... But not some basic monster.It's an Outsider.
Well, I am pretty sure Drakul is also an Outsider but anyway - it might no be a 'basic' monster, but it seems like a relatively low-level Outsider, which Goblins and other Fae seemed to be able to kill.
SK - see my edit above. I have revised my position somewhat.
... it might no be a 'basic' monster, but it seems like a relatively low-level Outsider, which Goblins and other Fae seemed to be able to kill.They are specifically deadly to wizards, yes. ALL the Outsiders are -- specifically -- very nearly immune immune to all mortal magic, except the Starborns' magic.
And from what Jim has said about Eb, he was even wilder and more gung-ho than Harry!
Unless the Cornerhound is specifically deadly in a certain way to Wizards or something...
MiraRob(click to show/hide)
Marcone would not want to spoil his relations with Mab either.
Name other vanilla mortals in on the talks? Or whom of those that are going to be present at the talks know enough mortals to pull this off? Now it could be that the Foman are pulling a fast one..
It could be the return of Cowl and his ilk. He certainly does not want these peace talks to be a success and they called outsiders before to aid the red court in their war with the white council. I think Cowl is our main suspect.
I think it becomes a question of how well known the peace talks are to begin with. If it is well known that they are going to take place, I'd agree, but if they are not, then he either has someone on the inside or it is someone else.It takes only one infected in one of the many participating factions to let the outsiders know. I think it is very likely that they have some sources of information probably within the fomor who worked with the red court.
Cowl knows the council quite well. He was probably an active member at some point. He hides his identity so he has an identity to protect. That might just be a white council identity. Cowl’s source of information could simply be Cowl.
I think that is too simple for the story line. As in just because we haven't seen Cowl in a while he'd be the one behind the Outsiders coming to the party. I doubt that he could hide himself among the White Council, he totally reeks of black magic. He could have a spy though.We actually do not see him use that much black magic. He usually hates some monsters in to do his killing and he did not raise zombies in dead beat. Peabody did a lot of black magic undetected inside council headquarters for years.
I think Marcone has too much common sense to mix with Outsiders. Of course, I could be wrong, but that is what I thinkIt also does not agree with all his curent alliances. Gard, Vadderung, Mab, Hades,....
And Peabody is an excellent example of black magic going undetected, or at least its origin misdirected.
It was not a potion that did all the work for him because. Peabody did many things with the younger wizards that probably required a more sensitive individualised approach. A potion to increase lust is one thing and will probably work on most people and is not inherently evil. It does not alter the mind directly and it can help some couples if taken voluntarily and knowingly in a controlled environment.
As Ebenezar said the ink assisted with mental manipulation probably by making the subject more vulnerable, Peabody still had to do the work.
Mind Control is black magic. See Proven Guilty, Chs. 5, 40, 42.
What Peabody did in Luccio’s mind went quite far and he did all kind of things with young wizzards minds.
Mind control and making a mind vulnerable to suggestion by way of a potion are not quite the same, as in a love potion. Mind control is physically going into someone's mind with your mind to manipulate him or her. Peabody didn't do that, the ink made the person vulnerable to suggestion, he never went into anyone's mind like Molly did. That is how he was able to get away with it for so many years.
What Peabody did in Luccio’s mind went quite far and he did all kind of things with young wizzards minds.
What I am wondering....(click to show/hide)
What I am wondering....What I am wondering is why every time something like this happens they seem to look at each other and go, "someone is summoning outsiders" and then go fight the outsiders, and never seem to do crap all to find/stop the summoners? I mean, Harry should have captured one of the humans on the barges attacking his island and turned them over to Mab. That would have been useful as she could have ripped information they never even knew they had out of them.(click to show/hide)
Peabody didn't do that, the ink made the person vulnerable to suggestion, he never went into anyone's mind like Molly did. That is how he was able to get away with it for so many years.I don't think you turn people into walking time bombs and assassins without mind magic. I think the drugs in the ink only made them more susceptible to the magic, it didn't do the work itself. If there were drugs out there that allowed that without magic the CIA would rule the world. I think it is probably that an experienced wizard, already fairly set in their ways before turning to black magic, and probably watching to make sure they avoid the strongest stains of it, can "wash" their aura or do other activities to hide their contamination if they try. As I recall, Luccio didn't really pick up anything from Kemmler or his magic in her encounter with him, and yet by that time he was an accomplished necromancer, so I think it must be possible to hide at least some degree of black magic use.
[1] What I am wondering is why every time something like this happens they seem to look at each other and go, "someone is summoning outsiders" and then go fight the outsiders, and never seem to do crap all to find/stop the summoners? [2] I mean, Harry should have captured one of the humans on the barges attacking his island and turned them over to Mab. That would have been useful as she could have ripped information they never even knew they had out of them.As to 1, yes. As to 2, he was a little busy that night.
What I am wondering is why every time something like this happens they seem to look at each other and go, "someone is summoning outsiders" and then go fight the outsiders, and never seem to do crap all to find/stop the summoners? I mean, Harry should have captured one of the humans on the barges attacking his island and turned them over to Mab. That would have been useful as she could have ripped information they never even knew they had out of them.When someone sets your house on fire you are more interested in saving your house and your life than catching the guy with the match. And in White Knight he feeds Madge to the demon she summoned.
When someone sets your house on fire you are more interested in saving your house and your life than catching the guy with the match. And in White Knight he feeds Madge to the demon she summoned.In White
But without the ink it is doubtful that he'd be able to do it. He didn't do it to Harry mainly because he
never came in contact with the ink. He should not have been able to go into any wizard mind, even
the young one without them being aware of it.
If I remember correctly though, the ink was meant more for the Senior Council. As they said, the older the wizard, the harder it is to get them to bend. Though it has more to do with the mind being settled in the body, vs the actual age of said mind, hence why Lucio could be manipulated. The ink was there to help him push and nudge the senior council into doing what he wanted.
Plus, remember, the young ones were baptised in fire. They got plenty of education on the hot and heavy evocation side, but they probably skimped out on the mind manipulation portion of the curriculum. And they were just so dang young. They probably had no clue what was going on, since they'd never experienced it before. Most of them were anywhere from 16 to what, 25, maybe 30 for the oldest like Carlos? I'm 24 and I'm still experiencing all sorts of new stuff.
Never underestimate inexperience.
Well, I am pretty sure Drakul is also an Outsider but anyway - it might no be a 'basic' monster, but it seems like a relatively low-level Outsider, which Goblins and other Fae seemed to be able to kill.
And from what Jim has said about Eb, he was even wilder and more gung-ho than Harry!
Unless the Cornerhound is specifically deadly in a certain way to Wizards or something, I don't really see why Eb would be more afraid in this situation than taking on Vampires or Demons or Faeries etc.
EDIT:(click to show/hide)
I think a key point to keeping Peabody from reeking of black magic was that while he “wired” all these people to give him control over them, he didn’t activate them until Turn Coat (that we know of). It may be like throwing fire all day long every day – its not black magic until the fire kills someone. So the act of loading them up with mental control “software” might not be black magic until the software is activated.
It confused me a little too, until I deduced the meaning. I don't think I have ever read "belike" before.
If I remember correctly though, the ink was meant more for the Senior Council. ...Peabody wanted Harry to sign a receipt for the investigation file, so I assume he was going to use the ink on Harry.
Most of them were anywhere from 16 to what, 25, maybe 30 for the oldest like Carlos?
Peabody wanted Harry to sign a receipt for the investigation file, so I assume he was going to use the ink on Harry.
Well, it is not shocking because Eb is old, really old, so he sometimes speaks with arcane words. And about Fey I just thought Jim meant "fairy" and it fitted what happened later for Molly.
I originally wondered if it might really just be age making Eb’s hand shake. I remember reading somewhere th at Eb is “getting up there” since he is far enough along a geriocrasy to get on the senior council. But then I read that LaFortier was 270 when he died, and I think Mai is older than him. Even was reportedly a “young buck” running around in the war of 1812 I though I heard Jim say, so if he was 30 then, he would only be about 230 in the series. That gives him easy 40+ years more to goHe's got much longer than than that, I think: Eb is a STRONG wizard, and he tosses around some REALLY potent magic. These are things WoJ says make the wizards longevity effect stronger.
If you catch the attention of one of them, they will hunt you FOREVER.Just saying.
... Michael's description is vague but it includes tentacles...OTOH, he also described that as "the usual" so it's hardly a definitive field-mark!
QuoteIf you catch the attention of one of them, they will hunt you FOREVER.Just saying.
QuoteIf you catch the attention of one of them, they will hunt you FOREVER.Just saying.
I've never read Lovecraft. I don't generally care for horror as the real world scratches that particular itch.Ditto, more or less.
I've never read Lovecraft. I don't generally care for horror as the real world scratches that particular itch.To be honest I didn't find it too horrible - as a non-native speakers, many of the more arcane words to describe certain horribleness just didn't come across as bad. You get a few stories where the horror is deeper (and thereby still comes across) but sometimes the horror is not much worse than 'oh the horror, those people interbred with other human 'races'' ::)
Lovecraft isn't horror, it's Cosmic Horror. It targets a different fear response: inevitability and madness rather than sheer terror.So I assumed, thus my comment on the real world. I like stories with hope.
So I assumed, thus my comment on the real world. I like stories with hope.Same.
I don't generally read horror, because I personally dislike gore. I prefer fear over squick. Like, I'll never watch or even be able to enjoy stuff like Hostel or Saw (after the first one, anyway), because I mostly just find it gross rather than scary. I remember when Fear Factor was first airing, and like half of the "challenges" were "eat this bucket of spiders." Not exactly measuring fear there.The scariest thing I've seen is Alien. This film made my wife furious with me. The Exorcist is right up there as well. However John Carpenters the Thing while scary left me cold since it is unresolved. The difference is in the endings. As a general rule print can't hit me that way. so I've read Preston and Childs, The Odd Thomas Books and so on. And I don't do torture porn.
But genuine fear, tension, and horrifying suspense? Hell yeah, I'm on board. I remember reading 'Salem's Lot at three in the morning by candlelight. I spent the whole night holding a cross and keeping one eye on my bedroom window. I didn't move until the sun came up.
Lovecraft doesn't usually illicit that strong of a fear response for me. I mostly read it because I find it terribly interesting. Most of it is unsettling rather than scary, in my opinion.
BUT! If you're not into hopelessness, you're not into hopelessness!
The Dresden Files starts after Harry encounters his mentor and has perhaps already crossed the threshold. Honestly, the mentor in Storm Front is the film canister under the bed. There is probably a "mentor" moment in each book, and I don't think it's ever been Eb. Maybe, maybe, in Changes. Eb isn't Harry's "mentor" in the actual books. He's Harry's "mentor" in the Dresden Files prequel.
I've never been a big fan of "the Hero's Journey." It's always seemed like a horoscope description of plot. Vague enough to fit most all circumstances without being specific enough to be helpful or useful.
Mentors in the HJ are typically the ones you see set the Hero on a Path. We don't see much of that in Dresden, except from Mab. Maybe Lea (and we certainly see that with her relationship to Molly in Ghost Story), too. Eb's role is informed, not really shown. For the most part, Harry's set his own path.
I disagree, if you go back and read how Harry speaks of Eb. He is his ideal wizard, all the ethics Harry has as far as magic goes is due to him. Harry was an angry kid with one foot on the path towards warlockhood, Eb turned that all around, not unlike Obi-Wan.
Nick Christian and his father Malcolm. And perhaps nick Cristian more then Eb. Because of what he decided to do and at what cost.
Heck, Morgan acts as a bit of a mentor ;)
'Do the right thing or else' makes him a lousy mentor, but still.
Oooh, it'd be very cool if Rashid did act as a mentor for Harry.To your point, Rashid fits the hero's journey mentor role to a t in Summer Knight. It's Rashid who acts to push Harry along every step of the way and gives him what he needs to finish his journey. He could also be described as a mentor in Proven Guilty and Cold Days.
The mentor gives the hero what he needs to answer the call after refusing it. The mentor pushes the hero into accepting the call. Sometimes this is by literally giving them what they need to succeed such as Lea giving Harry the ruby in Changes. Sometimes it's something the hero already has like grit or an object.
I'd like to point out that Eb gave Harry a code of ethics to live by when he had none. Without those, he would have lost his head a long time ago.I'd like to point out that I addressed that.
What Eb has taught Harry could often be considered the mentor, but it wouldn't actually be Eb because the hero's journey is a structure.Eb's code isn't Eb. It's a part of Harry's character by the time we meet him. Harry's time with Eb is part of Harry's "Ordinary World."
...
I read once that the mentor in most westerns was the main character's grit or some other character trait.
As to your second point, it could also be argued that without Eb's specific code, Harry would have been living a much easier life, and not endangering himself at all. Harry's code is part of the reason he doesn't fit into the hero's journey. He only refuses the call when it's a, in his opinion, bad guy who makes the call to adventure. If he didn't have that ethos, he wouldn't be risking his life left and right. He also wouldn't be putting himself in situations that lead to temptation.
Eb's code isn't Eb. It's a part of Harry's character by the time we meet him. Harry's time with Eb is part of Harry's "Ordinary World."
Whether or not without Eb's code Harry would be living an easier life is beside the point. MentorsThis all just makes Eb 'a' mentor. Someone who taught Harry things. But that doesn't make him THE mentor of a hero's journey who needs to die (or be disabled) to progress the story.
teach a way to live one's life or how to do something specific, the object of the mentoring isn't to make life easier, example being Yoda's teaching about the Force to Luke, Obi-Wan's also, their object wasn't to make life easier for Luke they were teaching him how to do it without going to the darkside.
It doesn't matter, were it not for Eb's mentoring, Harry wouldn't be the character we know.
Whether or not without Eb's code Harry would be living an easier life is beside the point. MentorsYour point was that Eb's code has kept Harry alive. I'm saying that Eb's code has done more to endanger him than to keep him alive. So that Harry's life would be easier without Eb's code is entirely the point.
teach a way to live one's life or how to do something specific, the object of the mentoring isn't to make life easier.
It doesn't matter, were it not for Eb's mentoring, Harry wouldn't be the character we know.It does matter as to the point you are arguing with. That point is whether or not Eb is the Mentor in a hero's journey structural way. If he isn't, the argument that the Mentor must die, Eb is the mentor, so Eb must die doesn't hold water. And that's putting aside that the premise "the Mentor must die" is false.
This all just makes Eb 'a' mentor. Someone who taught Harry things. But that doesn't make him THE mentor of a hero's journey.Exactly.
THE mentor of a hero's journey who needs to die (or be disabled) to progress the story.For the record, since my original point is that a hero's journey analysis of DF doesn't in any way point to Eb dying, the mentor dying (or being disabled) isn't part of the hero's journey.
It does matter as to the point you are arguing with. That point is whether or not Eb is the Mentor in a hero's journey structural way. If he isn't, the argument that the Mentor must die, Eb is the mentor, so Eb must die doesn't hold water. And that's putting aside that the premise "the Mentor must die" is false.Huh? You seem to be contradicting yourself.. Harry has had many mentors, several are still alive, Eb and I believe Rashid as well.. A couple are dead, Justin and I think you can count Shiro in as a mentor as well though briefly, but his impact was great.
Many on the forum argue that Eb is Harry's mentor, so he must die in keeping with the structure of the hero's journey. This is wrong for two reasons. First Eb isn't a mentor in the hero's journey sense. Eb has never shown up to Harry and caused Harry to take up the call to adventure after Harry has refused it. This means that Eb is not Harry's mentor in the hero's journey sense. Second, the death of the mentor isn't a step in the hero's journey. Let's go back to Star Wars. What would the death of the mentor even mean? That Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen come back to life? That's preposterous.
Merriam Webster's mentor and the hero's journey's mentor are two completely different things. Mentor is generally defined as "an experienced and trusted person who gives another person advice and help, esp. related to work or school, over a period of time." When speaking in the context of the hero's journey, the mentor refers to whatever the hero needs to change his mind after he has refused the call to adventure and go forth and succeed. In this context, the mentor can be a character trait, an object, a person, or literally anything else.
People often assume that the mentor in this context is a person who has to die so the hero can't rely on the person for help and must go forth on his adventure. This is a misunderstanding of both the hero's journey and what is meant by the mentor. For example, in Star Wars Luke refuses the call by telling Obi-Wan that he can't leave the farm. The Empire murders his family. Luke then decides to take up the call to adventure. Here the murder of Luke's family is the mentor, not Obi-Wan.
Many on the forum argue that Eb is Harry's mentor, so he must die in keeping with the structure of the hero's journey. This is wrong for two reasons. First Eb isn't a mentor in the hero's journey sense. Eb has never shown up to Harry and caused Harry to take up the call to adventure after Harry has refused it. This means that Eb is not Harry's mentor in the hero's journey sense. Second, the death of the mentor isn't a step in the hero's journey. Let's go back to Star Wars. What would the death of the mentor even mean? That Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen come back to life? That's preposterous.
Because Eb isn't a mentor and the mentor doesn't have to die, the argument that (premise 1): Eb is the mentor, (premise 2): the mentor has to die, so (conclusion): Eb will die, is wrong. Both premises are false. The conclusion cannot be reached because of the premises. The conclusion may be true for completely different reasons, but not because of the mentor/hero's journey argument.
Once the hero has committed to the quest, consciously or unconsciously, his guide and magical helper appears or becomes known. More often than not, this supernatural mentor will present the hero with one or more talismans or artifacts that will aid him later in his quest. Meeting the person that can help them in their journey.
Scholars have questioned the validity or usefulness of the monomyth category. ...I agree with the first two sentences and think that the second part sounds more like what's going on in the Dresden Files than the hero's journey, but, not having looked into it, I imagine it is also a formula that an author can easily diverge from.
Others have found the categories Campbell works with so vague as to be meaningless...
In a similar vein, American philosopher John Shelton Lawrence and American religious scholar Robert Jewett have discussed an "American Monomyth" ... . They present this as an American reaction to the Campbellian monomyth. The "American Monomyth" storyline is: A community in a harmonious paradise is threatened by evil; normal institutions fail to contend with this threat; a selfless superhero emerges to renounce temptations and carry out the redemptive task; aided by fate, his decisive victory restores the community to its paradisiacal condition; the superhero then recedes into obscurity.
Than again, as I stated in my earlier post, Ebenezer doesn't die, but something happens that diminishes him in some way. It would have to have the same effect of isolating Harry without killing the old man off.
Just thinking...The outsiders win. There is a reason for Molly to faithfully do her duty. If it was just for Mab’s pleasure she would have behaved quite differently.
What if Harry does get out of the Winter Knight gig...
by someone taking out the Winter Court.
Not Mab. The whole thing. Including Molly and his Mantle.
I mean if the Outsiders want to win they have to do it. What if they do it a couple books early and you deprive reality of Mab and any successor.
If Jim really wants to drive home that the end of all things is just around the corner, both Eb and the Merlin will go down at the same time.Throw in Rashid and it would really drive that point home.
Throw in Rashid and it would really drive that point home.
To Kurtin's point about Eb being Harry's protector, I think Rashid has done more. Eb gets three out seven votes in Summer Knight to not turn Harry over. Rashid gets the entire Senior Council to give Harry a trial instead of turning him over. The next time we actually see the Senior Council act, it is again Rashid who prevents the Merlin from going after Harry. Michael comes through with the Council's children and brings in the votes to save Molly because Rashid delayed.
Throw in Rashid and it would really drive that point home.
To Kurtin's point about Eb being Harry's protector, I think Rashid has done more. Eb gets three out seven votes in Summer Knight to not turn Harry over. Rashid gets the entire Senior Council to give Harry a trial instead of turning him over. The next time we actually see the Senior Council act, it is again Rashid who prevents the Merlin from going after Harry. Michael comes through with the Council's children and brings in the votes to save Molly because Rashid delayed.
I know it's because of dramatic reasons but the Council seems to have a severe problem with succession planning. Eb might be the easiest to replace (from a booms point of view) since any top-level talent could wield the Blackstaff, but Merlin and Gatekeeper don't seem to be so Macguffin enabled. The implication is that the strengths of the other Senior Council members don't overlap much, so there'd be a major capability loss if either of them got hit by a bus.
If Harry gets out of the Winter Knight's gig I can see him becoming the Blackstaff, something that would go against his grain even more than being Winter Knight ...
... However I don't see him getting out of it, I think it is too important in the fight ahead ...
Personally, I believe that Harry will be the WK until the BAT but he will finished it from that job. I always believe Mab will order Harry to kill her (perhaps because she realizes she is going to be infected or something). That act will release Harry of his obligations to winter, as Mab promised never to order Harry to hurt someone he loves and it will become obvious that Harry loves her (not in a romantic way).
About Eb, given the short Christmas story I suspect we will lose him in PT. I am also worried about Rashid.
(click to show/hide)
Something I think has been overlooked:Just a sign that it is really a big bad baddie. Compare with the influence demonreach emits and Harry was totally unaware off until Michael told him in skin game.(click to show/hide)
Come the BAT, I expect all those tools will be available to Harry. (I do include, BTW, Hellfire! Harry doesn't much care for it, or use it; but I think he still has access to it, and WILL use it in the BAT).
He pretty conclusively doesn't have access to it via Lash anymore...It just takes some knowledge, I think. Most of Lash "went away" in the Raith Deeps, but everything that was "Lash" existed inside Harry's mind... was a part of Harry; Harry was (and presumably still IS, if he knows how) capable of it.
I don't think Harry needs Hell-fire anymore, between soul power, the Winter Knight mantle, and his own considerable KABOOM talents I think he is set.
#259 “Does the same apply to hellfire/soulfire. What would happen if Harry were to take up Lasciel’s coin and then try to use soulfire and hellfire together? Would that result in Harry dying horribly?”
Those are different. They’re really two sides of the same coin–but they can’t really exist together like that. They aren’t explosively reactive, but they aren’t additive, either. Which one came into the person to be used would depend on the person who was using it, and what they were using it for.
Angelic types have access to both. Which one they use is partially what determines what /kind/ of angels they are. (Emphasis added)
In Cold Days, Harry launched a Soulfire/Winter strike on HWWBh, who blocked almost the whole thing; and the one strike drained a LOT of Harry's power.
What I think we will see is Harry will learn how to "take off" the Mantle at will; it's still there, still his; but he won't be the Mantle's, and he will have other things too. Vadderung, after all, isn't ALWAYS Kringle (and very well may have another Mantle -- or several -- he sometimes wears, as well).My bet is either Harry gets out of it or this. I'm leaning towards this. I think that was the whole point of the scene. I know Jim has said that Harry's deal to become the Winter Knight overrode his "three favors" deal, but that's not what happened in the books. I don't know if Jim is lying to throw us off or misremembering because it's not important to him since he doesn't plan on Harry getting out of the Mantle that way.
I agree about Rashid, however he does have his own agenda, remember in Summer Knight he was more like doing his own testing than protecting Harry from the Council. He told Harry he would have killed him, himself if Harry had slipped up. I think you are thinking of Proven Guilty, I don't believe Eb was at the trial itself for Molly, he came in later at the same time as Michael, however it was Rashid that delayed things that kept Molly alive and supported Harry.I meant Summer Knight in the sentence I said Summer Knight, and I meant Proven Guilty in the next sentence. Rashid does indeed have his own agenda, but he has constantly acted in ways that help Harry.
It just takes some knowledge, I think. Most of Lash "went away" in the Raith Deeps, but everything that was "Lash" existed inside Harry's mind... was a part of Harry; Harry was (and presumably still IS, if he knows how) capable of it.While I don't agree, I do think this is highly plausible.
Yeah, but in Cold Days Harry was still working out how Soulfire and the Winter Mantle work... He still was kind of intimidated by both and afraid of becoming a monster. By the end though some of it had gotten through, from what Kringle told him, Harry is a lot more powerful than he knows. All I am saying Harry's got weapons, he just doesn't quite have the skill set or confidence to deploy them, so while at that point he may drain his resources fighting HWWB, but by the BAT I bet that won't happen, and he won't need Hell Fire to do it either. Let's not forget the stash of weapons he got from the vault in Skin Game, Hades said only those clever enough to take them would be able to used them if I remember correctly.
I meant Summer Knight in the sentence I said Summer Knight, and I meant Proven Guilty in the next sentence. Rashid does indeed have his own agenda, but he has constantly acted in ways that help Harry.It may be more useful for your theorizing if you consider what the Gatekeeper and others are doing is moving Harry to a specific place and time. And that if he moves in the wrong direction they are prepared to kill him. Also in terms of Mentors, one not mentioned in the text of PG but who is there anyway. Uriel. First then in PG, then Small Favor, again in Changes, Ghost Story and finally in SG.
It may be more useful for your theorizing if you consider what the Gatekeeper and others are doing is moving Harry to a specific place and time. And that if he moves in the wrong direction they are prepared to kill him. Also in terms of Mentors, one not mentioned in the text of PG but who is there anyway. Uriel. First then in PG, then Small Favor, again in Changes, Ghost Story and finally in SG.
Something I think has been overlooked:I kinda curious when Harry has been in the immediate vicinity at other times that Outsiders have been summoned into the world--like, across the street. I don't recall any. From what I recall, the ones he's seen were previously summoned off page.(click to show/hide)
My bet is either Harry gets out of it or this. I'm leaning towards this. I think that was the whole point of the scene. I know Jim has said that Harry's deal to become the Winter Knight overrode his "three favors" deal, but that's not what happened in the books. I don't know if Jim is lying to throw us off or misremembering because it's not important to him since he doesn't plan on Harry getting out of the Mantle that way.In the books Mab tells Harry that if he accepts the job of Winter Knight, that she'll forgive out the remaining favors that he owes. So I'm not sure what you think Jim is lying about or misremembering. I think there were two left when she says that, but when Harry finally took the mantle, there was still one remaining. He has tasks to do for her now, not owed "favors".
Something I think has been overlooked:(click to show/hide)
I notice that Harry talk about nightmares in this passage. The Night of Bad Dreams followed the destruction of the Red Court via a powerful act of black magic. It also has occurred at other times of darkness in the series. Make of that what you will.I think that's an unwarranted expansion of the term black magic; sure it was death-fuelled, but no actual humans were murdered by magic there (they were murdered for magic).
I think that's an unwarranted expansion of the term black magic; sure it was death-fuelled, but no actual humans were murdered by magic there (they were murdered for magic).
So I believe it didn't technically violate any of the Laws.
In the books Mab tells Harry that if he accepts the job of Winter Knight, that she'll forgive out the remaining favors that he owes. So I'm not sure what you think Jim is lying about or misremembering. I think there were two left when she says that, but when Harry finally took the mantle, there was still one remaining. He has tasks to do for her now, not owed "favors".
And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken.I'm sorry if this is a little incoherent.
I think that's an unwarranted expansion of the term black magic; sure it was death-fuelled, but no actual humans were murdered by magic there (they were murdered for magic).
So I believe it didn't technically violate any of the Laws.
The Laws of Magic don’t necessarily match up to the actual universal guidelines to how the universal power known as “magic” behaves.
The consequences for breaking the Laws of Magic don’t all come from people wearing grey cloaks.
And none of it necessarily has anything to do with what is Right or Wrong.
Which exist. It’s finding where they start or stop existing that’s the hard part.
Jim
Dark magic has a qualitative difference. Dresden talks about this often, such as in Blood Rites when he feels the Malacchio. I don't have the ebook on hand so I can't do a direct quote but he says (paraphrasing) that he had always assumed that there wasn't really any truly evil magic, that it all came from the same place. But the Malacchio (Evil Eye - often associated with the Fomor fyi) that Lord Raith was using (powered by He Who Walks Behind supposedly) was of a different quality, something fundamentally wrong and evil.
There was also the barbed wire spell in Grave Peril, which was unlike Harry's magic. He ought to have remembered that.
When doing magic, you have to believe that what you are doing is right or justified. Maybe the "greasy feel" is, that one feels the evil intention behind the magic, not the magic itself.
Violation of the Laws does not equal black magic. Jim has said the Laws were set up specifically to limit power.
Dark magic has a qualitative difference. Dresden talks about this often, such as in Blood Rites when he feels the Malacchio. I don't have the ebook on hand so I can't do a direct quote but he says (paraphrasing) that he had always assumed that there wasn't really any truly evil magic, that it all came from the same place. But the Malacchio (Evil Eye - often associated with the Fomor fyi) that Lord Raith was using (powered by He Who Walks Behind supposedly) was of a different quality, something fundamentally wrong and evil.
Also, whilst the half-vamps are not mortal in the strictest sense, they are more mortal than Thomas. Food for thought, considering how many of them died to. And Harry murdered Susan on an Altar of Blood Sacrifice in front of her daughter, whilst also completing the ritual in doing so. And you're telling me it isn't black magic...
In the books Mab tells Harry that if he accepts the job of Winter Knight, that she'll forgive out the remaining favors that he owes.Not in Changes when Harry actually makes the deal with Mab. We're warned in Changes that fairy deals are tricky. You may think you're agreeing to one thing when you're actually agreeing to something else.
I think that's an unwarranted expansion of the term black magic; sure it was death-fuelled, but no actual humans were murdered by magic there (they were murdered for magic).It's implied that human sacrifice to fuel magic is a violation of the laws of magic in Dead Beat when Butters asks Harry about Corpsetaker's murder of the professor from the museum.
So I believe it didn't technically violate any of the Laws.
Not in Changes when Harry actually makes the deal with Mab. We're warned in Changes that fairy deals are tricky. You may think you're agreeing to one thing when you're actually agreeing to something else.Precisely
It's implied that human sacrifice to fuel magic is a violation of the laws of magic in Dead Beat when Butters asks Harry about Corpsetaker's murder of the professor from the museum.Yes, but I don't think there is a problem if the ultimate goal of the ritual is to kill monsters. Also, perhaps a technicality can be claimed, as Harry did not set the ritual himself.
Half vamps were hit in their vamp half, though, not their human half. Even if their human half had lost the ability to live without the vampire.
And yes, Harry killed (not murdered) Susan. He did so with a knife, though, not with magic. Harry has straight-up-murdered RCV's with magic, though, and that never seemed like black magic to anyone (or he would've been kicked to the curb for murdering Bianca with magic to kick off the war).
So, to sum up, I think Harry used an evil ritual, but it was not black magic, and he used it for a good purpose.
But if the substance of the consequences of the act itself does not have its own inherent quality of good or evil, then how can the /intentions/ behind it determine a similar quality? “Really, I was only trying to provide a better quality of life for my family and my employees. It wasn’t my intention to destroy that particular species of flower in the rain forest that cures cancer.” “I was just trying to give those Injuns some blankets. It wasn’t my intention to expose them to smallpox and wipe out hundreds of thousands of innocent people.” “I just wanted to get that book finished while working two jobs and finishing a brutal semester of grad school. It wasn’t my intention to screw up the name of Bianca’s personal assistant whose death had motivated her to go all power hungry to get revenge on Harry.”
There’s some old chestnut about good itentions serving as base level gradiant on an expressway that goes somewhere, but I can’t remember the specifics right now. :) While I agree that the /intentions/ of the person taking action are not without significance, they carry far less weight than the /consequences/ of that action.
“I meant to shoot him in the leg and wound him, not hit the femoral artery and kill him, so I should not be considered guilty of murder,” is not something that stands up in a court of law /or/ in any serious moral or ethical evaluation. You had the weapon. You knew it was potentially lethal, even if you did attempt to use it in a less than fully lethal fashion. (Or if you DIDN’T know that, you were a freaking idiot playing with people’s lives, something really no less excuseable.) But you chose to employ the weapon anyway. The consequences of those actions are /yours/, your doing, regardless of how innocent your intentions may have been.
Similarly, if you meant to drill that ^@#%er through the eyes, if you had every intention of murdering him outright, but you shot him in the hand and he survived with minor injuries, again the consequences overshadow your intentions. You might have made a stupid or morally queestionable choice, but it isn’t like anyone *died* or anything. He’s fine (at least in the long term), you’re fine, and there are fewer repercussions–regardless of your hideous intentions.
The exercise of power and the necessity to consider the fallout from your actions isn’t something limited to wizards and gods. Fictional people like Harry and Molly just provide more colorful examples.
As for violating the laws of magic themselves turning you good or evil, well. :) There’s something to be said on either side of the argument, in the strictest sense, though one side of the argument is definitely less incorrect than the other. But it’s going to take me several more books to lay it out, so there’s no sense in ruining the fun. :)
Jim
"Note also the killing law only applies to Humans.I have bolded the question that was asked to Jim that preceded his answer about how magic lines up. Just because you don't make a gun doesn't mean when you shoot and kill someone, you're any less guilty.
You can kill as many faeries as you want with magic."
Bingo. It hardly seems fair, does it?
The Laws of Magic don’t necessarily match up to the actual universal guidelines to how the universal power known as “magic” behaves.
Not in Changes when Harry actually makes the deal with Mab. We're warned in Changes that fairy deals are tricky. You may think you're agreeing to one thing when you're actually agreeing to something else.When Mab made the original offer in Summer Knight, she said that taking the job would eliminate the favors owed. When she asked him again in Dead Beat, she made it clear not only that the terms hadn't changed, but that the offer was still open after Harry refused a second time. She even said that she would give him extra on top.
It's implied that human sacrifice to fuel magic is a violation of the laws of magic in Dead Beat when Butters asks Harry about Corpsetaker's murder of the professor from the museum.
So if you hit a person with your car, and they get injured but in the end infection kills them in the hospital - are you less responsible than if they had died right there on the road? Harry may have only intended to kill Vampires, but by killing the vampire half of the St Giles half-vamps, he still ended up killing mortals.That analogy doesn't work because it is more like someone deliberately steps out in front of your car and you cannot avoid hitting them. It is regrettable that the person died, but you cannot be held responsible for it because it was unavoidable. Harry didn't half turn these people, he isn't responsible for that, the vampires are. He didn't make the generational spell, the Red King did. The Red King wanted to kill Eb by killing little Maggie starting a chain reaction, Maggie, Harry, then Eb.. All Harry did was reverse that spell when he cut the throat of the youngest vampire who used to be Susan.. With her the rest of the vampires died, the older half turned humans died of what they used to call "natural causes," or old age. If Harry is responsible for that, he is also responsible for a lot of them becoming full living humans once more, is that also black magic?
The ritual itself is the blackest of magics. But Harry was able to subvert it, to take out a great source of evil in the world. And Susan was a willing sacrifice. She was willing to die to save her daughter's life-- and with the vampire side of her taking over, in a way, she was already dying. The reason Harry had to kill her was because she couldn't do it herself.
... He's probably got all the raw power he needs for the BAT, he just needs to learn how to use it for maximum advantage.
So my guess is that when Harry completed the ritual which destroyed the Red Court, the collateral deaths of the half-turned members of the Fellowship of St. Giles wasn't considered a violation of the laws of magic.
The human life span if all goes well can run approximately a hundred years, some may go to hundred and ten, very few perhaps to one hundred and twenty, a couple have claimed to live longer, but proof of their actual age is sketchy.. So any of the Fellowship who were beyond a hundred years of age were way past a normal life span for a human.. No, in my opinion they could no longer be considered human, at least not normal humans.Wizards?
Wizards?
I once posted that Harry wasn't really human since a human life span is much shorter. Nobody liked that.
And it seems that people are implying that you can use the product of evil to do good and that it makes it OK. If you want a good look at how that plays out in the world you should look at the results of human experimentation in WW2.
The thing is that the ritual that was used to kill the Reds was evil, that it blew up in their face doesn't change that. And Harry deliberately pushed Susan over the edge knowing what she would do. She didn't give her consent though she might have if Harry had asked. But Harry didn't ask. It makes for good drama but poor ethics.
Now look at the parallelism between what the Fallen did to Harry and what Harry did to Susan. I believe this is intentional on Jim's part.
Harry killed a RCV with a knife. He admittedly tricked Susan into being that RCV, which is no doubt a stain on his soul (though he saved her daughter in the process so not too sure how thick a stain), but that's what he did.Ik is OK because an archangle said it was OK?
He did not deploy black magic; the magic was externalized into a ritual, the human sacrifice part of it was done by the Court, and turned back upon them in karmic justice. Harry did not engage in any black magic.
And his hand in the magic destroyed a whole nation of monsters, so even if any splashed on him, it should be the cleansing rage of heaven, not the blackening fury of hell. An Archangel had, after all, pronounced Judgment Almighty on the Red Court, and the Almighty does not shy away from mass destruction if it's warranted.
I once posted that Harry wasn't really human since a human life span is much shorter. Nobody liked that.Biologically they are all human. They breed with humans and produce fertile offspring. There is no clear definition in the dresdenverse about who is human an who is not.
And it seems that people are implying that you can use the product of evil to do good and that it makes it OK.Apart from Harry triggering Susan, and maybe even that, I see this as a big trolley problem except that on one track are only monsters. It would be different if Harry actually could have stopped it but that was not possible.
If you want a good look at how that plays out in the world you should look at the results of human experimentation in WW2.
The thing is that the ritual that was used to kill the Reds was evil, that it blew up in their face doesn't change that. And Harry deliberately pushed Susan over the edge knowing what she would do. She didn't give her consent though she might have if Harry had asked. But Harry didn't ask. It makes for good drama but poor ethics.
Now look at the parallelism between what the Fallen did to Harry and what Harry did to Susan. I believe this is intentional on Jim's part.
Harry killed a RCV with a knife. He admittedly tricked Susan into being that RCV, which is no doubt a stain on his soul (though he saved her daughter in the process so not too sure how thick a stain), but that's what he did.The Archangel took he sweet time getting his vengeance on. He was a thousand years slow. And I never said anything about a stain. I said the ritual was evil. And I asked if using an evil tool was in itself evil. And the problem with Susan isn't that he killed her, it's that he used her without giving her a chance to choose, or to use that bogey man that everyone loves so much here, he denied her the Choice.
He did not deploy black magic; the magic was externalized into a ritual, the human sacrifice part of it was done by the Court, and turned back upon them in karmic justice. Harry did not engage in any black magic.
And his hand in the magic destroyed a whole nation of monsters, so even if any splashed on him, it should be the cleansing rage of heaven, not the blackening fury of hell. An Archangel had, after all, pronounced Judgment Almighty on the Red Court, and the Almighty does not shy away from mass destruction if it's warranted.
In Changes, Harry was accepting a standing offer.In Changes, I wouldn't even say Harry was making a counter-offer. He comes to Mab and asks for power. Mab says Harry knows her price. The price is to be her Knight. Harry has "a" condition that she give him power and knowledge enough to save his daughter.
Don't make her any offers. Don't accept any, not even in passing, not even anything that seems harmless or that could only be construed through context.
Harry killed a RCV with a knife. He admittedly tricked Susan into being that RCV, which is no doubt a stain on his soul ...
I'm not saying it wasn't wrong, or terrible-- it was. Harry did make the choice to play it out that way. And yes, I think he definitely was stained by triggering the black magic spell, on top of the psychological damage he took in doing what he did.
But it's not like Harry had a ton of options at that point, either. He saw the shot, and he took it-- knowing very well how horrible it was. That should have consequences.
I'm not saying it's completely justified... but it is understandable, for lack of a better word.
He tricked Susan into being no-longer-human ... and thus eligible to be killed without it "counting" as murder ? Sorry, no.I obviously disagree.
In fact, HELL no.
Morally, this is identical to killing her before she had turned; as others have said, he took away her Choice. He chose on her behalf, and then murdered her for it.
It's also worth noting it as a classic "warcrimes" method: first, you dehumanize them; then you can feel OK about murdering them.
===
Now, you may be able to argue a "greater good" argument.
You may be able to argue "time of war, tragedies happen."
You may be able to argue that "It's what Susan would have chosen, if Harry had been able to lay it out for her." This is the most tempting argument of all: Susan would have wanted it.
None of which alter the fundamental fact that Susan entered that temple with a range of choices, but then Harry took all her choices from her... and then he killed her, for reacting in the only way she could.
He tricked Susan into being no-longer-human ... and thus eligible to be killed without it "counting" as murder ? Sorry, no.
In Ghost Story we see that Harry’s suicide and handling of Molly is seen as the real crime and I tend to agree and not just because that seems to be what the archangels think.
However no matter how much love she feels for Harry, Molly was an adult at the time. The religion she was raised in, teaches that suicide is a sin, to aid it would be a sin. She knew the consequences of assisting Harry's suicide for herself spiritually as well as him. She wasn't forced by Harry to make her decision, she may have underestimated the consequences of what the guilt would do to herself, but it was still her choice to aid him.Molly was an adult but she was also Harry’s pupil. Harry was in a position of authority and trust and he abused that position. It was even worse than in a normal master pupil relationship because of the nature of the white council’s apprenticeship and the doom that was hanging over her. It was Harry’s responsibility to teach her and to prepare her for the world and this was not the way of doing it.
I am not arguing whether it was moral or not to kill Susan.With Trolley problems you do not have those argument. The only question is what is worse. Pulling the lever and let the train go to the other track of doing nothing and let it continue as planned by the red court.
I am arguing that the ritual that Harry used was a evil ritual, as Morris said, regardless of how it was used.
I am arguing that using dark magic, even for a seemingly good result, still leaves a taint. A magic taint.
I am arguing that there are consequences beyond the Laws of Magic.
Mira, I would argue that while some men Fall from grace, some are pushed. Molly is in the latter category.
Arjan, we could have a debate about the ethics of whether killing a small nation of beings that murder, torture, terrify and feed of humanity. The problem with utilitarian ethics, is that it still sucks for the few it doesn't benefit.
Which flies in the face of the Christian belief that EVERY soul is worth saving, every person's life is important. Which lines up with the Dresden Files - Harry started a war over one soul, one life (Susan) knowing that it would cause terrible destruction. You might argue his choice was foolish (although I suspect Mirror Mirror will answer that). You might argue that he didn't fully appreciate the consequences of his actions (as the White Council did). But the answer Jim leans into, if you read closely, is that it was the right decision and that war was always coming. There is a recurring theme that one soul is always worth saving and fighting for. But I will leave it at that.Because the choice between Susan and Peace was a false choice. Peace was never on the table anyway.
G33k, you are essentially right. Harry practically committed war crimes (although you could argue that it is impossible against non-humans, as war crimes only apply to humans - but as Jim points out that is hardly fair).
Morris - you've hit the nail on the head. Agreed. And yes, parallels between the Fallen's treatment of Harry and Harry's treatment of Susan. I would go further and say Harry has been moulded for his whole life to do something just like that, even if it benefits the "good" guys. Harry is human enough, for the purposes of the book. He isn't totally (wizards are called freaks by the White Court) but he is mostly enough for the supernatural world. Only Jim knows where the line is. He certainly isn't by our standards, but as we don't have magic here (probably) there isn't much point in discussing it.
Avernite - you are insisting he didn't engage in black magic, but you're basing that on your own opinion. You have failed to provide any evidence that it wasn't black magic, other than assertions. Considering how little information on black magic we have, that is understandable. But you need to do better and find some references to what does or doesn't qualify to support your argument. As for the whole Archangel supporting his actions - 1) that's not been confirmed, but even if it was an archangel speaking through Murphy as others have pointed out that doesn't necessarily mean it was Right. Jim's whole point in the quote I provided is that Right and Wrong aren't necessarily owned or defined by the "good" or "bad" guys. A recurring motif is that there are lots of elements of grey (which even Harry isn't sure of) in morality. You might disagree, but that's how the books are written. I would also argue that just because the Almighty (TWG) thinks its okay to do mass destruction, genocide is genocide and many people might have a small issue with it. Including Dresden.
For those that argue that the half-vamps are not human enough, may I remind you that Thomas is mortal enough to be Winter Knight. Think less like the White Council and think more cosmically about Choice and things will get clearer.
Mira - I never said someone steps in front of the metaphorical car. Legally you'd still probably get a charge (although a number of factors such as what country you are in, how powerful your case is, your lawyers versus the families etc would affect that result and the severity of it). If you don't drive the car, no dead person. Harry doesn't use the ritual, no dead half-vamps. The ritual is black magic, built with black magic. Hell it is even built with a bloody dark ley line. Some of you need to re-read Changes.
CrusherJen - probably right about how much taint comes is partially to do with intention as much as result, and Susan's own Choice.
AClone - Have you read the Dresden Files?! The White Council exist in the story mostly to make Harry's life harder! If they can prosecute him for something, they probably will. It's all they do for most of the series. Just because Harry helped with one problem (which created arguably a greater problem) doesn't mean he'll get any thanks. Which is essentially the feel of Peace Talks anyway, more of Harry's choices coming back to haunt him.
Mira - I never said someone steps in front of the metaphorical car. Legally you'd still probably get a charge (although a number of factors such as what country you are in, how powerful your case is, your lawyers versus the families etc would affect that result and the severity of it). If you don't drive the car, no dead person. Harry doesn't use the ritual, no dead half-vamps. The ritual is black magic, built with black magic. Hell it is even built with a bloody dark ley line. Some of you need to re-read Changes.
Molly was an adult but she was also Harry’s pupil. Harry was in a position of authority and trust and he abused that position. It was even worse than in a normal master pupil relationship because of the nature of the white council’s apprenticeship and the doom that was hanging over her. It was Harry’s responsibility to teach her and to prepare her for the world and this was not the way of doing it.I don't argue with that point, however before she became Harry's pupil, she was the child of Charity and Michael Carpenter for eighteen years. The whole of that time she was raised in the Catholic Church, she went to Catholic schools, she attended Catechism, she participated in her first Communion, she was Confirmed in the Church.... Though she did rebel against her parents and their values when she went off the rails towards becoming a warlock, I doubt that they could be totally blocked out. Being Harry's apprentice didn't brain wash her and turn her against all of those years of teaching, let alone her parents living what the Church teaches.
Assisted suicide isn't really the point. In some cultures it is perfectly acceptable. The point is what he did to get there. He had Molly break one of the seven laws.No he did not. You can do everything in someone elses mind if you are invited. Otherwise you can not check for mindmagic and try to help healing people as for example the gatekeeper did after turn coat and training your apprentice in mental defence would also be impossible.
And Harry tricked her with Truth.
Harry didn't trick Susan into turning, he told her no lies.Harry lied to Susan when he told her Martin's steel machete couldn't harm her.
[1]Hell it is even built with a bloody dark ley line. Some of you need to re-read Changes.1. I don't recall the dark ley line. Maybe I need to re-read Changes! 2. I don't think so (though I'm a little confused by your phrasing). As indicated by your WoJ quote, Jim thinks results are more important than intent. The quote could be read to mean intent is irrelevant to the morality of the action. I think intent is highly relevant, but I'm not sure Jim does. Link your post with the WoJ:
[2]CrusherJen - probably right about how much taint comes is partially to do with intention as much as result, and Susan's own Choice.
Avernite - you are insisting he didn't engage in black magic, but you're basing that on your own opinion. You have failed to provide any evidence that it wasn't black magic, other than assertions. Considering how little information on black magic we have, that is understandable. But you need to do better and find some references to what does or doesn't qualify to support your argument.The only solid things we have on black magic are:
As for the whole Archangel supporting his actions - 1) that's not been confirmed, but even if it was an archangel speaking through Murphy as others have pointed out that doesn't necessarily mean it was Right. Jim's whole point in the quote I provided is that Right and Wrong aren't necessarily owned or defined by the "good" or "bad" guys. A recurring motif is that there are lots of elements of grey (which even Harry isn't sure of) in morality. You might disagree, but that's how the books are written. I would also argue that just because the Almighty (TWG) thinks its okay to do mass destruction, genocide is genocide and many people might have a small issue with it. Including Dresden.
For those that argue that the half-vamps are not human enough, may I remind you that Thomas is mortal enough to be Winter Knight. Think less like the White Council and think more cosmically about Choice and things will get clearer.I would say rather Harry didn't murder them. He took away the crutch that extended their life unnaturally. That it didn't work the way Wizard-extension does is a clear enough sign that the human was essentially dying very long. Kind of like how ending ICU treatment on a terminal patient, while the immediate cause of their dying then and there, isn't a killing (while killing a healthy 90-year old, the wizard in comparison, is a killing).
Harry lied to Susan when he told her Martin's steel machete couldn't harm her.
Harry didn't trick Susan into turning, he told her no lies.I think Harry did the right thing but I am not a Sidhe, in my book a deliberately incomplete truth is still a lie.
I think Harry did the right thing but I am not a Sidhe, in my book a deliberately incomplete truth is still a lie.Actually I had forgotten the part about the steel, however I also doubt that Susan believed it or
On second thought the Sidhe agree with me. They never say they can not lie as far as I can remember, the say they can not speak untruth.
Actually I had forgotten the part about the steel, however I also doubt that Susan believed it orWe see everything from Harry's point of view and he is big on taking blame but as soon as Susan understood what Harry's intention was she was totally into it, she just did not have the power to do it herself.
that it made any difference once she knew the truth about Martin.
We see everything from Harry's point of view and he is big on taking blame but as soon as Susan understood what Harry's intention was she was totally into it, she just did not have the power to do it herself.
So the question is when did Susan understood what her only chance to save her daughter was and I think that that was much earlier than Harry understood that Susan understood.
Maybe she made herself snap.
So the question is when did Susan understood what her only chance to save her daughter was and I think that that was much earlier than Harry understood that Susan understood.
Maybe she made herself snap.
... The White Council exist in the story mostly to make Harry's life harder! If they can prosecute him for something, they probably will. It's all they do for most of the series ...
It's also not clear to me whether the WC can claim jurisdictionThe existence of thousand yard head shot, or a Predator drone and a Hellfire missile would seem to say that jurisdiction is a function of how bad you want Harry dead. Ask the CIA. ;)
The only solid things we have on black magic are:My understanding is that the Council's Laws of Magic are meant to be 1:1 for the Universe's Laws of Magic and the Laws of Magic cover black magic. I think the Universe's Laws of Magic are black magic, but the Council's Laws of Magic are both over and under inclusive.
1) the Laws
2) the Laws are incomplete
Actually I had forgotten the part about the steel, however I also doubt that Susan believed it orI agree in that I don't think it made a difference in what Susan would have done. I do think it makes a difference in the morality of Harry's actions.
that it made any difference once she knew the truth about Martin.
I agree in that I don't think it made a difference in what Susan would have done. I do think it makes a difference in the morality of Harry's actions.
Yes. Harry clearly was trying to manipulate Susan.Was not that exactly what she signed up for? Everything to save Maggie?
I knew how angry she was. I knew how afraid she was. Her child was about to die only inches beyond her reach, and what I did to her was as good as murder.Harry lied when Susan didn't immediately do what Harry wanted her to do. It was a d*ck move. I would have done the same thing in his shoes.
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 lithely ignore the touch of steel.
Was not that exactly what she signed up for? Everything to save Maggie?
"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."
I knew how angry she was. I knew how afraid she was. Her child was about to die only inches beyond her reach, and what I did to her was as good as murder.
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 lithely ignore the touch of steel.
Harry lied when Susan didn't immediately do what Harry wanted her to do. It was a d*ck move. I would have done the same thing in his shoes.
Exactly... Well, Harry did ask her who could have tipped off the Red King about little Maggie? Which led her to ask Martin.I mean before that. From the beginning of the book when they met and with all their interactions. She made it quite clear what she considered important and she choose to trust Harry with it.
The existence of thousand yard head shot, or a Predator drone and a Hellfire missile would seem to say that jurisdiction is a function of how bad you want Harry dead. Ask the CIA. ;)
@g33k: Jim has said that Mab would leave Harry to deal with the White Council if Harry violated the Laws of Magic and came after him.Huh; that's surprising to me!
Huh; that's surprising to me!Mab does not protect you from your own stupidity and certainly not if you break your obligations to other people.
But TYVM.
Still -- does the Senior Council know Mab well enough to make that call? I doubt she would just say it to them straightforwardly... or even hint strongly enough they'd understand.
Unless she WANTED the Harry-vs-WC conflict, of course... in which case, she'd probably "hint strongly enough they'd (mis)understand" proactively, even if Harry hadn't done anything.
(b) Do you want it bad enough to give personal offense to the Queen of Air and Darkness, Winter's Liege, Mab... by asserting your jurisdiction over her Knight?Yes, Mab completely accepts that Harry has obligations to other people besides herself. That is why she send Lea to teach Molly for example and Harry's obligations to the council are not different. She could have a different understanding of those obligations than Harry though.
Yes, Mab completely accepts that Harry has obligations to other people besides herself. That is why she send Lea to teach Molly for example and Harry's obligations to the council are not different. She could have a different understanding of those obligations than Harry though.The White Council and Mab understand each other very well, they also respect each other's power and place in the universe. To both of them Harry is a valuable chess piece to be moved or sacrificed
Harry just needs to meet all his obligations.
I mean before that. From the beginning of the book when they met and with all their interactions. She made it quite clear what she considered important and she choose to trust Harry with it.
That too, you might say that Susan was manipulating Harry, because after six years she finally decided to tell him about little Maggie. The only reason she did that was little Maggie was in mortal danger and the only person who could or would help is Harry, she needed him..And Harry did not betray her in any way, he did exact what she wanted from him and now he needs to be a father for Maggie. That is what Susan would have wanted him to be as well.
And Harry did not betray her in any way, he did exact what she wanted from him and now he needs to be a father for Maggie. That is what Susan would have wanted him to be as well.
Yup, I'd call that successful manipulation on Susan's part.Except that she was quite clear about what she wanted and why. Telling the truth was enough. Harry did not need much manipulation anyway. There were no hidden tricks and subtle lies to influence Harry. I see no manipulation here.
Except that she was quite clear about what she wanted and why. Telling the truth was enough. Harry did not need much manipulation anyway. There were no hidden tricks and subtle lies to influence Harry. I see no manipulation here.
In my opinion it was still manipulation, open manipulation to be sure, but that is what it was.Susan did not manipulate Harry emotionally or otherwise it was already there as soon as the news reached him befor she was even in Chicago.
If he had said it to get her to strike, it would have been a dick move.. But he didn't.Why did he say it?
Why did he say it?
Maybe as a hope that it wouldn't hurt her, Lea had said she was protected.
His knife can’t hurt you, I thought, though I knew damned well that no faerie magic could blithely ignore the touch of steel.
Butcher, Jim. Changes (The Dresden Files, Book 12) (p. 517). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
He knew she wasn't protected from steel. He had no hope that she was:
In my opinion it was still manipulation, open manipulation to be sure, but that is what it was.
Susan took away Harry's choice, in that phone call, every bit as much as Harry took hers, when he made her realize that Martin was behind Maggie's kidnapping.
Yes. It is also interesting that she went to him for help with little Maggie after keeping the knowledge that she had even existed from him for the past six years. Her excuse? Harry would have been a danger to their child. She put a real guilt trip on him.Who else could she go for help? She should have involved Harry earlier, not never.
No one is arguing that point, the point is it made no difference to the outcome. Susan didn't attack Martin because she thought she was protected from steel.You are arguing that point. Harry lied to Susan for a reason. Your saying he didn't lie to her and that he didn't intend to push her to attack. I ask again, why did he say it? The only reason I can see is because she didn't attack when he accused Martin.
And Susan did not put a guilt trip on Harry. Harry was not feeling guilt about the situation. He correctly identified Susan’s guilt in hiding the child from him but choose not to dwell on it because they both shared the overwhelming desire to save their daughter. There were dangerous emotions but that were emotions they shared. No clever manipulation going on.
Susan's eyes hardened. "How many people have gotten killed around you, Harry? How many hurt?" She raked her fingers through her hair. "For God's sake. You said yourself that your apartment has been under attack. Would that have gone any better if you'd had a toddler to watch over?'
You are arguing that point. Harry lied to Susan for a reason. Your saying he didn't lie to her and that he didn't intend to push her to attack. I ask again, why did he say it? The only reason I can see is because she didn't attack when he accused Martin.Um, credit Lea with the lie, she is the one who put the cloak on her and enforced the markings on her then shot a bullet at her and it didn't hurt her. Harry repeated that, though he had serious doubts about how effective Fae magic would be against steel. However who knows? Never was tested, was it? He didn't need to tell her that the knife wouldn't hurt her to get her to attack. All he had to do was get her to ask Martin the fatal question as to how her daughter was where she was about to be slaughtered. Point is, the bit about whether or not the knife would hurt her was totally irrelevant, Susan wasn't worried about her safety at that point.
... Um, credit Lea with the lie, she is the one who put the cloak on her and enforced the markings on her then shot a bullet at her and it didn't hurt her.Susan was supernatural-savvy enough -- by this time -- to know about faeries & iron. She'd have known the (lead) bullet would be fully-resisted by the faerie magic, but iron/steel weaponry would not be.
... Harry repeated that, though he had serious doubts about how effective Fae magic would be against steel.No, Harry specifically claimed Martin's (steel) knife wouldn't hurt Susan, in that moment. He wasn't alleging any general/overall safety, just the one instance... and presenting as a "fact" something he knew was NOT a fact: faerie magic cannot blithely ignore iron. Not even Queen Mab's magic at Arctis Tor, the heart of Winter's power; overwhelmingly more power than Winterfae magic at the heart of the Red Court's power, in front of the Red King and the LoON's!
... Point is, the bit about whether or not the knife would hurt her was totally irrelevant, Susan wasn't worried about her safety at that point.No.
Harry was still trying to manipulate her into the attack. He lied to her, and the objective of that lie was to get her to attack.
Harry was still trying to manipulate her into the attack. He lied to her, and the objective of that lie was to get her to attack.
Susan tried to defend her actions and/ or explain why she did so. It would have been strange if she did not and I have no reason to believe that she lied especially because Harry made it clear what he thought about it and that did not change. This was not a clever manipulative ploy, it was just what you can expect from someone whose past acts are questioned.
Yes, she did, she did it to justify not telling him he was a father.
That is a guilt trip my friend, implying that he wouldn't have enough sense to even try to make
a safe home for a child. At the same time deflecting her own feelings of guilt because of what had happened to little Maggie. Um, credit Lea with the lie, she is the one who put the cloak on her and enforced the markings on her then shot a bullet at her and it didn't hurt her. Harry repeated that, though he had serious doubts about how effective Fae magic would be against steel. However who knows? Never was tested, was it? He didn't need to tell her that the knife wouldn't hurt her to get her to attack. All he had to do was get her to ask Martin the fatal question as to how her daughter was where she was about to be slaughtered. Point is, the bit about whether or not the knife would hurt her was totally irrelevant, Susan wasn't worried about her safety at that point.
Again no clever manipulation of Harry or an exploitation of Harry’s guilt. Just a cry for help. Harry and Susan both make everything highly emotionally charged but you can blame both of them for that. Susan is probably the one feeling guilt for hiding Maggie the way she did.
Pretty far down the list on what did get her to attack... These "moral" arguments are nice, but deathSo you agree that Harry lied and tried to manipulate Susan.
was imminent for their little girl. Susan wasn't going to survive as she was in any case, you don't think she wouldn't have lost it once the Red King cut little Maggie's throat, then Harry and Eb died? Harry was grasping at straws, Susan was the last one he had left. I can buy
all the moral arguments if this was Harry's plan all along to defeat the Red King, but it wasn't.
But it didn't work, so it is irrelevant, what worked was the truth.. Getting Susan to ask the fatal question to Martin, was he behind the situation where her baby is about to get her throat cut? When Martin confirmed that he was, then she lost it. Harry didn't "murder" her because he lied in the heat of the moment that she was protected by Fae magic, that wasn't even an effective argument.
So you agree that Harry lied and tried to manipulate Susan.
What do you mean by "Harry was grasping at straws" and "But it didn't work, so it was irrelevant, what worked was the truth?"Harry’s ability to feel guilty about the wrong things and totally miss the obvious namely his suicide and especially his handling of Molly?
What was the motivation of "grasping at straws?"
What do you call it when someone says something that isn't true, they know it isn't true, and they hope for God's eventual forgiveness before they say it?
What was the motivation of "grasping at straws?"
Harry’s ability to feel guilty about the wrong things and totally miss the obvious namely his suicide and especially his handling of Molly?
Huh??? Oh there was the little matter of his and Susan's daughter about to get her throat cut, and he was out of options. There was no play left that to save her.Because in the end what is morality about? It is about how we interact with other people. Harry and Susan had certain expectations of themselves and of each other. These expectations were quite clear from the beginning and confirmed with each interaction. Do everything and more to save their daughter. Anything possible.
Yup.
Because in the end what is morality about? It is about how we interact with other people. Harry and Susan had certain expectations of themselves and of each other. These expectations were quite clear from the beginning and confirmed with each interaction. Do everything and more to save their daughter. Anything possible.
Both Susan and Harry were not that concerned with their own lives. Or the planet for that matter. A lie to help each other do what had to be done? Nothing.
There was only one option open and Harry had to do everything possible to take that road including lying to Susan. Not doing so would have been the worst breach of morality. It would have been a betrayal of Susan and everything they expected of each other.
Susan did not mind. She knew her daughter was saved. That was the important thing for her.
Harry’s ability to feel guilty about the wrong things and totally miss the obvious namely his suicide and especially his handling of Molly?He literally couldn't remember Molly handling his suicide at this point, so I don't see how that's relevant.
Huh??? Oh there was the little matter of his and Susan's daughter about to get her throat cut, and he was out of options. There was no play left that would save her.You still haven't answered any question I've asked you. Did Harry lie to Susan or not? What was his goal in telling Susan that Martin's machete couldn't hurt her?
A lie to help each other do what had to be done? Nothing.So you agree with me that Harry lied to Susan to get her to act? Because that's what I'm saying. Mira is saying he didn't lie to get her to act, and it didn't matter that he lied to her to get her to act because she was going to do it anyway. Stating that he didn't lie and his lie didn't matter seems a little contradictory to me.
You still haven't answered any question I've asked you. Did Harry lie to Susan or not? What was his goal in telling Susan that Martin's machete couldn't hurt her?
So you agree with me that Harry lied to Susan to get her to act? Because that's what I'm saying. Mira is saying he didn't lie to get her to act, and it didn't matter that he lied to her to get her to act because she was going to do it anyway. Stating that he didn't lie and his lie didn't matter seems a little contradictory to me.
He literally couldn't remember Molly handling his suicide at this point, so I don't see how that's relevant.Not at that moment but apparently he did not feel guilty about it when he took that decision either. And there was the decision to take his sensitive young pupil to that place. He did not feel guilty about that either.
You still haven't answered any question I've asked you. Did Harry lie to Susan or not? What was his goal in telling Susan that Martin's machete couldn't hurt her?Everything he said at that moment had that purpose, to make her do what was necessary. I do not know if it even mattered for the eventual outcome but that was the intention. But lying is never a sin in the absolute sense, it is always contextual.
So you agree with me that Harry lied to Susan to get her to act? Because that's what I'm saying. Mira is saying he didn't lie to get her to act, and it didn't matter that he lied to her to get her to act because she was going to do it anyway. Stating that he didn't lie and his lie didn't matter seems a little contradictory to me.
Concentrating on that lie is acting like Harry. It is concentrating on the wrong things. His problem was not how he and Susan interacted. His problem was his let the world burn mentality, let Molly burn. A mentality he completely shared with Susan. Ghost Story explained that all.
While it is shocking that both Harry and Susan's attitude was to let the world burn, one has to also look at it from a parent's perspective. Most parents would declare that the world could burn if it would save their child's life, thank goodness most are never in the position to have to declare that. Also an added factor I think was the total guilt in the extreme both Harry and Susan must have felt.Most parents can at least understand this attitude under the circumstances though I doubt I really understood it before we got ours.
1] The unprotected sex that led to their child being born. 2] All the reasons their child was in danger in the first place. 3] The repercussions from the decisions that came out of that for the future.
As to Molly, I still think she made her own choices to help Harry, though I doubt that either thought through what those choices would do to them. It will be interesting in future books now that Molly isBut we are not talking about Molly’s responsibility, we are talking about Harry and his responsibility as Molly’s mentor, the trust Molly’s parents placed in him.
in effect both one of Harry's bosses and in that position because she chose to help Harry suicide in the first place, whether or not she confronts him about it. That should tell us a lot, we can point fingers, but it is both Harry and Molly that have to live with the results.
But we are not talking about Molly’s responsibility, we are talking about Harry and his responsibility as Molly’s mentor, the trust Molly’s parents placed in him.
He did not think it through because he did not want to think it through.
He wanted her to calm down and think... It is like telling someone going into danger that everything is going to be okay when both of you know damn well it won't be. Now you can call that lying if you want to, but it is not done out of malice like you are implying.I now understand your position and can make sense of "Harry's not lying." I don't agree with it because I don't think he was trying to calm her down, but his precise motivation in that line has to be interpreted by the reader.
Not at that moment but apparently he did not feel guilty about it when he took that decision either. And there was the decision to take his sensitive young pupil to that place.I'd say he felt guilty about both at the time, so I don't see how it's so apparent. He felt "like an utter bastard for asking" Molly to do it. I can't think of a quote precise enough to easily search, but I'm pretty sure he felt guilty for bringing all his friends with him, Molly most specifically, at the time.
Concentrating on that lie is acting like Harry.The only reason I was focusing on the lie is that Mira disputes that it was a lie. Lying is wrong, but it's wrong like killing people is wrong. Sometimes, it's actually the right thing to do because we live in an imperfect world. (Obviously killing is on a very different end of the moral gravity spectrum).
While it is shocking that both Harry and Susan's attitude was to let the world burnI don't find it surprising, much less shocking.
I'd say he felt guilty about both at the time, so I don't see how it's so apparent. He felt "like an utter bastard for asking" Molly to do it. I can't think of a quote precise enough to easily search, but I'm pretty sure he felt guilty for bringing all his friends with him, Molly most specifically, at the time.
The only reason I was focusing on the lie is that Mira disputes that it was a lie. Lying is wrong, but it's wrong like killing people is wrong. Sometimes, it's actually the right thing to do because we live in an imperfect world. (Obviously killing is on a very different end of the moral gravity spectrum).
One day I hope God will forgive me for giving birth to the idea that came next.There isn't really anything to say about that. It achieved the goal that Harry had stated, free his daughter at any cost. Would Susan have went along with it? Probably as written. But in the book Harry needed her in a beserker rage. Because she had already been subdued. With a knife against her throat the only way out was to be prepared to get your throat cut or to be so enraged that you wouldn't think about it.
Because I never will.
I knew how angry she was. I knew how afraid she was. Her child was about to die only inches beyond her reach, and what I did to her was as good as murder.
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.
If you assume that Harry knows right from wrong then the text is explicit. He lied to her and he manipulated her, knowing it when he did it.There isn't really anything to say about that. It achieved the goal that Harry had stated, free his daughter at any cost. Would Susan have went along with it? Probably as written. But in the book Harry needed her in a beserker rage. Because she had already been subdued. With a knife against her throat the only way out was to be prepared to get your throat cut or to be so enraged that you wouldn't think about it.
The prevailing notion here seems to be that good people can't do bad things. Sure they can. And sometimes they do them for noble reasons. But you can't make those decisions other than what they are. And I wouldn't trust a man that could do that and not feel guilt and remorse.
"That son of a bitch, Martin," I said. "He. . .set her up. Sold out the family that had had Maggie. I think he did it to set me on a collision course with the Red King, maybe hoping to focus the White Council on the war effort a little harder."
If you want to know what it would have changed had he not lied to her you would need to ask Jim. He wrote it the way he wrote it. Jim makes a point of the lie, in my mind that means he wants you to see it as a morally ambiguous act. YMMV. Certainly it's for the greater good, if you aren't a vampire. And Susan probably would have been good with it. But since he didn't ask there is no way to know.Jim wants to wreck our emotions and your child as a ritual sacrifice to kill you calls up a lot of strong emotions.
Notably in the text he asks her as she changes, but she isn't human by that point else the ritual wouldn't have worked. It seems kinda pointless. Had she wanted to be a vampire she would have already been one. And she had been working against them since she was bitten. I've never really understood why Jim plotted it this way. I suppose he wanted Harry to have a child, for whatever reason.
Jim wants to wreck our emotions and your child as a ritual sacrifice to kill you calls up a lot of strong emotions.
Notably in the text he asks her as she changes, but she isn't human by that point else the ritual wouldn't have worked. It seems kinda pointless. Had she wanted to be a vampire she would have already been one. And she had been working against them since she was bitten. I've never really understood why Jim plotted it this way. I suppose he wanted Harry to have a child, for whatever reason.
He most likely encouraged Susan to keep the child in the area, he plotted with the Red King to murder the innocent family she stayed with and kidnap the child.I find myself curious where this steady assumption of Susan keeping Maggie "in the area" has arisen from. The text specifically says that Maggie was with placed with a family "away from the fighting". The only indication of where that family may have actually been would be assumptions based on their surname.
He most likely encouraged Susan to keep the child in the area, he plotted with the Red King to murder the innocent family she stayed with and kidnap the child.I find myself curious where this steady assumption of Susan keeping Maggie "in the area" has arisen from. The text specifically says that Maggie was with placed with a family "away from the fighting". The only indication of where that family may have actually been located would be assumptions based solely on their surname.
He most likely encouraged Susan to keep the child in the area, he plotted with the Red King to murder the innocent family she stayed with and kidnap the child.I find myself curious where this steady assumption of Susan keeping Maggie "in the area" has arisen from. The text specifically says that Maggie was with placed with a family "away from the fighting". The only indication of where that family may have actually been located would be assumptions based solely on their surname.
The old man lifted his hand with a single sharp word, and a wall of pure arcane power blazed into light between us...
I find myself curious where this steady assumption of Susan keeping Maggie "in the area" has arisen from. The text specifically says that Maggie was with placed with a family "away from the fighting". The only indication of where that family may have actually been located would be assumptions based solely on their surname.
Please feel free to remind me of any other references by good guys. Aside from Lash, I mean.Eb might know what Margret intended. The argument that tips off Arianna as to Harry's linage was probably related to that. Almost certainly Lea.
Eb might know what Margret intended. The argument that tips off Arianna as to Harry's linage was probably related to that. Almost certainly Lea.
The only indication of where that family may have actually been would be assumptions based on their surname.There's also that they, including Maggie, spoke Spanish and Susan visited. But that only implies area. They could have been in Spain or any number of places.
The thing is, I've yet to see any indication that any of the good guys knows that Harry is a Starborn.Well, Karin and the Erlking know. Karin likely doesn't have a clue as to what it means and the question of whether or not the Erlking is a good guy or bad guy is open.
If I remember correctly Eb and Margaret and Lord Raith got together for dinner once or twice a year. Arianna was present for one of those dinners. I don't think it was out in the open as far as Eb and Margaret being father/daughter, but the way they interacted/argued apparently was a big tip off to Arianna that at the very least they were closely related. Also Susan named her daughter afterI don't recall anything about there being multiple dinners. It may have been brought up in Blood Right, but Arianna's involvement was definitely brought up at the end of Changes.
Margaret, that was a big tip off, Lord Raith may have told Arianna as well.
The problem with wizards is that they don’t share information. So even if Marta or Rashid know about Harry being a star born that does not mean anybody else knows.
... Martha Liberty mentions what Harry is destined for way back in...Summer Knight? In that case, I think she was referring to DuMorne's intention to shape him as an enforcer, something that Morgan echoes in his final note ...
I don't recall anything about there being multiple dinners. It may have been brought up in Blood Right, but Arianna's involvement was definitely brought up at the end of Changes.
A dinner. Maggie--my Maggie--asked me to a dinner.Ch. 49.