Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Mira

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 458
DF Spoilers / Re: Carlos and Chandler's mentors
« on: Yesterday at 11:41:03 AM »
But Harry is too ignorant of magic:  he's got more than a century of serious study before the senior wizards will take his knowledge-level seriously... and he doesn't have time to learn, before the BAT.

My take is a little different, one of the big lessons from Fool Moon is that names have power.  Harry said he couldn't give any more of his names to Chauncy because that would give Chauncy power over him.  In later books he is even careful as to how he pronounces his names because the proper inflection or lack there of can hand another being power over him.  We saw how upset Uriel got when Harry tried to mess with his real name. However Uriel was okay with an all together different nickname that wasn't connected to his real name.  So I think when Harry gives us his full name, he is then daring us after we know his full story to conjure with his name, if we can. 

DF Spoilers / Re: Carlos and Chandler's mentors
« on: April 14, 2024, 11:56:34 AM »
Assuming he survives "when all is said and done".

I think what's particularly interesting to consider is how long Harry will live, and how much will we see of his whole existence. Wizards live several hundred years, and give this story goes into the End of Days and is titled "The Dresden Files" one might assume we see his whole story. Jim has openly said in previous interviews that he isn't sure if Harry will survive the series.

Not maybe as we have known him, but Harry will survive.  But then again, Jim is now successful enough that if he loses some readers because he kills Harry off it won't hurt him that much.  Also consider, Jim has already "killed" Harry off once and brought him back, and he isn't the same Harry he was before, nor is his world.
t only that, I think it should be noted that Harry fundamentally rejects authority. While he has matured and become less abrasive, he ultimately still dislikes the idea of any governing body being in charge of him or anyone else. He's quite the libertarian. So, in the event the White Council does dissolve, I don't know that Harry would be the one to rebuild it. That's more of a Carlos type-of-thing.
Yes, young Harry rejected authority in a lot of ways, corrupt authority especially.  I disagree, Harry is no libertarian, not in the classic sense.  Up until they rejected him outright, Harry had a lot of respect for the White Council from just the way he talked about it.  No, he didn't follow all the rules all of the time, but more out of nessesity rather than disregard for them or belief that they didn't have merit.  Go back to his debate with the Merlin in his defense of Molly in Proven Guilty, that wasn't argued by a libertarian, it was argued by a future Merlin wanting the White Council to follow it's own rules.  Carlos maybe still young but he still represents the old guard, Harry is the new.
Dresden is an outsider (not the monster...probably...that's another theory for another day). But he doesn't want to be part of the establishment. He likes being on the outer. Look at his last conversation with Carlos.
Harry didn't leave the White Council, the White Council left him.  I also disagree that Harry likes being an outsider, he cannot afford to be with the BAT coming.  He has to learn to play well with others and become a leader.  This is what makes the series interesting, Harry has to evolve and is evolving, he has had to learn to play nice with some and reject others, watching him grow up is what makes the series compelling.

DF Spoilers / Re: Harry is a Dad...Again..😳
« on: April 10, 2024, 04:01:43 PM »
I think there's a fair chance for that. 1. If we're to believe the insinuation that Gard makes in Aftermath, Valkyrie is a state/position that can be obtained, and we all know how Murphy is, she climbed up the ladder pretty fast in her old job, she would at least try to do it in the afterlife as well, if it's remotely possible. 2. Harry is slowly being surrounded by weapons/attributes/allies that he will need for whatever final battle he has to fight, it wouldn't surprise me that what happened to Murph was a strategic play to put her (even if only to play with the myth of it) in place to be the Valkyrie that favors him and accompany him to victory.

I think you are mistaken, Valkyrie isn't a state/position that can be obtained.. Though Jim might make it one.

DF Spoilers / Re: Harry is a Dad...Again..😳
« on: April 10, 2024, 09:52:51 AM »
I think Harry and Lara do marry the wild thing honeymoon...and Lara conceives...just a afterthought twist... besides Maggie needs to be a big sister. 😳😜👍

She already is..

DF Spoilers / Re: Carlos and Chandler's mentors
« on: April 09, 2024, 03:01:29 AM »
I like this train of thought. Harry could build a new council of wizards when all is said and done.

Great minds think alike! ;)

DF Spoilers / Re: Carlos and Chandler's mentors
« on: April 05, 2024, 08:49:24 PM »
I don't think Chandler was all that young, or that we know he had any "rapid rise in rank."  I got much more of a sense that he was long-established as a warden (and rather older than Dresden), by the time we first meet him.  Of course, this would just put him into the "50-250" range of wizardly "almost unaging," so we can't really be at all sure.

  I don't think Chandler is that much older than Harry, but I agree he is older, perhaps fifty to seventy.  I do think though that he has been a Warden a lot longer than either Harry or Carlos. 
Not sure about WoJ. My gut still says Chandler is a bad guy and that Drakul didn't send him to a bad place. I mean, really. Why waste a wizard level talent by sending them to nothingness when you could turn him into a Blampire?

Odd, I feel the opposite, I predict that in Mirror Mirror Harry will rescue and return with him and the White Council won't trust him because of it. Thus Chandler will also be kicked not only out of the Wardens but the White Council as well.  This will allow him to join Harry and fill the role left vacant by the retirement of Michael, imprisonment of Thomas, and rejection of friendship by Carlos.

DF Spoilers / Re: Mab Roade with the conquerer
« on: April 02, 2024, 12:36:48 PM »
+1 for William the Conqueror.

Also note:  that's William, Duke of Normandy (i.e. France);
and a huge amount of the King Arthur legendarium comes from France.

If "Mab" rode with William, she may have originally been a French girl.

Although William is centuries post-Arthur... but Merlin could certainly have survived (indeed, with his known 5-ply time prison element of the Demonreach enchantment, he was certainly active well-after the time of William)

Not sure if any of this is precisely meaningful -- vis-a-vis the Dresden Files and our various guesses & prognostications as to how things will go -- but it's interesting grist for our mills!

It's possible on Merlin, but if you go by mythology, Merlin had long been asleep by that time. 

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 29, 2024, 10:19:46 PM »
The naive (aka ignorant) POV is one of the key types of "unreliable narrator."

And Harry is always ignorant.

  That,isn't true because always[/i ] implies an absolute..  Harry may be or can be ignorant in some areas, but he isn't always ignorant in all areas.. However if you want to agree that you too are always ignorant, I will admit to that as well, since there are a lot of things you and I don't know, thus are always ignorant.
He starts that way (q.v. Jim writing an actual, literal, "talking head" to "educate" Harry); but, despite how much he has learned, Harry stays that way:

    he's a magical heavyweight, and he's fighting his way into the deeper & murkier end of the supernatural power-pool
    he's also a PI, so he inquires & investigates as a central element of his professional life

Despite all he has learned, he keeps forging out beyond what he knows, into new areas... areas where he's still ignorant.
Or do you call that curiosity?  Without curiosity there is no progress.. However exploring new areas isn't simple, it is always complicated, and an intelligent person knows he or she doesn't know everything.. So Harry is a detective, he is investigating to find answers, but with the answers come more questions to find answers to..  Yup, Harry is ignorant, just like you and I.
Finally, I reiterate:  Jim himself says that Harry is an unreliable narrator.  When professional writer (who has not only a bunch of successful novels, but a bunch of academic & workshop training in writing) says "I used this well-known method" ... I honestly don't understand why it's so important to you to deny it.

Just Googled it;
What Is an Unreliable Narrator in Writing? An unreliable narrator is an untrustworthy storyteller, most often used in narratives with a first-person point of view. The unreliable narrator is either deliberately deceptive or unintentionally misguided, forcing the reader to question their credibility as a storyteller.Sep 29, 2021

Yes, the Dresden Files is written in the first person.
Is Harry an untrustworthy storyteller?  Sometimes due to his own errors and mistakes, but is he always untrustworthy? No, he isn't..

Is Harry deliberately deceptive in his story telling?  I'd say not..

Unintentionally misguided? Sometimes, but not always..

Forcing the reader to question their credibility as a storyteller?  For some of you apparently.. However when you have lived as long as I have, it is easier to see the whole picture of a person's life, the series covers a huge chunk of Harry's life.  Perhaps I am the only one here, but there is no way I could read and reread over a dozen books written in the first person if I felt the story teller had no credibility as a story teller.. What a waste of my time!  And yes, Jim is a good successful writer, he knows that as well!  He skillfully mixes the two, the reliable with the unreliable, so we are looking for the truth along with Harry, thenwhen the truth is found, and since it is written in first person, we the reader usually accept the truth, that Harry has found out and is reliably telling us!   
OK, this is an entirely different point!  And it can be a crutch, yes; but equally, it can be simply point out that just because Harry says such-and-such is "true" (like his early reports of Mab being "the archetypal evil queen"), that too isn't really "evidence" that "such-and-such" is a "truth" of the Dresdenverse.

Thank you, that is my point! Too many use it as a crutch..

Yes, I am merely pointing out that what Harry said when he was young and inexperienced might not be true,but for him in that point in time, it was true.. So the picture he paints of Mab in Summer Knight was unreliable. However as he gotten older and understands more, the picture he paints of Mab now, is much more reliable.  Or if Jane Austin wrote "Pride and Prejudice" in the first person, that person being Elizabeth, or Darcy for that matter, both would be very unreliable narrators because their first impressions of each other were totally wrong.

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 29, 2024, 02:33:32 PM »
Yes they do.

"Unreliable narrator" is a specific literary term, a method/technique authors use; it has a specific meaning.  Jim Butcher says he's using it, and shows us this in the books.

Being "naive" (inexperienced, ignorant) is very-specifically one well-known form of this "unreliable narrator" method.

I understand, but if you go back and read the different definitions of what an unreliable narrator is, Harry really doesn't fit, at least not consistently.  Yes, he makes mistakes, can be inexperienced, and sometimes ignorant, but not consistently.  I would like to see in context of what Jim actually said about Harry.  Is Harry more reliable in the later books as he and we the readers learn more?  Or can anything be believed since 95% of the time it is Harry who is doing the story telling?  Harry who is lot more experienced and a lot less ignorant than he was in the early books, is he more reliable now?  What I am saying is both can be true at the same time.  Too many times the term "unreliable narrator" is the fall back crutch when there is no evidence to prove the poster's point one way or another. 

The series is told in first person, this does present problems in the narration of the story.  The teller can be wrong as Harry has been from time to time, especially in the early books when he was younger and trying to figure out what was going on.  If this was a consistent pattern of his through out the books, would you enjoy reading the story if you believed the story teller was full of BS 90% of the time?  Don't think so, and as the series has gone on, Harry alters his views about other characters and events as we do in life.. 

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 28, 2024, 04:43:57 PM »
It's a 1st-person-POV story, so Harry only "knows" what the author writes him as knowing... and as noticing, in the moment (for example, there's the scene where Lash reveals there was a veiled figure at the Ordo Lebes meeting); though Harry is a keen observer, e.g. Harry noticed Abby's medic-alert bracelet.

It is, what it is, right? 
But most of all, Jim himself attests that Harry is an unreliable narrator, and that Harry has a fairly simple & "straightforward" perspective, and mostly doesn't  grasp the subtler (and more-correct) nuances of many situations & individuals.
Or more to the point, the author is giving himself wiggle room for changing his mind later in a long series or CYAing for his own mistakes that his "Beta Readers" might miss.  So it all has to be taken with a grain of salt.  I just think too many times it is a convenient excuse for posters who fail to adequately back up their own posts.  If they can't prove their point the fall back line is Harry is an unreliable narrator..
Early Mab was written as the stereotypical "mythical villain" figure, the archetype and prototype of all Evil Queens (and Kings, &c); later we see that she's cold&hard because she's Winter, but possibly the single mightiest champion who's fighting on behalf of Creation.
But Harry's early perceptions of Mab,or of Morgan for that matter, don't make Harry an unreliable narrator.  They were accurate as he saw them at the time as a young inexperienced wizard.  When we first meet Harry he is a young wizard in his mid-twenties, a lot has happened to him, the characters, and the world around him in the last 35 years, and with them his perceptions  Though he writes in first person, he writes not as a historian beginning the first page of the book," back in 1982 these are the events as I remember them.." No, his tale reads in first person, in that time period, as he perceived it in that time as a young man.  I bet if you were to try and narrate a story about your life at 25, even with a daily diary, you'd do some correcting about the people you've met and how you saw the world at that time, at 50 you see the people you have met and the world around you differently.  So for as he saw it at the time, right or wrongly, I think Harry is quite reliable.. That doesn't make him always correct, but for that moment as he saw it, he was.. Now often he will correct or admit he was wrong about events and characters as the series goes along.  Events, information have changed his impressions of characters like Mab and Morgan in addition to his own maturity.
Harry's "unreliable" narration is from a place of ignorance, & an unrealistically-simplistic perspective.

No more than any human perspective, looking at the series as a whole, I think you can say Harry's perspective is a hell of a lot less simplistic in the last five books, from what it was in the first five..  Harry's narration is reliable for the time period he was writing in, it has shown mental and emotional growth over the series.  His world has become more complex, he has a character has become more complex and matured.
"When I was a boy of 14, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be 21, I was astonished at how much the old man had learned in seven years." -Mark Twain.Mar 24, 2015

The same can be said of Harry.. ;)

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 28, 2024, 03:10:10 PM »
Three(4?) magicians:  Harry Houdini, David Copperfield, & the Blackstones (Sr. & Jr),  if you'll forgive the nitpick.

You are right, been down with COVID, forgot about Blackstone..  However nothing really magical about the names except the men who had them.. However though all three were great illusionists and vanilla magicians, it was all stage craft and no wizard powers involved.  Natural that they would be Malcolm's idols and that he'd name his son after them and hope that someday young Harry would follow in his footsteps.   

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 27, 2024, 09:53:30 PM »
Harry the unreliable narrator with a very confusing backstory even without the constant shifts?

Is he?  Everyone says that yet outside of a few short stories he is the only narrator we've got. So is he a liar? Just stupid? Maybe senile when he wrote his story?  Unless you got an alternative story out there..
Let's jump back to Star wars for the metaphor of chosen Orphan. Did luke know... Anything that was true? Leia what about Rey?
What has that to do with anything?  Harry is a starborn, he would be so whether he was an orphan or not.  As far as his names go as Harry explains back in Fool Moon, it isn't the names themselves that would give Chauncy power over him, it is giving him, his names..  Harry was careful even to change the inflection of how to say the names he did give him to try and prevent Chauncy from having power over him..  Didn't matter if his name was John Jinglehimer Smith, or Harry David Copperfield Dresden, it was giving his name or part of his name that gave Chauncy power over him and what he bargained for.
I find it far more likely they named him together, as they were indeed together before her death 👀
So what if they did? Harry's name in of itself has no power, at least up to this point it hasn't shown itself to have power of any kind or protection.
I find it fair less likely Malcolm named him unilaterally and just by happenstance gave him the extra protection of names in a verse where such things actually matter.(Something Harry mentioned in storm front, FM, GP, ECT)
Whether Malcolm did or didn't give him those names unilaterally doesn't matter.  The name, Harry, in of itself has no power or protection, nor David, nor Copperfield, nor Dresden, what gives power is that they are his names.
Again:  do we know this?  Was he on-board with the "starborn" scheme?  I don't really count the scene in the dream (around the campfire), because it's evident that Malcolm was VERY clued-in at that point.
Oh I think he was more clued in than you think, at least the importance of the conception, even if he didn't fully understand.  This is hinted at both by Margaret herself during Harry's soul gaze with Thomas in Blood Rites and when Lash begins to tell him about his power over Outsiders in White Night.  It takes two to make a baby, and that's even more important in the case of a star born.

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 27, 2024, 04:21:04 PM »
We know who Harry was named after, but it's actually entirely a logical leap that it was Malcolm who named him at all.. Padme didn't survive child birth and she named her kids.
And since classically the third name itself is a direct result of the 'hidden name's convention', I find it highly unlikely he just happened to get two. Wasn't for bargaining, it's for it's original purposes, protection.

So are you saying that Jim stole the idea from Star Wars?  Even if he did, Harry was born before the prequels to the original Star Wars trilby came out, the first one 1999.  So yeah, possible, but at the same time unlikely.  Just as likely that Malcolm a vanilla human stage magician would name his son after a well known and I imagine admired stage magicians, Harry Houdini and David Copperfield.  In fact I believe Harry said that back in Storm Front.. Now Malcolm could have lied to him about that, but what would be the point.

DF Spoilers / Re: Does Thomas get a free pass?
« on: March 26, 2024, 02:28:45 PM »

  I realize we are going far afield again, but I guess it is all related and there are so few of us now posting.
The DF Wiki says so, too:

    The tradition of the White Court is to not tell a young potential succubus what they will become, or even anything about the supernatural world. In their childhood and early teens they are raised as a vanilla human. Their first feeding, which is always fatal, comes as a surprise to them, and introduces them into the world of the White Court.

(footnoting this factoid to White Night ch.27; I have not gone back to find the original passage(s) supporting this.)

I just did go back to Chapter 27 of White Night, other than stating that Thomas was hungry and that he tries not to kill, nothing about what the DF Wiki sights.. However in Blood Rites there is, it talks about if Inari is in love she might be able to avoid that first feeding. Even if she cannot avoid it, if she and the young man love one another the Hunger Demon could be killed.
Blood Rites 164-165
page 164, Thomas leaned up against the wall beside my mother's portrait.  He pushed his hair back from his face with one hand.  "She hasn't been taken by her Hunger yet," he said.  "Once she starts feeding it there's no going back.  She'll be like us for the rest of us.  My father is pushing her toward that point.  I want to stop him."
"Because if. . .if she's in love, that first time, it could kill her Hunger.  She'd be free.  I think she is mature enough to be capable of that love now. There's a young man she's all twitterpated about."
That indicates there is a choice if the would be White Court vamp knows before hand.  The reason why the set up for Inari's first feed to be on Harry, she isn't in love with him.. She'd kill him, be hooked.  Also note that timing is important, Thomas states that he thinks Inari is mature enough to experience true love.. So Raith has to set up his daughters before they have a chance to be in love.
page 165
Thomas pressed his lips together for a moment and then said.  "If the kid loves her in return, then she could have a life.  She could be free of the kinds of things that---"  His voice broke.  He had to cough before he continued."Things like what happened to Justine.  Like what my father has done to my other sisters."
"What do you mean, done to them?"
"He establishes that he is their superior,  He overpowers them.  Pits his Hunger against theirs."
My stomach twisted.  "You mean he feeds on his own. . ." I couldn't finish the sentence.

So the above establishes a couple of things, 1] once the feeding begins, the would be vampire is toast, a vampire. 2] True love can kill it at this time.  3] Raith did set up his daughters so they had no choice upon whom that first feeding began, so it happened and results in death of the victim. 4] Most importantly Raith sets them up so then he can establish Hunger power over them though incest.  No, I don't think this is standard White Court practice.

DF Spoilers / Re: Malcolm gives Harry more to bargain for
« on: March 26, 2024, 01:41:11 PM »
To be clear:  are you suggesting that the "magicians of the day" (Harry Houdini, David Copperfield, Harry Blackstone (Sr. & Jr.)) were all actual wizards (e.g. White Council or the like), instead of mundane "stage magicians" (like Malcolm was)?

I tend to think not.  "Stage magic" is a well-understood (if intentionally obscure) art, and we don't have to posit "real" magicians faking that they are faking their magic (tho it's an amusing idea).

Agreed, what Malcolm knew and performed were strictly stage vanilla human tricks and illusions.  Though I think it is fair to say that Malcolm knew Margaret was a wizard, I think less clear, how much he knew of her world.  He knew enough apparently to go along with her desire to give birth to a star child.  However the more subtle aspects like the power of names and why one should be very careful giving one's name to a demon for example as Harry explained back in Fool Moon when he called up Chauncy is another matter.  I doubt that Malcolm's knowledge was that extensive and it is what it is, he named Harry after a magician that he admired, not so Harry would have a lot of names to bargain with later on in his life.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 458