. She joined the Fellowship and was an active fighter against the Reds and a known associate of their greatest enemy. She knew that Maggie would be a target because of her parentage and didn't take any more precautions than putting her with friends.

I don't disagree with that.. However I still stand by what I first said about her being doomed from the start.  She could have gotten herself killed whether she had met Harry or not, because she never truly believe in or respected what she was "exposing" to the public..  Like her stealing then forging the invite to the vampire party then showing up with a Bram Stoker anti-vamp kit in her basket...  Yeah, they can be effective, but not against a whole den of them or what their agenda was, that is what Harry was trying to tell her.. In short she had no respect for what she was up against.. 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 22, 2019, 04:24:26 AM
However I still stand by what I first said about her being doomed from the start.

That's fair. I just think she was more 50/50 going to die of supernatural causes if Harry had kept her at arms length. Do you think Harry extended her life by several years by putting her in a position to have supernatural powers instead of dying horribly within a few years of Storm Front?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on February 22, 2019, 04:26:48 AM
Quote
hat's fair. I just think she was more 50/50 going to die of supernatural causes if Harry had kept her at arms length. Do you think Harry extended her life by several years by putting her in a position to have supernatural powers instead of dying horribly within a few years of Storm Front?

I'm not sure about Mira, but I definitely think so.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Bad Alias on February 22, 2019, 05:01:10 AM
I've compared Susan going to the party like going somewhere after a Navy Seal tells you he isn't willing to go there because it's too dangerous despite not doing it pissing the Navy off at him. How stupid can you be?

Point being, I can definitely see y'all's side of things.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 22, 2019, 12:09:42 PM
That's fair. I just think she was more 50/50 going to die of supernatural causes if Harry had kept her at arms length. Do you think Harry extended her life by several years by putting her in a position to have supernatural powers instead of dying horribly within a few years of Storm Front?
 
No,  what was the quality of that life?  Was she happy being a half turned vamp?  Yeah, she was part of the resistance, but it was that her true choice considering the alternatives? Did she seem to be a happy camper when she returned in Death Masks?   She couldn't even be a mother to her child because of it.   
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: forumghost on February 22, 2019, 12:26:33 PM
I've compared Susan going to the party like going somewhere after a Navy Seal tells you he isn't willing to go there because it's too dangerous despite not doing it pissing the Navy off at him. How stupid can you be?

Point being, I can definitely see y'all's side of things.

I mean I doubt Harry would see it that way, but it was 100% her fault and honestly Susan got off better then she deserved for that particular act of stupidity. I mean really:

Susan: "Harry, can I go with you to the Vampire Party?"
Harry: "No. Because I'm not going, because I'm a hamburger to those creatures and it's almost definitely a trap specifically set up to kill me by the host, that has a Grudge against me, personally."
Susan:"Imma steal your invite."

How thick can you get???
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Avernite on February 22, 2019, 06:35:22 PM

Susan is a tragic character due to her fate, but I think that her end definitely overshadows the choices she made that put her in that position in the eyes of some readers (as illustrated by the above posts). One of the biggest decisions (that I disagree with) was her choice of where Maggie should grow up. I can see her concerns about the safety around Harry, but she thought the better alternative was a family she personally knew within the Red's sphere of influence. She joined the Fellowship and was an active fighter against the Reds and a known associate of their greatest enemy. She knew that Maggie would be a target because of her parentage and didn't take any more precautions than putting her with friends.
Much as I think Harry and you have a point that it would probably have been safer to keep her somewhere with Harry - Susan was probably primarily thinking about being as much a mother to Maggie as she could be, and that required a foster home in South America.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on February 22, 2019, 10:00:20 PM
Much as I think Harry and you have a point that it would probably have been safer to keep her somewhere with Harry - Susan was probably primarily thinking about being as much a mother to Maggie as she could be, and that required a foster home in South America.

Problem, any connection no matter how distant that she maintained made her child vulnerable to being found and used by the Red Court.  Hell, Martin should have seen that and told her so, but either he didn't figuring he use this later or Susan was too hard headed to listen..  Even naming her Maggie telegraphed a connection that led back to Harry and Eb.   Better she had given birth and then consented to a blind adoption by someone in another country.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: TrueMonk on March 06, 2019, 09:07:16 PM
Skin game spoiler
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 07, 2019, 01:53:12 AM
Quote
Did anyone else consider the symmetry in Harry sacrificing Susan and Nico sacrificing Deirdre. Of course it is not the same, but it is not so different either.

Definitely! :)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 07, 2019, 01:58:59 PM
Skin game spoiler
(click to show/hide)

Not quite, apples to oranges, both fruit but very different...   Harry didn't sacrifice Susan to as you put it, save the world.. He did it to save his daughter,  he didn't sacrifice his daughter..  Also he didn't set up the curse that backfired on the Red King, the Red King did.  There is also evidence that Nic lied to his daughter as far as the future of her spirit, did she fully understand that Hades wasn't going to let it off as far as punishment goes? 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Avernite on March 14, 2019, 10:46:55 AM
Not quite, apples to oranges, both fruit but very different...   Harry didn't sacrifice Susan to as you put it, save the world.. He did it to save his daughter,  he didn't sacrifice his daughter..  Also he didn't set up the curse that backfired on the Red King, the Red King did.  There is also evidence that Nic lied to his daughter as far as the future of her spirit, did she fully understand that Hades wasn't going to let it off as far as punishment goes?
I'm not sure I see it that way.

Instead I think Nicodemus is specifically set up as a foil for Harry. Harry is not beyond making the hard calls, and often strays to dodgy, but always knows (except during Changes, and see how that struck back at him?). Nicodemus is not beyond making the hard calls, regularly strays to dodgy, but has a hard time knowing when he's being dodgy and when he's making the hard calls.

IF Nicodemus was truly saving the world with the sacrifice of Deirdre, rather than merely furthering a quest to power, I would say he has a claim to it simply being one of those hard calls. Harder than Harry's sacrifice of Susan, sure, but what is one daughter against all the children that will ever be?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 14, 2019, 12:02:21 PM
Quote
IF Nicodemus was truly saving the world with the sacrifice of Deirdre, rather than merely furthering a quest to power, I would say he has a claim to it simply being one of those hard calls. Harder than Harry's sacrifice of Susan, sure, but what is one daughter against all the children that will ever be?

As I said, both are fruit, but they are not the same.  The difference between your two examples is something called pre-planning.   Nic planned all along to sacrifice his daughter to get into the vault.  At the moment we do not know what his plans for the artifacts really are, just what he claimed to Harry, and we know Nic never lies, right?  Harry wasn't about to sacrifice his daughter, this is why he went to C.I. to save her, nor was it his plan to sacrifice Susan to save her, that came down to no real choices in the end.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 14, 2019, 01:50:07 PM
Quote
The difference between your two examples is something called pre-planning.   Nic planned all along to sacrifice his daughter to get into the vault.

This may be somewhat blurry. Harry may not have intended specifically to sacrifice Susan, but the whole "if the world burns because of what I do, then me and the kid will roast marshmallows" thing was pretty indicative that he was prepared to do something problematic.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 14, 2019, 06:38:04 PM
This may be somewhat blurry. Harry may not have intended specifically to sacrifice Susan, but the whole "if the world burns because of what I do, then me and the kid will roast marshmallows" thing was pretty indicative that he was prepared to do something problematic.

  It is also running at the mouth at what he'd be prepared to do, big difference between that and true pre-planning... Pre-planning means you are planning for what may happen on your mission..  Nic knew beforehand what was needed at the second gate, blood sacrifice, and coldly planned for it.. 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 14, 2019, 10:39:24 PM
Quote
It is also running at the mouth at what he'd be prepared to do, big difference between that and true pre-planning... Pre-planning means you are planning for what may happen on your mission..  Nic knew beforehand what was needed at the second gate, blood sacrifice, and coldly planned for it..

True. In my mind, the difference between what Nicodemus did and what Harry did is the difference between buying a gun, stalking someone to figure out the best time and place to kill them, and then following through; and buying a gun, deciding to bring it with you when you rob a house, and then shooting the homeowner when they come at you with their own weapon. The burglar may not have planned to murder anybody, but they accepted the possibility when they brought the gun with, and they'll still get charged with some degree of murder.

(Obviously, Harry had good intentions. But given we don't know what Nicodemus's long-term intentions are regarding the artifacts, I tend to consider it a non-issue when comparing the two.)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 15, 2019, 05:13:28 AM
True. In my mind, the difference between what Nicodemus did and what Harry did is the difference between buying a gun, stalking someone to figure out the best time and place to kill them, and then following through; and buying a gun, deciding to bring it with you when you rob a house, and then shooting the homeowner when they come at you with their own weapon. The burglar may not have planned to murder anybody, but they accepted the possibility when they brought the gun with, and they'll still get charged with some degree of murder.

(Obviously, Harry had good intentions. But given we don't know what Nicodemus's long-term intentions are regarding the artifacts, I tend to consider it a nonissue when comparing the two.)

Huge difference, the end may be the same, but there is a difference..  Oh and please give page and book so things can be read in context..

One of the come backs that Uriel had to your quote... Ghost Story page 458

Quote
It is one thing to say, 'Let the word burn.'  It is another to say, Let Molly burn."  The difference is all in a name.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 15, 2019, 11:26:09 AM
Quote
Huge difference, the end may be the same, but there is a difference..

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..

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

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.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 15, 2019, 01:37:55 PM
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.

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.

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.. 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 15, 2019, 01:55:22 PM
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?

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?

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.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 15, 2019, 02:12:33 PM
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.

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).

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...
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 15, 2019, 03:33:44 PM
Quote
Page please, book, please....

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?

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..

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.

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..

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.

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..

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...

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...

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.

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.)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 15, 2019, 05:11:08 PM
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).

Planning is everything....   That what Death Masks is all about, Nic knew very well what he was going
to bring about, and he had goals...   Yes, and this is why context is very important, forgive my poor spelling, but it doesn't change what I said... Also one tends to say a lot of things when one is upset or frustrated...

One might have been said in the emotion of the moment....  Let the world burn, I am going to do what I need to do to save my daughter...  However I do like the world and I do care for the people like Molly who live in it.. However I am upset..

Let the world burn because I really don't care about it and if little Maggie inherits ashes that's perfectly fine...

Let the world burn because I really hate it and want it to burn, saving my daughter is a good excuse....

Saying,  "let the world burn," really murder?  Now giving an old man the plague so he might infect a whole city or worse could be considered, committing...  Is there a difference between saying and committing?   







Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 15, 2019, 05:17:56 PM
Quote
IF Nicodemus was truly saving the world with the sacrifice of Deirdre, rather than merely furthering a quest to power, I would say he has a claim to it simply being one of those hard calls. Harder than Harry's sacrifice of Susan, sure, but what is one daughter against all the children that will ever be?

Oh I'd agree, but it is a matter of point of view isn't it?  Nic claims to be saving the world, but we have no clue as to what his vision of a saved world would be...   Despots have murdered for thousands of years and one of their common excuses for it is making the world safe....  The question then becomes for what or whom?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 15, 2019, 06:35:14 PM
Quote
Planning is everything....

No, planning is one component. I can plan meticulously how to blow up the White House, but if I don't then do so then I have done nothing wrong.

Quote
That what Death Masks is all about, Nic knew very well what he was going
to bring about, and he had goals...

This is why what Nicodemus did is the equivalent of (attempted) first degree murder.

Quote
Yes, and this is why context is very important,

If it were important, you would have provided it. If you can't actually refute my argument, feel free to say so rather than bringing up specious and unsupported points.

Quote
forgive my poor spelling, but it doesn't change what I said...

I never claimed it did.

Quote
One might have been said in the emotion of the moment....  Let the world burn, I am going to do what I need to do to save my daughter...  However I do like the world and I do care for the people like Molly who live in it.. However I am upset..

Let the world burn because I really don't care about it and if little Maggie inherits ashes that's perfectly fine...

Let the world burn because I really hate it and want it to burn, saving my daughter is a good excuse....

Saying,  "let the world burn," really murder? Now giving an old man the plague so he might infect a whole city or worse could be considered, committing...  Is there a difference between saying and committing?   

If all he did was say it, no. The issue is that he said "let the world burn," and then followed through on that.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: peregrine on March 15, 2019, 09:08:16 PM
But later, we see the difference between "let the world burn" and "let Molly burn."

He said that, and he did that, but that's because he was being an idiot without really thinking about what that would actually mean.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 15, 2019, 09:16:00 PM
Cut to the chase.  Had Harry learned basic reproductive physiology there would have been no Maggie to have to rescue. This would be first cause.  If Susan had to die it was this choice, made by the two of them, that set it up.  Once there, given the setup, it would have been morally suspect if he hadn't killed Susan.
But later, we see the difference between "let the world burn" and "let Molly burn."

He said that, and he did that, but that's because he was being an idiot without really thinking about what that would actually mean.
Precisely!
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 15, 2019, 09:40:24 PM
But later, we see the difference between "let the world burn" and "let Molly burn."

He said that, and he did that, but that's because he was being an idiot without really thinking about what that would actually mean.

Precisely, amen...   Nor did he really act upon that...  What happened in the aftermath of C.I. wasn't because Harry really intended for the world to burn or failed to care if it did..  If anyone is to blame it is the Red King who set the whole thing up in the first place.  He never thought through the idea that both Harry and Eb were first rate wizards and if anyone one could foil his plans for revenge, they could.  Nor did he plan on the child's mother being there and willing to give up her life, which saved her child and wiped out the Red Court..  Also before this all went down there was no one warning Harry that if he succeeds in wiping out the Red Court some badder asses would step in to take up the slack.. 
Quote
Cut to the chase.  Had Harry learned basic reproductive physiology there would have been no Maggie to have to rescue. This would be first cause.  If Susan had to die it was this choice, made by the two of them, that set it up.  Once there, given the setup, it would have been morally suspect if he hadn't killed Susan.

Actually I believe he had, but to be fair between the vamp pheromone laced saliva that even half vamp Susan gave off at the time and his own physically weakened condition, plus the hots they still felt for one another, the manual on how to put on a condom kind of went out the window...   Like most sex, it was a mutual thing, Susan wasn't demanding protection either at that point... Though to be fair, she wasn't herself either because of the vamp influence...
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 15, 2019, 11:19:50 PM
They weren't two 16 year olds in back of the minivan.  That seven minutes cost one family everything, and almost destroyed Molly.  Not to mention all of the human sacrifices that took place to set up the ritual.  And if memory serves me correctly Harry had to plan to make a restraint that could hold Susan(Death Masks).  Something about unicorn hair.  Original idea courtesy of Molly, I believe, who suggests using handcuffs.  And Harry had nightmares that revolved around what might happen, thus the rope.

Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 16, 2019, 12:32:10 AM
Quote
But later, we see the difference between "let the world burn" and "let Molly burn."

He said that, and he did that, but that's because he was being an idiot without really thinking about what that would actually mean.

Well, yes. But on the other hand, if it was the only way to save his daughter then I'm not remarkably convinced he wouldn't do the same again, so...

Quote
Precisely, amen...   Nor did he really act upon that...

What? He was told specifically that if he kept pushing this, he might cause a disaster, and then proceeded to keep pushing until he caused a disaster. How is that not acting upon what he said? He didn't say "I'm going to set out to destroy the world," he said, "I'm going to rescue my daughter no matter what the consequences are."

Quote
What happened in the aftermath of C.I. wasn't because Harry really intended for the world to burn or failed to care if it did..  If anyone is to blame it is the Red King who set the whole thing up in the first place.  He never thought through the idea that both Harry and Eb were first rate wizards and if anyone one could foil his plans for revenge, they could.  Nor did he plan on the child's mother being there and willing to give up her life, which saved her child and wiped out the Red Court..

Victim blaming much? The Red King is responsible for a lot of awful things, but I don't think we can legitimately say that he was 100% responsible for the genocide of his own species. I mean, Harry did have other options: both Susan and the Eebs pointed them out. He just objected to them.

Quote
Also before this all went down there was no one warning Harry that if he succeeds in wiping out the Red Court some badder asses would step in to take up the slack.. 

Um, yes there was. Harry's "let the world burn" thing was said directly in response to Murphy warning him that if he kept pushing then really bad things might happen. He might not have known the specifics, but he was warned as to the risks.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: forumghost on March 16, 2019, 12:11:20 PM
Victim blaming much? The Red King is responsible for a lot of awful things, but I don't think we can legitimately say that he was 100% responsible for the genocide of his own species. I mean, Harry did have other options: both Susan and the Eebs pointed them out. He just objected to them.

I mean "Victim Blaming" seems like a questionable way to refer to someone having kidnapping a Girl and attempting to murder her entire family backfire on him.

And Harry's only other 'option' was to give up his daughter to the vampires and let them familicide him. What a great choice, I can't imagine why he didn't go for it.

Harry's plan at Chicken Pizza was to go out there, publicly call out Arianna to force a fight, kill her, take Maggie and go.

It was the Red King that forced his hand because "I R GR8 VMPYR, I NO NEED DEAL WID DRT WZRD!!!!!"
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 16, 2019, 01:00:24 PM
Quote
I mean "Victim Blaming" seems like a questionable way to refer to someone having kidnapping a Girl and attempting to murder her entire family backfire on him.

I'm not saying that what he did wasn't awful, just that he isn't the only one responsible for what happened: Arianna, Martin, Susan, and Harry all have some responsibility as well.

Quote
And Harry's only other 'option' was to give up his daughter to the vampires and let them familicide him. What a great choice, I can't imagine why he didn't go for it.

Susan pointed out in the beginning that Harry had enough allies to potentially force the Red King to return his daughter for a big enough bribe, and Harry didn't contradict her--he just objected to that option because he didn't want to pay the Red King off. (At least, this is how I remember it going. I don't have my book with me, so I can't check.)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 16, 2019, 05:10:41 PM
They weren't two 16 year olds in back of the minivan.  That seven minutes cost one family everything, and almost destroyed Molly.  Not to mention all of the human sacrifices that took place to set up the ritual.  And if memory serves me correctly Harry had to plan to make a restraint that could hold Susan(Death Masks).  Something about unicorn hair.  Original idea courtesy of Molly, I believe, who suggests using handcuffs.  And Harry had nightmares that revolved around what might happen, thus the rope.

Yeah, he was afraid she'd eat him..  I agree they weren't sixteen, but do not underestimate the power of the vamp venom...  Fear of being killed trumps responsible birth control I think, so rope over condom..  No excuses though I agree, but age had nothing to do with it, lots of "adults" turn up pregnant.   I doubt that either one of them even thought of the possibility that she might get pregnant, it wasn't their first sexual encounter after all..  So either they were very lucky before she was half turned and went away, or at least one of them was being responsible.. 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 16, 2019, 08:21:09 PM
This is a direct response to the moral claims and the idea of symmetry between Harry and Nic.  That people get get together and make babies is no surprise to me, but if you do it, then irrespective of why or how, you own it.  Everything that happens at Chichen Itza is on Harry and Susan.  Had there been no child, there could have been no blood curse as portrayed in the book.  At least Nic has a plan, however twisted it appears to be.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: TrueMonk on March 16, 2019, 09:00:35 PM
I really do not understand the argument about the act of them having a baby meaning that they are responsible. So two people love each other. They get a baby. A horrible monster kidnaps the baby and wants to use it for a bloodline curse.

How does that become the parents fault? Yes there was some details in between with Harry not knowing he was a father and the kid not living with either of them. But how does it make them more responsible for the whole situation at C.I. than if they had been living together (Susan, Harry and Maggy in Chicago)? If it does not thenn by your arguments every parent who has their child kidnapped and used for a blood curse is somehow responsible?

Also I get that the ideal scenario would be to post quotes and page numbers to support theories and ideas. But I listen to the books. So if I had to do that I would just have to stop posting on the boards (or buy the books only for the purpose of posting here and that is not going to happen)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 16, 2019, 11:12:21 PM
It's one thing for Susan and Harry to say, let's have a child, and then plan for that.  It's an all together different thing to have a child by accident. In Harry and Susan's case, she is a half turned vampire involved in a guerilla war and Harry is a wizard who has been attacked multiple times at his home.  It is so dangerous for the child, that Susan fosters her out.  Before everything is said and done, the foster family is brutally murdered.  And perhaps hundreds are killed at CI as the Reds prepare the curse. 

The events of the book were generally foreseeable. Not the bloodline curse specifically, but that the Reds would use the child in some fashion if they became aware of her.  Harry after the event hides her from the White Council for fear that they would use her as well.  And Harry has hid the fact of the existence of his brother for the same reasons.  Harry got careless about risks he was aware of and others had to pay.  That doesn't make him evil, but he can't escape the responsibility.

On the subject of page numbers and quotes, use them if you have them, but don't sweat it if you don't.  Do the best you can do and have fun.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 17, 2019, 01:50:54 AM
Quote
It's one thing for Susan and Harry to say, let's have a child, and then plan for that.  It's an all together different thing to have a child by accident. In Harry and Susan's case, she is a half turned vampire involved in a guerilla war and Harry is a wizard who has been attacked multiple times at his home.  It is so dangerous for the child, that Susan fosters her out.  Before everything is said and done, the foster family is brutally murdered.  And perhaps hundreds are killed at CI as the Reds prepare the curse. 

The events of the book were generally foreseeable. Not the bloodline curse specifically, but that the Reds would use the child in some fashion if they became aware of her.  Harry after the event hides her from the White Council for fear that they would use her as well.  And Harry has hid the fact of the existence of his brother for the same reasons.  Harry got careless about risks he was aware of and others had to pay.  That doesn't make him evil, but he can't escape the responsibility.

I think it's more Susan's fault than Harry's. Sure, he got careless, but he had every reason to expect that if Susan did get pregnant, she would tell him. He might have some responsibility, but I'd give him 10% to Susan's 90%.

How he reacted to his daughter being in danger is a different issue.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 17, 2019, 03:31:42 PM
Quote
It's one thing for Susan and Harry to say, let's have a child, and then plan for that.  It's an all together different thing to have a child by accident. In Harry and Susan's case, she is a half turned vampire involved in a guerilla war and Harry is a wizard who has been attacked multiple times at his home.  It is so dangerous for the child, that Susan fosters her out.  Before everything is said and done, the foster family is brutally murdered.  And perhaps hundreds are killed at CI as the Reds prepare the curse. 

Child by accident is neither here nor there....  It happens every day,  then the best is made of it... I don't agree with Susan's decisions as to not telling Harry etc., though appearing rational on the surface, from her attitude when she told him the origin sounded more like bitterness, not for getting pregnant so much as her situation which is another story... However having said that, let's not blame the victims here... It was the Red King who did the kidnapping and the murdering, not Harry or Susan....  What is more it was Eb he was trying to kill in revenge, not Harry..  It was Martin who was playing double agent in the first place and let the Red King know where little Maggie was... 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 17, 2019, 04:54:53 PM
@nadia.skylark
Think about what you wrote.  Both parties are warned about just this thing multiple times over the course of the story line.  Practically speaking, trying to apportion blame to them separately is  foolish. 

@Mira
Quote
However having said that, let's not blame the victims here
It kinda puts the lie to "With great power, comes great responsibility.", don't ya think?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 17, 2019, 05:37:28 PM
Quote
Think about what you wrote.  Both parties are warned about just this thing multiple times over the course of the story line.  Practically speaking, trying to apportion blame to them separately is  foolish. 

I have thought about what I wrote. From what I understand of what you've said, you are saying that Harry bears responsibility for what happened due to him having a daughter because he was careless about birth control. What I am saying is that even though he was careless, things would not have happened the way they did if Harry had known about his daughter. Therefore, more blame should be apportioned to the person who made the decision not to tell him than to the people being careless, because the carelessness was only a small part of the issue.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 17, 2019, 07:33:23 PM
Quote
It kinda puts the lie to "With great power, comes great responsibility.", don't ya think?

Perhaps you need to go back to the scene when this all happened in the first place?   Maybe it should all go under the heading of unplanned sex, sub-heading, unplanned sex when you are not thinking straight, i.e. wounded, almost killed, drunken by vamp venom,  sub-sub-heading of having unplanned sex with someone you truly love who you haven't seen in ages who could kill you during the sex act....   The thought of birth control apparently was way down the list for both parties...   I don't recall Susan asking or insisting on Harry wearing a condom, nor Harry replying with the line that his pleasure is better if he doesn't wear anything, nor her refusing sex if he didn't.. Nor him asking her if she was on the pill or wearing any device for birth control, nor refusing to do anything if she wasn't..  Looks to me like the irresponsibility was mutual..
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: TrueMonk on March 17, 2019, 08:22:12 PM
I think I can go so far as to say that if you are not ready to have kids, you should make sure you don't have any. So the parents are responsible for harm that comes to the kid and harm that comes from the kid. For example if Maggie had turned warlock. Also following your great power great responsibility argument.
But at any point in Harry's life from now and untill he is dead he will have dangerous enemies. Does that mean he should never have kids? Should Ebenezer (or any other combat active wizard) never have had any?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 17, 2019, 08:50:42 PM
I am not apportioning culpability, I'm making a moral statement.  Both Harry and Susan, by the precepts that Harry espouses, should have maintained a higher standard.  In sports they would call Maggie an unforced error.  Harry has powerful enemies and the very act of being around him puts you at hazard.  He can't afford to be the guy that forgets to put on a raincoat because of a little vampire venom.
I think I can go so far as to say that if you are not ready to have kids, you should make sure you don't have any. So the parents are responsible for harm that comes to the kid and harm that comes from the kid. For example if Maggie had turned warlock. Also following your great power great responsibility argument.
But at any point in Harry's life from now and untill he is dead he will have dangerous enemies. Does that mean he should never have kids? Should Ebenezer (or any other combat active wizard) never have had any?
That's impossible to say, each individual has to make that decision.  But if you make a conscious choice to have a child, you will at least be able to plan for the risks, as far as is possible.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Avernite on March 17, 2019, 09:19:44 PM
I am not apportioning culpability, I'm making a moral statement.  Both Harry and Susan, by the precepts that Harry espouses, should have maintained a higher standard.  In sports they would call Maggie an unforced error.  Harry has powerful enemies and the very act of being around him puts you at hazard.  He can't afford to be the guy that forgets to put on a raincoat because of a little vampire venom.
Calling Maggie an unforced error seems to be a rather strong judgement by itself. You might (to stick with the sports analogies) also call her a lucky goal instead.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 17, 2019, 09:50:15 PM
I am not apportioning culpability, I'm making a moral statement.  Both Harry and Susan, by the precepts that Harry espouses, should have maintained a higher standard.  In sports they would call Maggie an unforced error.  Harry has powerful enemies and the very act of being around him puts you at hazard.  He can't afford to be the guy that forgets to put on a raincoat because of a little vampire venom.That's impossible to say, each individual has to make that decision.  But if you make a conscious choice to have a child, you will at least be able to plan for the risks, as far as is possible.

Under normal circumstances you wouldn't get much argument... But Maggie wasn't conceived under normal circumstances.. Harry was wounded, the scent of his blood aroused Susan's hunger both for Harry's blood and sex... In turn her venom had a hypnotic effect on Harry sexually arousing him, not to the point where he was about to totally surrender his life for sex, but he wasn't in any shape to fight it either..  Do not project rational or moral judgement onto this scene, it isn't fair..   
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 17, 2019, 10:31:00 PM
Calling Maggie an unforced error seems to be a rather strong judgement by itself. You might (to stick with the sports analogies) also call her a lucky goal instead.
Unless you of course were the foster parents and their children.
Do not project rational or moral judgement onto this scene, it isn't fair.   
All right. 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: TrueMonk on March 17, 2019, 11:04:58 PM
I dont think we will get any further in regards to Maggie.
But in regards to Diedre/Susan symmetry. As I remember it Harry also lied by indicating she would be protected from the knife by her fairy armor, even though he she would not be. That does sound a bit like Nic saying the enemy cannot get you here.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 18, 2019, 12:12:26 AM
Quote
But in regards to Diedre/Susan symmetry. As I remember it Harry also lied by indicating she would be protected from the knife by her fairy armor, even though he she would not be. That does sound a bit like Nic saying the enemy cannot get you here.

Definitely :)
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: peregrine on March 18, 2019, 01:46:34 AM
That does sound a bit like Nic saying the enemy cannot get you here.
For that, I chalk it up to Nic just being wrong.  Harry bought what Nic said as well, before it was corrected for him, Deirdre most likely had much the same information Nic did, she was a true believer from everything we saw, and could very well have gone along with it even if she had known better.  I figure he really did think that she wouldn't be punished for all the horrors that she committed.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 18, 2019, 04:34:08 AM
Quote
For that, I chalk it up to Nic just being wrong.  Harry bought what Nic said as well, before it was corrected for him, Deirdre most likely had much the same information Nic did, she was a true believer from everything we saw, and could very well have gone along with it even if she had known better.  I figure he really did think that she wouldn't be punished for all the horrors that she committed.

That seems extraordinarily unlikely. The Greek myths are not exactly unknown even today, and given that when Nicodemus was alive the Greek/Roman pantheon was being actively worshipped...
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 18, 2019, 11:46:15 AM
For that, I chalk it up to Nic just being wrong.  Harry bought what Nic said as well, before it was corrected for him, Deirdre most likely had much the same information Nic did, she was a true believer from everything we saw, and could very well have gone along with it even if she had known better.  I figure he really did think that she wouldn't be punished for all the horrors that she committed.
Yes, include the Fallen that inhabited the coin she held as well...  To it she was no different that any other host to be used until he or she died.  It apparently knew or counted on somehow turning up again to be picked up by another host...

Quote
But in regards to Diedre/Susan symmetry. As I remember it Harry also lied by indicating she would be protected from the knife by her fairy armor, even though he she would not be. That does sound a bit like Nic saying the enemy cannot get you here.

Does he say that?  Because it wasn't her armor that failed her, after Susan turned her throat was cut, that wasn't protected by armor, nor if I remember correctly was she wounded through her armor before she turned.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 18, 2019, 01:55:15 PM
Here is the passage  with Susan. 
Quote from: Changes
I focused my thoughts and sent them to Susan. Susan! Think! Who knew who the baby’s father was? Who could have told them?
Her lips peeled away from her teeth.

His knife can’t hurt you, I thought, though I knew damned well that no faerie magic could blithely ignore the touch of steel.

“Martin,” Susan said, her voice low and very quiet. “Did you tell them about Maggie?”
He closed his eyes, but his voice was steady. “Yes.”

Susan Rodriguez lost her mind.

One instant she was a prisoner, and the next she had twisted like an eel, too swiftly to be easily seen. Martin’s machete opened up a long cut on her throat, but she paid as little attention to it as a thorn scratch gained while hiking.

Martin raised a hand to block the strike he thought was coming—and it was useless, because Susan didn’t go after him swinging.

Instead, her eyes full of darkness and rage, her mouth opened in a scream that showed her extended fangs, she went for his throat.
Consider Nic's statement in it's context.  Whatever she might suffer under Hades, had she died anywhere else her fate would would have left her in the hands of the White God for judgement. And that judgement would be irrevocable and final.  On the other hand if Nic's plan would grant him the power to challenge Hades at some point he could have Deirdre back.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 18, 2019, 02:42:10 PM
Quote
His knife can’t hurt you, I thought, though I knew damned well that no faerie magic could blithely ignore the touch of steel.

Thank you for the quote and the context, but I don't think it is the same..  Harry sounded conflicted. Here is what I am wondering, was he sending mixed messages to Susan in that moment? Is he so disciplined mentally that he could mentally send a lie while at the same time believing something totally different?    I think he sent that message with his doubts but it made no difference to Susan, she attacked anyway in her rage and she too wanted to save her daughter... Her own safety was the last thing she was worried about in that moment...  Actually it was kind of dumb really for Harry to even suggest that her armor would protect her, both knew damn well what would happen if she attacked, what did happen, she turned...

Quote
Consider Nic's statement in it's context.  Whatever she might suffer under Hades, had she died anywhere else her fate would would have left her in the hands of the White God for judgement. And that judgement would be irrevocable and final.  On the other hand if Nic's plan would grant him the power to challenge Hades at some point he could have Deirdre back.

Yes, no argument there, but that is my point about not just Deirdre, but Nic being taken in by the Fallen and being used by them...  I don't think either of them ever thought that she could be resurrected, that isn't what Nic was thinking... His reassurance to her was her soul wouldn't be tormented and punished for her crimes in Hades to the extent it would be on Judgement Day when all souls will be judged..  I have to go back and read, but I think he assured her that her soul couldn't be touched, thus she'd escape the ultimate punishments.  Harry, if I remember correctly sort of bought this up in his visit, but then Hades, himself disabused him of that idea..  It was that truth that Harry tried to use to try and reach Nic about what he had been done... And in fact used....
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 18, 2019, 03:08:57 PM
Quote
Thank you for the quote and the context, but I don't think it is the same..  Harry sounded conflicted. Here is what I am wondering, was he sending mixed messages to Susan in that moment? Is he so disciplined mentally that he could mentally send a lie while at the same time believing something totally different?    I think he sent that message with his doubts but it made no difference to Susan, she attacked anyway in her rage and she too wanted to save her daughter... Her own safety was the last thing she was worried about in that moment...  Actually it was kind of dumb really for Harry to even suggest that her armor would protect her, both knew damn well what would happen if she attacked, what did happen, she turned...

I'm not sure Harry was sending anything but words. There's a part in White Night that shows more clearly how his communication spell works--when he's trying to get in touch with Elaine. If I remember correctly, they could see each other and speak to each other, but I don't think there was any emotional transference (if someone could quote this bit, it would be great. I don't have my books with me).
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 18, 2019, 04:55:32 PM
Nic says.
Quote from: Skin Game
You will be safe from the Enemy here.
Followed somewhat later by a strange exchange. With Deirdre saying
Quote from: Skin Game
"I love you, father."  Nicodemus's rough voice cracked a little.  "I know," he said, very gently. "And that is the problem."
Note the capitalization of the word enemy in the first quotation. What is protecting Susan in an enchantment on her skin.
Quote from: Changes
I grasped for the minor magic, fighting to pull it together through the dragging chains of the wills of the Lords of Outer Night, and cast my thought at Susan as clearly as I could. He doesn’t know all of it, I sent to her desperately. He doesn’t know about the enchantment protecting your skin. He only knows about the cloak because he saw you use it when we got here.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 18, 2019, 06:04:16 PM
Quote
    I grasped for the minor magic, fighting to pull it together through the dragging chains of the wills of the Lords of Outer Night, and cast my thought at Susan as clearly as I could. He doesn’t know all of it, I sent to her desperately. He doesn’t know about the enchantment protecting your skin. He only knows about the cloak because he saw you use it when we got here.

You mean Changes don't you?   Susan was dead as of Skin Game..  But rereading it I think it is unclear, I don't think Harry was talking about armor that Susan was wearing, but himself..

A few paragraphs up Harry says  on page 415  About the Red King, remember now it was Harry who Lea clothed in armor and he felt silly and refused to wear the helmet..

Quote
He took the knife from my belt, smiling, and moved toward the alter--my daughter.

Harry becomes desperate.... To me it seems like he wants to attack the Red King, but he knows it is useless.

Then he says, talking to himself.  Alternatively trying to get Susan to think as to who knew who Maggie's father was..
Then he says the bit about the knife cannot you, trying to reassure himself, but at the same time knowing damn well that steel will penetrate fae armor.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 18, 2019, 06:53:09 PM
Corrected quote attribution.
Quote from: Changes
His knife can’t hurt you, I thought, though I knew damned well that no faerie magic could blithely ignore the touch of steel.
Italics indicate Harry thinking at Susan.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 18, 2019, 10:59:11 PM
Corrected quote attribution.Italics indicate Harry thinking at Susan.

I am not so sure of that, I think it can go either way...  Interestingly Lea dressed her in  leathers, it really wasn't classic armor, though she demoed that it was bullet proof she never warned against iron knives, spears etc... Harry didn't either in fairness...  However though Martin had a machete and could have slashed her before she ripped his throat out... He didn't..  Either he didn't know about the iron and fae thing, or Susan turning was part of his plan...  Come to think of it, since the Red King ripped the knife he was going to use on little Maggie from Harry's belt, why didn't he stab Harry while he was at it?  Or was he also totally stupid on the subject of iron and the fae.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 19, 2019, 12:39:49 AM
In terms of Changes I'm just supplying the text, as written.  How you interpret it is up to you, it seems straightforward to me. 

In terms of the quotes about Nicodemus, it's obvious to me that the White God is the Enemy.  What that might mean for Deirdre is unknown.  Is it better than what Hades might have in mind? Your guess is as good as mine.

Speaking to symmetry, there is the obvious symmetry of two women being sacrificed by their male partners, which is mildly creepy.  In terms of purpose I know one and I couldn't begin to guess the other.  So unless enlightened by Jim there isn't much in the text to support any conclusions.

Some interesting questions for which I have no answers, are.  If Satan controls Hell and the Denarians are in league with him, what does that imply as regards Deirdre had she died outside of Hades domain?  Did she face perma death versus whatever weirdness Hades might dream up.


Quote from: nadia.skylark
If I remember correctly, they could see each other and speak to each other, but I don't think there was any emotional transference (if someone could quote this bit, it would be great. I don't have my books with me).
Here you go.
Quote
There was a shocked silence, and then Elaine's thought-voice said, more clearly, Harry?
And her lips moved, and the not-Elaine voice said, "What the hell?"
Elaine's eyes snapped to mine, suddenly meeting them, and the room around her clarified into crystalline relief.
She was in the bathroom of the hotel, in the tub, naked in the bath.
The air was thick with steam. She was bleeding from a broad cut across one wrist. The water was red. Her face was god-awful pale, but her eyes weren't fogged over and hazed out. Not yet.
Elaine! I thundered. You are under a psychic attack! Priscilla is the Skavis!
Elaine's eyes widened.
Someone slapped me hard on the face and screamed, "Harry!"
The world flew sideways and expanded in a rush of motion and sound as my denied senses came crashing back in upon me. The Beetle was sitting sideways across several parking spaces in the motel's little lot, both doors open, and Murphy, gun in one hand, had a hold of my duster with the other and was shaking me hard. "Harry! Get up!"
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 19, 2019, 03:08:45 AM
Quote
Come to think of it, since the Red King ripped the knife he was going to use on little Maggie from Harry's belt, why didn't he stab Harry while he was at it?  Or was he also totally stupid on the subject of iron and the fae.

Because that knife was obsidian, not iron.

Quote
Here you go.

Thanks! This quote seems to make it clear that what is conveyed is words, plus an image of the person and where they are. Based on that, I'd say that any of Harry's feelings and thoughts not phrased as dialog would not have been transmitted to Susan.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 19, 2019, 01:22:10 PM
Quote
In terms of the quotes about Nicodemus, it's obvious to me that the White God is the Enemy.  What that might mean for Deirdre is unknown.  Is it better than what Hades might have in mind? Your guess is as good as mine.

Oh I think that is obvious to everyone who reads the books.  What that means to Deirdre is what Harry would have faced had he chosen to move on in Ghost Story, what comes next...  As Uriel
told him on page 454 in Ghost Story..
Quote
"The part involving words like forever,eternity, and judgement."

Now one could argue if Nic's side wins she won't face that, but that is yet to be determined... In the meantime though, it seems like Nic and Deirdre were under the impression that she wouldn't be punished quite so harshly in Hades and would be safe from final judgement if they lose..  Seems like both feared that judgement more than anything that could happen to her soul in Hades...  However
when Harry asked Hades about her, his reply was for Harry to go back and reread the classics, he also implied that she'd stay in his care in any case..

Harry concluded 349 Skin Game

Quote
I didn't know what would happen to Deirdre--but I knew she wasn't going to get off light.

The Hell of Satan and Hades controlled by Hades are two different places...  Hades is the realm of the dead, all the dead travel there, a place of reward for a good life as well as a place of punishment for those who didn't live one.
 Deirdre did die in the Realm of Hades, under his jurisdiction, so he gets to deal with her.... If she had died some place else, then she'd face what Uriel had told Harry... Apparently she and Nic feared the latter more than the former, they may have been wrong there...

Deirdre is Nic's daugher, Susan was Harry lover, not the same at all...  Technically she was no longer Susan when Harry killed her, otherwise the reverse spell wouldn't have worked..  Deirdre was still herself when Nic killed her.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 19, 2019, 05:46:42 PM
Quote
Oh I think that is obvious to everyone who reads the books.

Nope! There's a bunch of people who think that he was referring to Nemesis there (and they might be right).

Quote
Deirdre is Nic's daugher, Susan was Harry lover, not the same at all...  Technically she was no longer Susan when Harry killed her, otherwise the reverse spell wouldn't have worked..  Deirdre was still herself when Nic killed her.

They were both people who loved their killers, and who allowed themselves to be killed for love. Their killers both used that love, plus a judicious bit of lying (possibly. If Nic was referring to Nemesis when he talked about the Enemy, he might not have been) to convince them to allow themselves to be killed even though it hurt all of them to do it.

Also, Susan's body might have been different, but in the moments she was killed she was clearly still herself--otherwise she wouldn't have let Harry kill her. She almost certainly would have become a different person eventually, but it hadn't happened yet.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: peregrine on March 20, 2019, 02:02:43 AM
People can think whatever they like, it doesn't make them right.

TWG is the Enemy.  If we assume Lucifer and Nic have vaguely aligned goals (as shown by Lucifer aiding Nic in his attempt to grab the Archive) then Lucifer is, per Jim, doing something like playing a game of chess against TWG.  You gotta play the game to win it.  Nemesis wants to metaphorically toss the board and scatter the pieces.  And thus, while Nic/Lucifer may oppose Nemesis, the enemy is TWG.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 20, 2019, 02:13:24 AM
Quote
People can think whatever they like, it doesn't make them right.

True. Of course, this applies to everyone.

Quote
TWG is the Enemy.  If we assume Lucifer and Nic have vaguely aligned goals (as shown by Lucifer aiding Nic in his attempt to grab the Archive) then Lucifer is, per Jim, doing something like playing a game of chess against TWG.  You gotta play the game to win it.  Nemesis wants to metaphorically toss the board and scatter the pieces.  And thus, while Nic/Lucifer may oppose Nemesis, the enemy is TWG.

This...doesn't make sense. The fact that Nemesis wants to destroy the universe which Lucifer needs intact would by definition make him Lucifer's enemy. TWG is also an enemy, of course, but people aren't actually restricted to having just one. Also, if I have one person who I want to prove wrong in an argument and one person who I know wants to annihilate my existence, I would categorize the former as my opponent and the latter as my enemy, if I were differentiating.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 20, 2019, 03:50:12 AM
Unless Jim is playing mind games the capitalization of the word enemy is important.  Make of that what you will.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 20, 2019, 03:57:24 AM
Quote
Unless Jim is playing mind games the capitalization of the word enemy is important.  Make of that what you will.

Actually, it just occurred to me reading this that that's actually support for it being Nemesis, given that if it were the White God, Nicodemus would almost certainly refer to him as that or some variation*, and we know that speaking of Nemesis by name risks attracting its attention.

*Evidence: I'm pretty sure just before that when Nicodemus is talking to Michael, he refers to TWG as "your god" (I'm not 100% certain, though; could someone quote this bit? It's when Nicodemus is talking about Michael being trapped in Hades if he dies there).
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 20, 2019, 10:16:55 AM
People can think whatever they like, it doesn't make them right.

TWG is the Enemy.  If we assume Lucifer and Nic have vaguely aligned goals (as shown by Lucifer aiding Nic in his attempt to grab the Archive) then Lucifer is, per Jim, doing something like playing a game of chess against TWG.  You gotta play the game to win it.  Nemesis wants to metaphorically toss the board and scatter the pieces.  And thus, while Nic/Lucifer may oppose Nemesis, the enemy is TWG.

Exactly, and in my opinion Nemesis is just another tool.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: segaily on March 20, 2019, 02:35:53 PM
I had always assumed Nic was talking about TWG but I must say the idea it could have been Nemesis does make a lot of sense.  Nic certainly seems more worried about the traitors in his own people then anything else so he could easily be more focused on Nemesis as the enemy at the moment. That idea also lines up better with his so often saying in the past that he and Dresden could be on the same side.   
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 20, 2019, 03:19:03 PM
I had always assumed Nic was talking about TWG but I must say the idea it could have been Nemesis does make a lot of sense.  Nic certainly seems more worried about the traitors in his own people then anything else so he could easily be more focused on Nemesis as the enemy at the moment. That idea also lines up better with his so often saying in the past that he and Dresden could be on the same side.   

 However I think there is little evidence of Nemesis infestation among the Fallen... Can a fallen angel even be infested?  If it is the host, is Nemesis so strong it can over come the influence of the fallen who inhabits the coin?  Now it could be that Satan and Nemesis are one in the same, but the the quarrels among the Denarians wouldn't make a whole lot of sense either..  I think the friction between the factions simply stems from the nature of the Fallen, why they were cast out of Heaven in the first place..  It is only natural they they'd fight among themselves for notice and for favor from their master..
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Avernite on March 20, 2019, 07:11:51 PM
However I think there is little evidence of Nemesis infestation among the Fallen... Can a fallen angel even be infested?  If it is the host, is Nemesis so strong it can over come the influence of the fallen who inhabits the coin?  Now it could be that Satan and Nemesis are one in the same, but the the quarrels among the Denarians wouldn't make a whole lot of sense either..  I think the friction between the factions simply stems from the nature of the Fallen, why they were cast out of Heaven in the first place..  It is only natural they they'd fight among themselves for notice and for favor from their master..
I thought one of the Fallen was involved in the attack on Mab's palace in Proven Guilty, presumably Thorned Namshiel?
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 20, 2019, 07:55:26 PM
I thought one of the Fallen was involved in the attack on Mab's palace in Proven Guilty, presumably Thorned Namshiel?

Hell Fire was mentioned, however that doesn't mean that if it was him that he is Nemesis infested.  Remember the whole reason or rather excuse or cover for Skin Game was favors owed to Nic by Mab...  Of course we know that both sides were paying a much deeper game..
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: morriswalters on March 20, 2019, 10:37:28 PM
I thought one of the Fallen was involved in the attack on Mab's palace in Proven Guilty, presumably Thorned Namshiel?
The attack on Arctis Tor was probably the work of the Circle or Black Council. Perhaps indirectly instigated by Nemesis.  Answer the question, why attack at all, and you might be on your way to understanding. To this point in the book I have seen no support in the text for the idea that Nic knows of Nemesis.  I could be wrong.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 21, 2019, 11:07:39 AM
The attack on Arctis Tor was probably the work of the Circle or Black Council. Perhaps indirectly instigated by Nemesis.  Answer the question, why attack at all, and you might be on your way to understanding. To this point in the book I have seen no support in the text for the idea that Nic knows of Nemesis.  I could be wrong.

At this point we still don't know who or what Nemesis is..  So it is merely speculation as to whether Nic knows or not who Nemesis is.. However it is doubtful that he didn't know of the attack.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on March 21, 2019, 01:57:40 PM
Quote
To this point in the book I have seen no support in the text for the idea that Nic knows of Nemesis.  I could be wrong.

For once I have this book!

Small Favor:
Quote
"Have you not seen the signs around you?" Nicodemus asked.  "Beings acting against their natures? Creatures behaving in ways that they should not? The old conventions and customs being cast aside?"

I narrowed my eyes at him. "You're talking about the Black Council."

He tilted his head slightly to one side. Then his mouth twitched at a corner and he nodded his head very slightly. "They move in shadows, manipulate puppets. Some of them may be on your Council, yes. As good a name as any."
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Avernite on March 21, 2019, 06:32:24 PM
Hell Fire was mentioned, however that doesn't mean that if it was him that he is Nemesis infested.  Remember the whole reason or rather excuse or cover for Skin Game was favors owed to Nic by Mab...  Of course we know that both sides were paying a much deeper game..
Not infected by Nemesis, merely recruited, would be just as possible I suppose. And would be just as much 'traitors' to Hell's cause.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Mira on March 21, 2019, 07:10:08 PM
Not infected by Nemesis, merely recruited, would be just as possible I suppose. And would be just as much 'traitors' to Hell's cause.

We have no clue as to what or who Nemesis is, so I think it is too early to jump to conclusions.. 
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: Cozarkian on April 01, 2019, 10:25:52 PM
Skin game spoiler

Did anyone else consider the symmetry in Harry sacrificing Susan and Nico sacrificing Deirdre. Of course it is not the same, but it is not so different either. If Nico and Deirdre believe they are saving the world from something and the only way to do it is by getting the artifacts.


Harry/Susan displayed the normal case of the parent sacrificing for the child. Nico/Deidre was a perversion where the child sacrificed for the parent.


Yeah, he was afraid she'd eat him..  I agree they weren't sixteen, but do not underestimate the power of the vamp venom...  Fear of being killed trumps responsible birth control I think, so rope over condom..  No excuses though I agree, but age had nothing to do with it, lots of "adults" turn up pregnant.   I doubt that either one of them even thought of the possibility that she might get pregnant, it wasn't their first sexual encounter after all..  So either they were very lucky before she was half turned and went away, or at least one of them was being responsible..

Susan was probably on birth control and Harry never stopped to think about the fact that she might not be any more.

For that matter, she could have been on birth control. According to WebMD, perfect use of birth control is only 99.7% effective, so 3 in 1,000 people will still get pregnant. Typical use failure rate increases to 9% because of factors like skipping a day, vomiting before it is fully absorbed, not taking it at the same time every day, and taking some other medication that interferes with it. Maybe being a half-vamp is one of those factors that interferes.

[/quote]
People can think whatever they like, it doesn't make them right.

TWG is the Enemy.  If we assume Lucifer and Nic have vaguely aligned goals (as shown by Lucifer aiding Nic in his attempt to grab the Archive) then Lucifer is, per Jim, doing something like playing a game of chess against TWG.  You gotta play the game to win it.  Nemesis wants to metaphorically toss the board and scatter the pieces.  And thus, while Nic/Lucifer may oppose Nemesis, the enemy is TWG.

When does Harry reveal to Nicodemus that there is a traitor within the ranks of Denarians? I believe it is after the attempt on Ivy, right?

There you have it. Deidre is doomed to hell, but dying in hades condemns her to hell with Hades rather than hell with Lucifer. Why does she need to avoid Lucifer? Because Lucifer is infected by the Enemy.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: nadia.skylark on April 02, 2019, 01:22:13 AM
Quote
When does Harry reveal to Nicodemus that there is a traitor within the ranks of Denarians? I believe it is after the attempt on Ivy, right?

Just before then, actually. It was during their conversation in the Shedd.
Title: Re: Did Harry lie to Michael, or worse?
Post by: peregrine on April 02, 2019, 02:49:08 AM
She doesn't need to avoid Lucifer, she needs to avoid eternal damnation for all the horrible shit she did.  As handed down by TWG, aka The Enemy.

After all, if he wanted to hide her from Lucifer, why would he be working with Lucifer to get the hellfire trap in Small Favor?

And Namshiel being bent doesn't by any means indicate that Lucifer is infected.