Author Topic: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3  (Read 137345 times)

Lothy

  • Guest
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #375 on: December 22, 2010, 07:51:02 PM »
But when they are alone together, nothing else going on, their like totally cute.  Justine wears like these grownup version of footie pajamas so that she can snuggle up next to him on the couch and watch TV without actually burning him.

FEAR THE POWER OF THE FOOTIE PAJAMA

Yes, I actually do own a footie pajama(s?). It is very cozy.

Offline Kysk

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #376 on: December 22, 2010, 07:51:30 PM »
unending guilt & self-recrimination?

That would be a pretty potent and sneaky death curse indeed :S
"Your arguments are beautiful and deserve to be true" [1]

1. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC. (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci.  205:581-98.

Offline Dina

  • Has Collapsed Into a Singularity of Posts (a.k.a, "The Dina")
  • ***
  • Posts: 105329
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #377 on: December 23, 2010, 12:24:56 AM »
How is Gard's name supposed to be pronounced?


I've never thought of that. For me, it's like "Gardener", without the ending.
Missing you, Md 

There are many horrible sights in the multiverse. Somehow, though, to a soul attuned to the subtle rhythms of a library, there are few worse sights than a hole where a book ought to be. Someone has stolen a book (Terry Pratchett)

Offline Serack

  • Special Collections Division
  • Posty McPostington
  • ****
  • Posts: 7745
  • WoJ Rock Star!
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #378 on: December 24, 2010, 03:28:56 PM »
Kysk, if you haven't gotten a chance yet you should check out the DF WoJ compilation also stickied in the spoiler section.  It's linked in my sig as well.  In it is a link to Jim's answer to your bolded question below

Thank you so much for the pointers the answer to my last question! Here is a new one:

In SmF, Harry talks about how the Swords of the Knights of the Cross can be destroyed if someone picks them up when they are, as Lea puts it, ownerless. Destroyed as in not only rendered powerless, but also melted or shattered or otherwise made unable to function as swords normally should.


What does it take for the church to be able to destroy the coins? Not just make a bearer give them up and the fallen to loose it's power over them, but actually, physically destroy the coins?


In the WoJ compilation under the section "Denarian's and fallen" the WoJ cited is a link to the forum posting
Destroying Denarian coins (+ Denarians are the elite of Hell/why their there)

Jim's post there says:
Quote from: jimbutcher
Quote from: bob
It seems to me that as long as the Church has some of the coins, those paerticular Denarians are neutralized.  Doing a Mt Doom with the coins might free up the spirits housed within to act freely in the world.


Well.  Not quite freely, but MORE freely, certainly.  The Fallen bound in the coins are the freaking elite of Hell--everyone the big D didn't want trying to stab him in the back, basically.  If they were suddenly freed it would do all kinds of horrible things to about a million balances of power, with repercussions that would last for centuries.

Which assumes that they /can/ be destroyed.  I mean, don't think that in 2,000 years, no one has ever TRIED it.  And there are still thirty of them kicking around.

Which isn't necessarily to say that it's impossible.  But it sure as Hell wouldn't be easy.  And given that, while in the coins, they ARE effectively frozen in carbonite without a human agent to assist them, containment certainly seems to be a prudent course.

Funny you should mention that whole notion about redeeming Lasciel . . . > :)

Jim

Sorry that I don't have WoJ responses to any of your other great questions.  However here is a post I started back in August that throughly discusses Harry's propensity to give characters names or nicknames which you might find interesting.  (on an aside, thanks for mentioning this stuff, it made me realize this post and a few others of my favorites are now locked and will eventually be wiped from the boards within a year of the last posting or so, so I saved them to my hard drive.)
« Last Edit: December 24, 2010, 03:50:51 PM by Serack »
DF WoJ Compilation
Green is my curator voice.
Name dropping "Serack" in a post /will/ draw my attention to it

*gnaws on the collar of his special issue Beta Foo long-sleeved jacket*

Offline Kysk

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #379 on: December 24, 2010, 09:11:25 PM »
Thanks Serack!

I kind of guessed that these subjects had been discussed here somewhere, but I didn't find them on my own... It's great that there are so many people here to ask!

I can see why you wouldn't want to destroy the coins, even if you could, and in a way it makes more sense that they are more indestructible than the Swords. The Swords, after all, does not have anyone living in them. I was just kind of wondering what would be the coin equivalent of "betraying" the Swords. An act of truly altruistic goodness? Probably not (after all the road to Hell is paved and so on), but perhaps you see what I mean? But maybe that kind of reasoning does not apply to the coins.
"Your arguments are beautiful and deserve to be true" [1]

1. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC. (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci.  205:581-98.

Offline faithlessprophet

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #380 on: December 27, 2010, 10:06:34 AM »
Jim, will Toot-Toot and/or the rest of the Za Lord's guard ever get their own "short" story? hehe see what i did there?

Offline Doroga's Cousin

  • Needs A Life
  • ***
  • Posts: 25787
  • Not sure if Correct
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #381 on: December 30, 2010, 07:47:15 PM »
Is Cowl more than a psychotic power mongering lunatic?
Is it just me or is it getting a little solipsistic in here?

Offline Skinwalker

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #382 on: December 31, 2010, 08:05:36 PM »
What would it take to get the Archangels, or Heaven at all for that matter to get sufficiently provoked to get "involved" and I dont mean involved by handing soulfire to a reckless but well meaning young wizard. Would we ever get a chance to see "Jake" cut loose on somebody, anybody?

Offline esprotra

  • Lurker
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #383 on: January 01, 2011, 08:48:25 PM »
Is it possible to use the NeverNever to get to the Moon or Mars or someone else like that?

Offline Doroga's Cousin

  • Needs A Life
  • ***
  • Posts: 25787
  • Not sure if Correct
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #384 on: January 08, 2011, 08:03:05 PM »
What would it take to get the Archangels, or Heaven at all for that matter to get sufficiently provoked to get "involved" and I dont mean involved by handing soulfire to a reckless but well meaning young wizard. Would we ever get a chance to see "Jake" cut loose on somebody, anybody?
I think seeing "Jake" cut loose would cause extreme imbalances. Remember, Jim has said that the last Archangel to so directly interfere with the mortal world's moral compass was about 90 degrees off true and he is rather notorious.
Is it just me or is it getting a little solipsistic in here?

Offline Kysk

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #385 on: January 10, 2011, 05:37:40 PM »
Is it possible to use the NeverNever to get to the Moon or Mars or someone else like that?

The question is "Would you WANT to use  the NeverNever to get to the Moon or Mars or someone else like that?". :p
Dangerous enough places in the real world, what would be their reflection in the spiritual one?

...that is actually a really good question. If the NeverNever is attached to this world by emotions, does it even touch those places then? Man has been on the moon, but not yet on Mars, and as far as we know there is nothing else living there either. And if the likeness between the NeverNever and the real world is built upon emotions only, perhaps the moon would be a place of great triumph (though probably some fear as well).
"Your arguments are beautiful and deserve to be true" [1]

1. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC. (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci.  205:581-98.

Offline I am a book nerd

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 138
  • I like being me if you don't like it, well too bad
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #386 on: January 17, 2011, 04:49:59 AM »
one question... How does harry do laundry? he can't use a washing machine and (i'm not sure, never had to use it) dry cleaning is expensive.   ???
You never heard of harry dresden *gasp* hells bells we must fix that asap! :)
Yes i have a homemade amulet that looks like harrys... don't look at me like that
>.> <.< >.> *runs away*
"I'd challenge you to a battle of wits but I see you have come unarmed" William Shakespeare

Offline cass

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2577
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #387 on: January 17, 2011, 05:19:38 PM »
Harry probably does laundry-- either it got done by his Summer Court cleaning service, or Harry uses a laundromat.  Washing machines are not, in general, complex and overly reliant on delicate electronics. Or, rather, they don't have to be, and those at a laundromat probably wouldn't be.  Another alternative is that he could do his washing by hand. Yes, by hand-- they still sell mechanical 'washing machines' for use in a sink.

Offline AcornArmy

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 4635
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #388 on: January 17, 2011, 06:12:23 PM »
Harry probably does laundry-- either it got done by his Summer Court cleaning service, or Harry uses a laundromat.  Washing machines are not, in general, complex and overly reliant on delicate electronics. Or, rather, they don't have to be, and those at a laundromat probably wouldn't be.  Another alternative is that he could do his washing by hand. Yes, by hand-- they still sell mechanical 'washing machines' for use in a sink.

The laundromats near me are set up so that you can pay an attendant to load the clothes into the machines, or watch your laundry for you, if you can't stay there yourself for hours. Harry might take his laundry to someplace with a similar system.
DV AcornArmy YR5FR5 BK+++ RP+ TH+(++) WG+++ CL++ SH[Mab+ Lara++ Molly+++]

Offline Magnus

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 4445
  • Secret Vampire of The Chiro Court
    • View Profile
Re: Questions Specifically for Jim, Part 3
« Reply #389 on: January 17, 2011, 06:15:13 PM »
"You think the dry cleaner can get this out?"
(...)
"The last time I took something stained by a slime golem to a cleaner, the owner burned his place down the next day and tried to collect on the insurance."

(From the beginning of It's My Birthday Too)

So Harry has used dry cleaning at least once. ;)
Full assed FTW! :)

"I have always imagined that paradise will be a kind of library." -Jorge Luis Borges