ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: kbrizzle on April 03, 2019, 06:47:02 AM
-
After re-reading this book & given our knowledge of subsequent events, I noticed some odd things in the plot. I have my own theories as to what’s going on, but I’m interested in everyone’s opinions.
- Mavra’s role in the fight at Bianca’s party was pretty underwhelming given her power level. The things she does of note in this book are to train Bianca in vampiric magic (perhaps necromancy-based?), weaken the barrier with the spirit world & help power up Kravos enough to wreak havoc on his enemies. Despite doing all this, her only contribution to Bianca’s cause in the party is to successfully stop Harry & co. from trying to leave early. Michael is able to take her fairly easily even without the Sword, using faith magic alone. And she’s mysteriously absent from round 2 when Harry goes back to the mansion & kills Bianca, unraveling their plan. Her stated reason for being at the party is seek revenge against Michael for eliminating her scourge decades ago.
- Seeing how powerful Cowl truly is in Deadbeat, it seems odd that he would be relegated to attendant duty at the party. Also, given that Mavra’s actions kick-off the plot of Deadbeat, it’s interesting that she & Cowl are at the party without interacting much or acting against each other/ in concert
- At the end of the book, Bianca & Duke Ortega threaten Harry with war if he does not give up Susan. How does this benefit the Red Court?? As Michael points out after the fight at the masquerade, Bianca took her best shot at Harry very publicly & failed. How is stealing Susan (who is not publicly known in the supernatural world as his girlfriend) a commensurate gain? She basically has Harry breaking into her mansion & has captured him - why not just kill him, which was the point of many of her actions at the masquerade? Why allow him to walk out with everything minus Susan? I assume Bianca thinks she can control Harry through enthralling Susan, but she has to know that Harry is going to spend all his time trying to destroy her once this happens (just like she did after Harry “kills” her paramour in StF). She has still lost face in front of the supernatural community since she was unable to kill Harry in her own center of power
-
1. I think Mavra has been holding off for years. Sometimes as author's add new scope to a series and new rules, they can find clever plot threads to explain holes. Such as when McCoy puts a magic lock on Mavra. Quite the trick, yet rarely attempted. And not just because McCoy is Senior Council level wizard. I suspect Mavra (in that book) was not written as powerful as she became later. Numerous characters experienced power-slide over the series and she was one. She may well have had other motives to be there, indeed Cowl does state many things of importance happened there and I am sure we haven't found out anywhere near all of them.
2. As we only see things from Harry's perspective, there is no way to know whether they (Cowl and Mavra) were working together or otherwise. I also believe that there is potential to use Time Travel to explain inconsistencies - I think there is even a WOJ on it from a while back. I also think Cowl and Kumori, like Mavra, prefer to be power behind the throne/scene people. Allows them greater influence and freedom. Cowl clearly doesn't like to draw too much attention to himself, same with Mavra. Neither are Ferrovax level - who just gives zero F's.
3. I think that was explained that they were looking for an excuse for war, and a hot-headed inexperience member of the White Council was a prime target. It was not the value of Susan to the White Council, but rather her value to Harry that made her a tool. I don't believe they thought for one minute Harry would leave Susan. But even so, I think it was also Bianca flexing her muscle (under Ortega's attention). It was a test - could they act perhaps more openly without fear of consequence. And also just in general - revenge for Bianca's dead servant and humilation for the Wizard who so publicly embarrassed her. Remember in the Supernatural world, there is a big thing of respect and honour. Bianca had to restore her standing after losing it so early just after being promoted.
-
Mavra’s role in the fight at Bianca’s party was pretty underwhelming given her power level. The things she does of note in this book are to train Bianca in vampiric magic (perhaps necromancy-based?), weaken the barrier with the spirit world & help power up Kravos enough to wreak havoc on his enemies. Despite doing all this, her only contribution to Bianca’s cause in the party is to successfully stop Harry & co. from trying to leave early. Michael is able to take her fairly easily even without the Sword, using faith magic alone. And she’s mysteriously absent from round 2 when Harry goes back to the mansion & kills Bianca, unraveling their plan. Her stated reason for being at the party is seek revenge against Michael for eliminating her scourge decades ago.
I think Mavra was there to try a sneak attack, but she's a squirrelly sort (as behooves one of the last remaining members of an annihilated race). As soon as Harry, Susan and Michael were on to her, her only next move was to stick around for the official parts and then run like the wind once the real fighting started.
After all, in a fight, you might die - especially when EVERYONE knows what is needed to kill you like a chump.
-
1/2. I don't think Cowl and Mavra were working hand-in-hand. I think that both of them showing up in both Grave Peril and Dead Beat was mostly a consequence of necromancy being involved. Though I've often wondered if Bony Tony "acquired" the shipping container with the Word of Kemmler around this time.
That said, I do think you're right in that Mavra was understated in GP. I don't really understand what she had to gain by mentoring Bianca, unless she was attempting to manipulate the Red Court and the White Council into war somehow, but that's... not really a high percentage plan, unless she knew the future.
On the other hand, wasn't Mavra the one screwing with the Barrier? Because that's what let Kravos become the Nightmare (that and a dark ritual, which I suspect he put together with Mavra or Bianca's help), and also what let the ghost of Bianca's "friend"—the one with the inconsistent name—rise up to haunt her, which is part of what drove Bianca nuts. So I'd say it's possible that she was manipulating Bianca and Kravos to get to Harry and Michael. Mavra doesn't strike me as the kind of villain who fights in the open; she's seen too many Blampires get taken down by angry villagers for that.
Also, there is a lot of speculation about the origin of Black Court Vampires and the Outsiders, driven in part by this Word of Jim:
And also what is Drakul a scion of?
Drakul wasn’t a scion of anything! He was something entirely unhuman that got trapped in human form. Dracula was his half-human child, who naturally had enormous paternal issues, and wound up creating himself as the first Black Court Vampire in an effort to win his father’s approval.
It didn’t work out so well.
Some have taken that as a possible hint that Drakul himself was an Outsider who got stuck on the Inside. There's also the strange comment Harry makes to Lash about Outsiders and the Black Court in White Night. I just spent like half an hour looking through the Word of Jim archive to try to find it, but I specifically remember Jim responding to a fan's question about that, and clarifying that it wasn't an error (meaning that he didn't mean "Black Council," which some thought might have been the case, since Cowl was present at the time, and they were discussing Outsiders and Starborn). Regardless, it's a curious thing to link the Black Court to Cowl at all in White Night; there weren't any Black Court Vampires hanging around, so why would Harry bring it up?
But then there's Cowl, who gave Lea the Nemesis-tainted Athame in Grave Peril, which is linked to the Outsiders, along with Vittorio (one of Cowl's flunkies) being outright possessed by an Outsider somehow. So... yeah. I think there's a connection, I just don't know if they're working together.
3. Mostly, I think Bianca was crazy by Grave Peril (being haunted by a ghost for a few years could do that) and wanted to make him suffer. She also was looking for a legal reason to kill Harry while he was there at the party, and the best way to do that was to goad him into attacking—which he did. Ortega threatening Harry with war was, in my opinion, a representative of the Red Court trying to be the Adult in the Room, because they weren't ready for it yet—he's also the guy who tries to put the brakes on the war in Death Masks. I don't think Bianca particularly cared about the consequences.
-
We didn't see much from Mavra because I imagine she had no reason to get involved in the fighting. She had no major involvement in that whole situation to warrant it.
-
1.Mavra’s role in the fight at Bianca’s party was pretty underwhelming given her power level. The things she does of note in this book are to train Bianca in vampiric magic (perhaps necromancy-based?), weaken the barrier with the spirit world & help power up Kravos enough to wreak havoc on his enemies. Despite doing all this, her only contribution to Bianca’s cause in the party is to successfully stop Harry & co. from trying to leave early. Michael is able to take her fairly easily even without the Sword, using faith magic alone. And she’s mysteriously absent from round 2 when Harry goes back to the mansion & kills Bianca, unraveling their plan. Her stated reason for being at the party is seek revenge against Michael for eliminating her scourge decades ago.
I can think of a couple reasons for Mavara to keep her role limited
1) She is a guest of Bianca under the accords - which likely limits her action
2) She has no need to do more - or sees no advantage to doing more.
3) She is rather risk adverse
2.Seeing how powerful Cowl truly is in Deadbeat, it seems odd that he would be relegated to attendant duty at the party. Also, given that Mavra’s actions kick-off the plot of Deadbeat, it’s interesting that she & Cowl are at the party without interacting much or acting against each other/ in concert
The whole point of the party was to be able to conduct biz without alerting the White Council or other supernatural powers. A party was a perfect excuse to meet on the down-low. If Cowl starts throwing down power or even provide a noticeable presence, it destroys that subterfuge and probably alerts many powers that something weird/dangerous is happening and they better pay attention.
3.At the end of the book, Bianca & Duke Ortega threaten Harry with war if he does not give up Susan. How does this benefit the Red Court??
It is obvious that Duke Ortega was speaking to the larger audience (aka - the larger supernatural community that will hear about events) and making diplomatic points at Dresden/White Council's expense. Painting them as both rash and weak. It was equally obvious that Duke Ortega was shocked when Dresden refused to give up and started that war. Ortega misunderstood Dresden and made the wrong call. As a result, The Red Court went to war at a time and place that Ortega would never have picked.
As Michael points out after the fight at the masquerade, Bianca took her best shot at Harry very publicly & failed. How is stealing Susan (who is not publicly known in the supernatural world as his girlfriend) a commensurate gain?
The spat between Dresden and Bianca is clearly a PERSONAL conflict. Bianca is doing this to get revenge on Harry because she understands him enough to know that this outcome (Susan taken as a vampire) would be devastating to Harry -- and Bianca is confident that she has forced a situation where Harry either has to eat it (a great public victory) or Harry gets to die failing to stop it (a great public and private victory). She cannot loose - unless of course Harry kills her minions, burns down her house and kills her. But who could have seen that happening :)
-
Seeing how powerful Cowl truly is in Deadbeat, it seems odd that he would be relegated to attendant duty at the party. Also, given that Mavra’s actions kick-off the plot of Deadbeat, it’s interesting that she & Cowl are at the party without interacting much or acting against each other/ in concert
The whole point of the party was to be able to conduct biz without alerting the White Council or other supernatural powers. A party was a perfect excuse to meet on the down-low. If Cowl starts throwing down power or even provide a noticeable presence, it destroys that subterfuge and probably alerts many powers that something weird/dangerous is happening and they better pay attention.
It's possible that Cowl and Mavra were working together or communicated with one another during the events of Grave Peril. It's also possible that Mavra was directly responsible for bringing in Cowl and Kumori to act as Bianca's flunkies; and I'll get to why I think that may be the case further down.
However, I think it is also possible that Cowl and Mavra have different long-term objectives. Meaning they were only allies of convenience; like Kemmler's disciples, and at some point their interests might diverge from one another.
The spat between Dresden and Bianca is clearly a PERSONAL conflict. Bianca is doing this to get revenge on Harry ...
Yes to pretty much everything you said, even the parts I edited out. Now here's something I've argued for years. Bianca was a relatively minor power in her own right. Even the promotion she was celebrating didn't make her powerful enough (IMO) that she'd be making deals with Outsiders to hand out Nemfected presents to her guests. Her interests appeared to be local rather than global and her motivations against Harry were personal. Think of the target that was painted on Bianca's back by handing out the tainted items. Remember what Lea said about how she owed Bianca payback for giving her the tainted Athame. I think Bianca was a patsy and either Cowl or both Cowl and Mavra were responsible for the Bianca's gifts being tainted. They didn't plan on Harry knocking off Bianca, but when it happened it made things better for them. Bianca wasn't around to deny that she was responsible for the tainted items. (By the way, Bianca being set up as a patsy helps explain why Mavra didn't appear to be that powerful in the fight at Bianca's party. She wasn't on Bianca's side, she was testing Michael without his sword and Harry without his full strength. When she didn't get an easy victory she wasn't going to go all out just for Bianca's sake.)
It has been stated or suggested that Outsider magic is what animates the Black Court, or perhaps it was what first animated the Black Court into existence. This would explain Mavra's willingness to help the Outsiders. They are to her; and her kind, progenitors, parents of a sort. However, it's more difficult to understand why Cowl or any wizard would make a deal with Outsiders, outside of being Nemfected themselves. In Dead Beat both Cowl and Kumori spoke of a New Order arising, but knowing the Outsiders are making a move for power and deciding to throw in with them seems very questionable to me. Jim has yet to explain why anyone would trust the Outsiders to keep any deals they may have made.
It's more easy to understand how Cowl and Mavra may have become allies. In Dead Beat Bob explained how Kemmler had friends in most of the vampire courts and with other supernatural bad guys. It's possible Kemmler introduced his students to some of his contacts. From both Kemmler and Mavra, Cowl would have learned of the Outsider's plans. What made him join their team is an open question. Also, it's possible that the attempt to perform the Darkhallow wasn't simply aimed at the eliminating the Senior Council of the White Council, it was an attempt by Cowl to gain enough power so he wouldn't have to trust the Outsiders to keep their word. He'd have been strong enough to demand that they keep their word.
I wonder what it would take to make Harry re-think the events of Bianca's party. Once he does, he should be smart enough to realize that Lea would want to know who was really responsible for driving her so crazy Mab had to turn her into a Sidhecicle in order to cure her. Now that I think about it, Mab might also want to know who was indirectly responsible for Nemfecting Maeve. Harry has some juicy material to trade with Lea, and possibly with Mab, and he doesn't even realize it.
-
Bianca, as my brother in law would say, "knows just enough to be dumb.." She had just enough
power or was allowed to have just enough power to think she was a real up and comer and craved more. This made her the perfect cat's paw...
Lea had this in common with Bianca, she was second only to Mab, but that wasn't enough.. There are signs of it from the first time we meet her. No, I don't think she was infected before she got the Knife, but her desire for more power made her the perfect dupe for the Enemy and a way in to the Winter Court through the Knife... By the time Mab discovered what was going down it was almost too late.. Lea was treatable, but Maeve wasn't...
I am not sure that Cowl and Mavra are responsible for the Knife being tainted, oh they knew, but I doubt they were behind the plot..
-
However, it's more difficult to understand why Cowl or any wizard would make a deal with Outsiders, outside of being Nemfected themselves. In Dead Beat both Cowl and Kumori spoke of a New Order arising, but knowing the Outsiders are making a move for power and deciding to throw in with them seems very questionable to me. Jim has yet to explain why anyone would trust the Outsiders to keep any deals they may have made.
Personally, I think that Cowl, Peabody, and any other mortal wizards "allying" with the Outsiders isn't what it looks like. I think they're trying to use the Outsiders, including Nemesis infection, as weapons. They're trying to upset the natural order so that they can seize enough power to create a new...well, in their minds, it's probably a utopia. But the Old Guard has to go, and this is one of the ways to do that. I think, anyway.
-
Personally, I think that Cowl, Peabody, and any other mortal wizards "allying" with the Outsiders isn't what it looks like. I think they're trying to use the Outsiders, including Nemesis infection, as weapons. They're trying to upset the natural order so that they can seize enough power to create a new...well, in their minds, it's probably a utopia. But the Old Guard has to go, and this is one of the ways to do that. I think, anyway.
Yep. Kumori even tells us about part of it, in her conversation with Dresden in Dead Beat -- imagine if no one ever had to die. It's a huge idea, and not hard to see why someone might think it worth a few broken eggs to make that omelet. Trillions of human lives against maybe a hundred thousand at the dark hallow -- a hundred thousand human lives that would have ended within a century in any case.
-
Regarding Mavra’s role
Looked at from a certain point of view, Mavra was present just enough to make Bianca’s plan happen. While Mavra has no personal beef with Harry yet, perhaps she knew that he would be a future impediment to her plans so she used Bianca’s own desire for revenge as a way to neutralize him.
I also think that her performance in the fight was underwhelming because Michael hit her with faith magic directly - I don’t think she had a good defense against that - it probably damaged her enough that she didn’t want to risk losing her life in the fight (especially since she was about to break Amoraccius, likely pissing off TWG).
Regarding Cowl
To me this is further proof that Cowl is Simon. Since the party happens a few months before the attack at Archangel, Simon is keeping a low profile while propagating his nefarious agenda. Once Simon is ‘dead’, he openly walks around as Cowl.
Perhaps he hadn’t made himself known to Mavra in his Cowl persona yet, so she had no reason to wonder if he was a nexromancer.
@ Kindler & ClintACK
Absolutely agree - Based on Kumori’s conversation with Harry & Lea’s reasons for taking the athame (trying to find freedom from that which stalks us all), it seems to me that perhaps the saner members of the Black council have made a deal with the Outsiders to “end death” - that is their ultimate goal.
-
The other way of interpreting Mavra’s role is that everything she has done in the series from GP onwards is to set up Harry’s role in DB.
Basically Mavra finds out that there is an eventual Black Council plan to perform the Darkhallow in Chicago (either because she is on it or through spies) - realizing the danger that a new necro-god would pose her & her kind, she is determined to stop it.
She does this by taking Bianca on as an apprentice of sorts - the idea here is to have Bianca consolidate power in Chicago. The newly elevated Bianca would then use the might of the Red Court to clamp down on the Kemmlerites before they perform the Darkhallow.
However Mavra sees that Harry is stronger & therefore has a better chance of beating the Kemmlerites, so she disappears. She returns in BR to test Harry/ entrap him.
-
Mavra’s role in the fight at Bianca’s party was pretty underwhelming given her power level...
Seeing how powerful Cowl truly is in Deadbeat...
Bianca was being played by most of her "guests." She was WAY out of her depth (but too foolish or power-mad to know it). Mavra or Cowl could have stomped all over her without exerting themselves. Ferrovax has to exert extra care in order NOT to.
Neither Mavra nor Cowl has any real motive TO join the fight, and Bianca has zero leverage to make them -- indeed, as her "guests" she is obligated to spend her meagre power "defending" them!
They were there for THEIR motivations, not for hers; and I doubt she had any idea what their motivations/priorities were.
I expect one part of their motivation was to get a peek at this "rogue" wizard Harry Dresden, see him in action. I don't expect Harry was a top priority for EITHER of them, however!
Also, we have in DB the info that necro's (which may include Mavra) like to socialize and smile together while all plotting mutual backstabbery. So there may have been an element of that.
At the end of the book, Bianca & Duke Ortega threaten Harry with war if he does not give up Susan. How does this benefit the Red Court??
I don't think they expected Harry to throw down; I think Bianca was genuinely surprised. They set up overwhelming odds against him... Nightmare-weakened, sick from Ramp-Spittle, exhausted, etc. Most wizards would have no winning play there; they were planning him to creep away with his tail between his legs. Later, they'd publicly humiliate him with Ramp-Susan taunting him about how she HAD been his but now she hates him, &c &c &c. And eventually they'd take him, en-Ramp him via Susan. The End.
Back-up plan -- Harry fights, and dies. Not as good, but it gives Bianca the victory she needs the prove that the WC rogue wizard, who challenged her, got his comeupance. And she STILL gets the "moral" victory of Harry dying with the knowledge that Susan was Ramp'ed.
Harry choosing to fight... and WIN??!? Not one of their projected outcomes. Given the pre-existing Ramp plans to make war against the WC, a savvy politico like Ortega /HAD/ to know that Harry trashing Bianca's would tip some fence-sitters into the hardline war-now camp, and BADLY damage their chances. If THAT outcome had been anywhere on Ortega's radar, he'd have scuttled the plan, and Harry&Justine would have become food, down in the basement; Harry would never have woken.
-
@g33k
Agreed - that’s why one of my WAGs is that Mavra was planning on using Bianca & the Ramps to shut down the Kemmlerites who would show up to perform the Darkhallow (which she knew either as a member of/ spying on the Black Council). That Harry won just meant that she had to change the game plan a bit, but she still gets what she wants by the time of DB.
-
After having a listen through of Grave Peril recently, I had this observation. Michael refers to Mavra as "Blood of the Dragon, that old Serpent". Dresden Wiki says that this implies that she is the spawn of Vlad Drakul. I'm not sure where that implication comes from. Is this something Jim has talked about?
The Dresden Wiki talks about Drakul being "half-human" based on a quote from Ebenezer. Kindler, where did the concept of Drakul being something else trapped in a human body come from. Sounds familiar. Maybe the Wiki isn't updated?
If Drakul isn't a dragon trapped in a human body, then why is Michael calling Mavra "Blood of the Dragon"?
-
Dracul literally means devil and/or dragon.
From the name Vlad III Dracula (also known as Vlad Țepeș), from the name of his father Vlad II Dracul, who was given the name Dracul by the Order of the Dragon. Dracul comes from the Romanian drac (“devil”), itself deriving from the Latin draco (“dragon”).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Dracula
-
After having a listen through of Grave Peril recently, I had this observation. Michael refers to Mavra as "Blood of the Dragon, that old Serpent". Dresden Wiki says that this implies that she is the spawn of Vlad Drakul. I'm not sure where that implication comes from. Is this something Jim has talked about?
The Dresden Wiki talks about Drakul being "half-human" based on a quote from Ebenezer. Kindler, where did the concept of Drakul being something else trapped in a human body come from. Sounds familiar. Maybe the Wiki isn't updated?
If Drakul isn't a dragon trapped in a human body, then why is Michael calling Mavra "Blood of the Dragon"?
Yeah Bad Alias is right. This isn't a in-universe reference; the phrase "Blood of the Dragon, that old Serpent" refers to the Devil. While yes this could also be a reference to both Drakul (the Dragon) and Dracula (little Dragon), considering Michael's highly catholic nature and his perchant for using old biblical phrases as curses, it is most likely that he is refering to the literal Devil (as in Satan/Lucifer). Satan/Lucifer is often referred to as the Dragon and the Serpent (as both words were somewhat interchangeable, Serpent does not always mean snake).
Michael may well be aware of Drakul and probably Dracula (as her progenitor). Although we have no actual indication of this in the series, or in WOJ. But it much more likely he was simply calling her a demon/devil and not making a literal reference to her origin as a Black Court vampire.
The concept of Drakul (not Dracula but his father) in the Dresdenverse, comes from several references in the books and WOJ. This quote best explains it from a 2015 reddit AMA.
And also what is Drakul a scion of?
Drakul wasn’t a scion of anything! He was something entirely unhuman that got trapped in human form. Dracula was his half-human child, who naturally had enormous paternal issues, and wound up creating himself as the first Black Court Vampire in an effort to win his father’s approval.
It didn’t work out so well.
2015 AMA
-
"Blood of the Dragon" is an odd phrase to use as a reference to the Devil. I can't find anything explaining it as a reference to anything in particular. It seems most commonly used for fantasy titles and to reference Targaryens.
I don't really understand how Michael's using it in the context. I don't know if it's a curse/battle cry or a specific reference to Mavra in some way.
-
The Devil is often identified as the Serpent that tempted Eve and the Dragon of Revelation.
Mikhael and the Dragon (12:7–12)
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Book: Book of Revelation
Christian Bible part: New Testament
See this page for reference:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity)
-
At the end of the book, Bianca & Duke Ortega threaten Harry with war if he does not give up Susan. How does this benefit the Red Court??
It gets rid of Harry. It benefits those who are using the Red Court as a cat's paw and know he is star born. Let's not forget that there were those on the Senior Council who were very willing to give up Harry to prevent
war.
Miscalculation in the timing and Harry's reaction to the threat sets off the war prematurely and
eventually leads to the Red Courts demise..
-
The Devil is often identified as the Serpent that tempted Eve and the Dragon of Revelation.
Mikhael and the Dragon (12:7–12)
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
Book: Book of Revelation
Christian Bible part: New Testament
See this page for reference:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil_in_Christianity)
I'm quite familiar with the Devil as a serpent, have heard the devil referenced as a dragon, but have never heard the phrase "Blood of the Dragon" used outside of a modern fantasy reference. I don't think I've ever heard of a reference to the Devil's blood even more generally.
It gets rid of Harry. It benefits those who are using the Red Court as a cat's paw and know he is star born. Let's not forget that there were those on the Senior Council who were very willing to give up Harry to prevent
war.
Miscalculation in the timing and Harry's reaction to the threat sets off the war prematurely and
eventually leads to the Red Courts demise..
Isn't Ortega's proposition more as an intermediary between Bianca and Harry? Bianca had the right within the Red Court to force the issue. She was willing to let it slide if she could properly humiliate Harry. Bianca (and Ortega) expected Harry to acquiesce or die. The benefit to the Red Court is not appearing weak to the supernatural community. It didn't work out for them.
-
I'm quite familiar with the Devil as a serpent, have heard the devil referenced as a dragon, but have never heard the phrase "Blood of the Dragon" used outside of a modern fantasy reference. I don't think I've ever heard of a reference to the Devil's blood even more generally.
Fair enough, can't always be sure how well versed people are in Christian theology. I suspect that the actual phrase is either one that Jim created specifically for Michael, or one that is quite uncommon and perhaps only exists in certain communities (such as the one Jim grew up in). I too found little reference to that exact phrase.
Although you will note that the full phrase that Michael uses is "Blood of the Dragon, that old Serpent" which is strikingly similar to 12:7-12 Book of Revelation. On balance of probabilities it is more likely that this is what is in reference to, as nowhere else does anyone ever use that phrase or discuss the connection between the Black Court and Dragons.
The thing is, it isn't to be taken literally. Otherwise why not use that phrase with Ferrovax in the earlier scene? Being that there is an actual capital-D Dragon in the room with them...wouldn't that make more sense?
Also if Michael really were referencing the connection to Drakul, assuming he actually knew of that connection (which only exists as WOJ, and a indirect connection that Ebenezar mentioned), why have he and Harry never discussed the origins of the Black Court before? Or Drakul for that matter? Harry (especially this early in the series) barely even knows who the Vampire Courts are (other than surface information - remember Thomas fills him in during the party). Let alone who Drakul is, which he doesn't even understand the difference between Dracula and Drakul until Ebenezar tells him 3 books later in Blood Rites.
-
Isn't Ortega's proposition more as an intermediary between Bianca and Harry? Bianca had the right within the Red Court to force the issue. She was willing to let it slide if she could properly humiliate Harry. Bianca (and Ortega) expected Harry to acquiesce or die. The benefit to the Red Court is not appearing weak to the supernatural community. It didn't work out for them.
However the duel was fought after Bianca died, it had nothing to do with appearing weak, it was all
about getting Harry gone, otherwise Ortega wouldn't have felt the need to cheat.. Bianca's party was all about the master players getting their chess pieces in place, like the gift of the Knife to Lea thus infecting the Winter Court.. Bianca was merely a pawn in a much larger game.. Think of Cowl as a knight or perhaps castle, Mavra may turn out to be the queen, though that isn't all that clear as of yet. I think Ortega thought he was a knight but when all is said and done I think he too like Bianca will turn out to be a mere pawn..
-
@Yuillegan: I think you're right.
@Mira: We're not talking about two books later, but I'll address why it doesn't matter. Things changed after Harry didn't acquiesce/die at Bianca's. Harry was a much bigger threat than Ortega and Bianca had deemed him, which is kind of a theme of every book. In Death Masks, Ortega's goal was to end the war, at least temporarily. If he died, the war would continue and, probably more importantly to him, he wouldn't survive, so it wouldn't matter to him that the war continued if he cheated, especially if that enabled him to survive.
As to appearing weak, that's why it was Ortega, and not some other vampire, challenging Harry. Bianca was Ortega's vassal. It is one's duty to protect one's vassals. If Harry could kill Ortega's vassal with impunity, he would be considered weak.
-
Fair enough, can't always be sure how well versed people are in Christian theology. I suspect that the actual phrase is either one that Jim created specifically for Michael, or one that is quite uncommon and perhaps only exists in certain communities (such as the one Jim grew up in). I too found little reference to that exact phrase.
Although you will note that the full phrase that Michael uses is "Blood of the Dragon, that old Serpent" which is strikingly similar to 12:7-12 Book of Revelation. On balance of probabilities it is more likely that this is what is in reference to, as nowhere else does anyone ever use that phrase or discuss the connection between the Black Court and Dragons.
The thing is, it isn't to be taken literally. Otherwise why not use that phrase with Ferrovax in the earlier scene? Being that there is an actual capital-D Dragon in the room with them...wouldn't that make more sense?
Also if Michael really were referencing the connection to Drakul, assuming he actually knew of that connection (which only exists as WOJ, and a indirect connection that Ebenezar mentioned), why have he and Harry never discussed the origins of the Black Court before? Or Drakul for that matter? Harry (especially this early in the series) barely even knows who the Vampire Courts are (other than surface information - remember Thomas fills him in during the party). Let alone who Drakul is, which he doesn't even understand the difference between Dracula and Drakul until Ebenezar tells him 3 books later in Blood Rites.
Remembering that "Harry is an imperfect narrator," I think we need to admit that ALL the characters will speak from their own POV's, based upon what they personally know and believe. We can't count on Michael to be CORRECT, so trying to parse his allegories may be pointless.
That said: "blood of..." is a clear reference to ancestry, and the rest of the phrase (as noted) seems to imply the Devil.
So... the antichrist? Hm. It's only a few centuries after the year 1000, which many presumed would be the apocalypse.
Maybe the antichrist DID come, DID get embodied as a human (the way Christ did), but couldn't bring about the End Times and got trapped in their earthly form?
Maybe Drakul is the literal antichrist, still sticking around (stuck) from 1019 years ago...
-
Fair enough, can't always be sure how well versed people are in Christian theology. I suspect that the actual phrase is either one that Jim created specifically for Michael, or one that is quite uncommon and perhaps only exists in certain communities (such as the one Jim grew up in). I too found little reference to that exact phrase.
Although you will note that the full phrase that Michael uses is "Blood of the Dragon, that old Serpent" which is strikingly similar to 12:7-12 Book of Revelation. On balance of probabilities it is more likely that this is what is in reference to, as nowhere else does anyone ever use that phrase or discuss the connection between the Black Court and Dragons.
The thing is, it isn't to be taken literally. Otherwise why not use that phrase with Ferrovax in the earlier scene? Being that there is an actual capital-D Dragon in the room with them...wouldn't that make more sense?
Also if Michael really were referencing the connection to Drakul, assuming he actually knew of that connection (which only exists as WOJ, and a indirect connection that Ebenezar mentioned), why have he and Harry never discussed the origins of the Black Court before? Or Drakul for that matter? Harry (especially this early in the series) barely even knows who the Vampire Courts are (other than surface information - remember Thomas fills him in during the party). Let alone who Drakul is, which he doesn't even understand the difference between Dracula and Drakul until Ebenezar tells him 3 books later in Blood Rites.
Thanks for all of the feedback. I get what you and Bad Alias are saying about it perhaps being biblical, especially since it is coming from Michael, but man, with an Actual Dragon, i.e. Ferrovax, in the scene -- and this scene being one of the pivotal scenes, if not THE PIVOTAL SCENE in the entire series thus far (it sets up SOOOO much) -- I find it hard to believe that Jim just happened to have Michael say "Blood of the Dragon - that old serpent", randomly. Unless it's a red herring, and considering how important this scene is in setting things up I just don't see that, I think it means more.
I think it's safe to assume Michael knows all about black court vampires and their origins.
I think the unhuman thing that is in Drakul is a Dragon. It just makes too much sense.
-
... I think it's safe to assume Michael knows all about black court vampires and their origins ...
If there's something particular about BCV's and some sort of Hellish/Satanic origin... then yeah, that seems likely.
Otherwise, not so much; the Knights are not Encyclopedia's of the Supernatural. Harry, in general, knows a LOT more than Michael. Michael, otoh, knows a LOT more than Harry... specifically about Denarians (Harry didn't even know that Denarians existed, until they almost killed him).
Michael didn't particularly grasp that the Outsiders he fought (offstage, entering at the end of Proven Guilty) were anything other than your run-of-the-mill supernatural gribblies.
Thanks for all of the feedback. I get what you and Bad Alias are saying about it perhaps being biblical, especially since it is coming from Michael...
This.
Michael, alluding to a scriptural text? Don't get caught up in the word "Dragon" as being one of those Nomovax beings, this is using "Dragon" in its Biblical context; count on it, because Michael.
He's outright saying that Lucifer is part of Mavra's origin.
Which is saying that Drakul is associated with Lucifer... or maybe that his sonny-boy made a literal Deal With The Devil in the creation of the Black Court.
-
@spiritofair
I suspect that’s exactly what Drakul is - although my WAG is that he was Nfected as a Dragon & being trapped as a human was the way to contain him. Dracula, his half-scion son attempted a ritual to unleash his inner supernatural nature, however due to interference from the Outside, he ends up becoming a Black court Vamp - the first.
A lot of this comes from the fact that the undead nature of the BCV is reminiscent of power from the Outside & the old WoJ referenced by @Yuillegan.
Regarding the issue of Bianca/Ortega taking Susan from Harry
My own theory is that the RCV’s chief complaint is that Harry caused the death of Rachel, Bianca’s ‘special friend’ in StF - as Bianca says at the ball in GP, she feels that Harry’s actions necessitated her death (Ramps’ own twisted POV). Her attack on Harry at her ball in GP is thus revenge. So despite being unable to kill him, taking Susan would compensate her for the loss of Rachel.
However it still doesn’t address the fact that from an outside perspective (especially those who view humans as ‘chattel’), Bianca took 2 years to make alliances & set Harry up in GP at her own center of power - despite which she was unsuccessful especially in front of the likes of Ferrovax & Lea etc., who could care less about the fate of the wizard’s ‘pet mortal’ - they would focus on the fact that the Ramps tried to assert their dominance over Chicago but were unable to take 1 young member of the White Council in their own stronghold.
To a wise & experienced ancient being, this would portend that the Reds are overconfident & that despite their new alliances with questionable characters, an individual White Council wizard is not to be underestimated. They would likely not throw in with the Reds in their quest for a new world order (as we see in the following books - the Ramps don’t really have too many allies outside the Outsiders & the Black council - even the other Vamp courts refuse to back them)
@Mira
I don’t know that Ortega was a pawn. From what we can surmise, the Ortegas (Paolo & Ariana) were the faction in the RCV that were not Nfected/ thrilled with the alliance with the Black council. Their plans were the most sensible, & seemed to be directed towards the overall good of the Ramps, however Ariana’s attempt at a coup gets shut down by Harry.
I suspect the Red King’s bloodthirst is a result of being Nfected.
-
Yep. Kumori even tells us about part of it, in her conversation with Dresden in Dead Beat -- imagine if no one ever had to die. It's a huge idea, and not hard to see why someone might think it worth a few broken eggs to make that omelet. Trillions of human lives against maybe a hundred thousand at the dark hallow -- a hundred thousand human lives that would have ended within a century in any case.
I wonder if, in gaining enough power to end death, Kumori may even believe that those sacrificed in the ritual could be returned to life afterward. Necromantic magic kinda makes the whole concept of death a little squishier than it is in reality.
-
Thanks for all of the feedback. I get what you and Bad Alias are saying about it perhaps being biblical, especially since it is coming from Michael, but man, with an Actual Dragon, i.e. Ferrovax, in the scene -- and this scene being one of the pivotal scenes, if not THE PIVOTAL SCENE in the entire series thus far (it sets up SOOOO much) -- I find it hard to believe that Jim just happened to have Michael say "Blood of the Dragon - that old serpent", randomly. Unless it's a red herring, and considering how important this scene is in setting things up I just don't see that, I think it means more.
I think it's safe to assume Michael knows all about black court vampires and their origins.
I think the unhuman thing that is in Drakul is a Dragon. It just makes too much sense.
It certainly is an odd phrase with some odd context.
@kbrizzle: I think Bianca's behavior with regards to Rachel was her succumbing to bloodlust. I get the impression that basically all RCV have this and one of the major factors in obtaining (or losing) status in the RC is controlling it.
-
@Bad Alias
I think you’re right about resisting bloodlust being something of note in the RCV hierarchy - given what we know about their elite jaguar warriors (remaining half turned) etc.
@Kindler
I suspect this is exactly what the Outsiders promised mortals - the ability to become immortal. This is why we see mortals like Cowl & Kumori on the BC. To take it a step further, I suspect the Outsider offer immortals the ability to change their natures/ nature of their mantles.
-
Kbrizzle: The Outsiders seem to promise everything you want. Mortals want power, knowledge, immortality etc. The Outsiders can provide. Immortals want Free Will and the ability to overcome their limitations, the Outsiders will provide. The cost? Your actual Will. Maybe not all at once, maybe not overtly at first. But in the end they all serve. It is the difference between the illusion of choice, and actual choice. Maeve could lie, but she was not true to herself, and therefore against her own nature. A violation of the natural order. It felt freeing and powerful, but that's all it really was: a feeling. Most of what the Outsiders promise mortals seems to violate Choice and Free Will, either yours or another's.
Kindler: Agree. The whole life-death concept in a series that involves Necromancy and afterlife's is a bit hard-edged. Just because you're dead doesn't mean your out. Look at Carmichael and Captain Murphy, or Harry's dad. Although I think Jim has stated if you truly want to raise the dead (not just control spirits and animate corpses) you have to kill someone. A life for a life. So not sure those people would have been able to come back without killing a whole bunch more...seems redundant. Not to mention - their souls/spirits still would exist. The body may perish but the soul seems to be fine (basically the entire point of Ghost Story).
For the rest: I think we will all have to wait and see on the Drakul front. I have convinced some of you, but others require further conversation. I certainly could be wrong, but for now I have yet to see a credible reason yet to convince me the Blood of the Dragon is anything beyond what it appears - a paladin's curse (not magical btw). Sometimes gray curtains are just that - gray curtains.
g33k: I think you summed up my concerns about Michael well. Cheers! Whether he was literally meaning that the Devil was involved in the creation of the Black Court (and that he knew that for a fact - or that it was just a mere accusation, like accusing all witches of drawing their power from the Devil - is another question). I will argue though that on further reflection, I think the Antichrist is the least likely option. Why? Because he only shows up in the End of Days anyway. And Drakul has been around for at least over 600 years. Pretty ineffective, if not downright lazy, Antichrist. Why even have a prophecy about it? I won't even go into the fact that the Book of Revelations was only added into the Bible around the end of rome, written likely about the End of Days when Nero was Emperor. Besides which Nephilim are not "trapped" they are scions (carrying the blood of the Nevernever in them, half mortal half immortal, exactly like Changelings btw). Drakul is something more...at least at current rewrite. A true immortal that has been bound inside a mortal body, for whatever reason. So Antichrist is probably a bad fit overall.
Bad Alias: Thank you :)
-
You're welcome.
-
...
... I will argue though that on further reflection, I think the Antichrist is the least likely option. Why? Because he only shows up in the End of Days anyway. And Drakul has been around for at least over 600 years. Pretty ineffective, if not downright lazy, Antichrist. Why even have a prophecy about it? I won't even go into the fact that the Book of Revelations was only added into the Bible around the end of rome, written likely about the End of Days when Nero was Emperor. Besides which Nephilim are not "trapped" they are scions (carrying the blood of the Nevernever in them, half mortal half immortal, exactly like Changelings btw). Drakul is something more...at least at current rewrite. A true immortal that has been bound inside a mortal body, for whatever reason. So Antichrist is probably a bad fit overall.
I find there to be too little actual evidence -- canon from stories, or WoJ commentary -- for me to find any answer very convincing.
My "antichrist" speculation is a very-very-W kinda WAG, I admit! But I wanted to clarify what I meant, which I guess I didn't explain well...
In this WAG, the Son of Lucifer (literal "Blood of the Dragon," in the Biblical meaning) came on the millenium, to rule and destroy the world, and otherwise perform antichrist assholery.
Lots of millennial apocalyptic thinking back around 1000AD... and lots of it was right! There was a rough draft of Jim's BAT. BUT ...
But then Something Happened. Maybe the Knights of the Cross, maybe a prior Starborn Wizard, maybe a prior whole "Team Dresden" scooby-gang, maybe some funky Outsider bargain, I dunno. Not enough info. Maybe all the above, and more, and maybe some topspin by Uriel (which wouldn't be out of character for that jerk, would it?)
The apocalypse was kinda... apocalimp. Lotsa foreplay, big expectations, but the finale... fizzled.
The world went on, with maybe a kind of stunned shrug on some people's part.
Especially on the part of the Antichrist. "WTF, dude! I was supposed to come for a little while... a few decades, basically. Then destroy shit, and go chill. Now...? Dammit: now. WHAT now? I don't even. I mean... pretty sure I'm immortal (thanks, Dad) barring the end of the world. And... I have no purpose?"
So the antichrist went tourist for a few centuries, ended up in Wallachia in the early-to-mid 1400's deciding to play king for a while... and the rest, as they say, is history.
That's my WAG (and despite arguing for it, I'm not even that invested in it; I mean, it's probably wrong). But I think this WAG has at least as much evidence as any of the other WAGs have, regarding "what Drakul really is."
-
G33K: Your theory is very interesting. It reminds me a lot of what happened to Supernatural (season 5 had THE apocalypse and it...fizzled. The pages were torn up and what do you get? Another 11 seasons. Sometimes I wish they lost... :P )
I like the spirit of it - even if it is wrong, it is a fun idea! You are certainly right, it has as much chance as any other. Not that I necessarily think it is MORE right than my own WAG. But I like it none the less. :)
-
... You are certainly right, it has as much chance as any other. Not that I necessarily think it is MORE right than my own WAG.
So far as I can tell, there is little enough on "the Drakul Question" that pretty much EVERY one of the WAGs is equally likely. Or equally unlikely. Whichever way you want to phrase it.