Thoughts on Simon Petrovich being Cowl

[Yuillegan]

Morris - That makes more sense...but it still puts Michael as older than I would think. But maybe that's just me. I think the release on mortality could apply to more than just "death" in how we see it. It's really talking about the change of state from mortal to "something" which isn't necessarily immortal. I also read a reasonable theory about Nephilim and Harry that includes that quote. Basically, it's about losing that which makes you mortal rather than ceasing to exist (which is Harry's interpretation to a degree).

Kbrizzle - your date for Harry's bday is about right, to my mind. Also, are you saying that there are more necromancer apprentices? I must admit I always assumed that the extra bodies were either extra necromantic hotspots (one person could do multiple acts) or that they were the drummers. Perhaps they didin't warn Kemmler because as Cowl says, he was a madman. And they didn't want him around. Taking out the competition. Or perhaps they did and Kemmler actually is alive. Who knows?

[Bad Alias]

Also oddly enough Luccio considers killing four warlocks with fire magic, but only worries about the masquerade. This somewhat surprised me as I listened to it, anybody with a text version care to correct me?


If Michael was born in 1945 as the timeline suggests and Harry is 20 years younger that has him born in 1965 which would make Maggie about 165.

That's what if seemed like in the book to me as well.

For when everything takes place on our calendar, see the explanation for when the SF takes place at the bottom of the timeline page. The "best" guess is 1999. I see why Morris said 45, but I just think Michael's birth and the things taking place in the 50's are out of place on the timeline.

The fact that it would shatter this first law just to kill 3 warlocks (and potentially kill the innocent bystanders around) is both strange and worrying. In fact, she would have killed Grevane with magic had he not blocked it. These inconsistencies are harder to rectify. Because as we know - the wardens never aim to kill warlocks with magic. In fact no wizard should attempt to kill at all, according the Laws. They always should attempt to use mundane means. Unless of course, they don't always do that (and cover it up). But that would contradict the squeaky clean image! We also know that the self-defence argument is very tenuous and takes a lot of convincing protect the wizard. This is because the taint may still exist despite the reasons, so killing no matter what the reason may still corrupt the wizard.

Or maybe the 1st law isn't at all what we think it is. Maybe it's like "thou shall not kill" from the ten commandments. Which is a mistranslation of "thou shall not murder" or just the common confusion between murder and kill. Maybe it's like a lot of religious rules that say don't do x, but over the years people end up saying don't do x+1 (or maybe it should be x-1). Thou shall not murder is a much better rule anyway. I could make that work in text. I don't really buy the argument, but I don't think it can be dismissed out of hand either.

Vadderung himself has died and come back (if he is indeed Odin).

Vadderung. Definitely Odin, but also maybe not.  . I love how tenuous even things we "know" are.

Morris - That makes more sense...but it still puts Michael as older than I would think. But maybe that's just me.

It's not just you. It always felt like Michael was 15 years older than Harry max, to me. But I can see him being 20 years older.

I'm kind of thinking that Cowl may have been a necromancer who was a begrudging ally of Kemmler and like all of Kemmler's allies, was subordinate to Kemmler. Cowl would have been a secret necromancer who maintained a separate persona who was in good standing with the White Council. I'll have to look back over the quote from DB Yuillegan pointed out to me in another thread to see if that theory sound.

[Yuillegan]

The Christmas Eve short story says Michael is a man in his fifties...so I guess he is at most only 10 years older than Harry. Which feels right from how Jim writes. But retcons a previous WOJ and perhaps text from the earlier Files.

I agree with your interpretation of the first law. We know that the Laws of Magic are inventions, not cosmic rules. But perhaps when Merlin said them in very old Welsh or whatever he meant murder, not just kill. You'd think the old Wizards might have studied some entymology but there you go. Happens to everyone. Language can't be shackled!

It is fun to realise that half the things that are fact (or more) might not actually be fact. But it makes it impossible to work out anything if everything is a lie.

Cowl is one of the most interesting characters. In some ways, it will be sad when his identity is revealed (if he is someone we know...there is apparently a WOJ that says we do).

[CrusherJen]

(if he is someone we know...there is apparently a WOJ that says we do).

Of course it's someone we know. It's more painful for Harry, and therefore more fun for Jim, if Cowl is somebody he (and by extension, the reader) knows.

Beyond that, I have no idea who Cowl is. 

[Bad Alias]

The Christmas Eve short story says Michael is a man in his fifties

Per the timeline, Michael was born about 43-45 years before SF. CE takes place 14 years after SF, but let's just call it 15 because it's Christmas Eve/Morning. That mean's Michael is about 58-60 years old. Harry is 40 in CE. That's 18-20 years difference. The timeline states that Michael is "almost twenty years older than Harry [GP 315]."

So Michael is either 58 or 59 in CE or Harry is just wrong about how old he Michael is. People get age wrong all the time. I once was asked by a waitress if I was 21. I responded "no, but I was ten years ago."

We know that the Laws of Magic are inventions, not cosmic rules.

I'd say they are the human (mis)understanding of actual cosmic rules.

[Yuillegan]

Well I think that the timeline, and Harry's previous statement in GP is wrong/retconned. It's a good workaround you have provided but tbh I think Jim has always had Michael as a middle aged guy (as a character build) which had become inconvenient to how long the story has dragged on. So I suspect he is sort of rewriting reality (if he even remembers exactly what he wrote in GP or said in some old interview years ago).

As a rule, I always go with the most recent info. The most recent age for Michael is a man in his fifties, so that's what I am going with.

Hmm not sure I agree. Luccio describes them as the best way of limiting power amongst wizards. Merlin set them up, with Vadderung's training (and likely influence). I wouldn't be surprised if Uriel and others were involved. So not sure they are cosmic limits as much as restraints to stop new demigods and monsters popping up.

[Bad Alias]

Well I think that the timeline, and Harry's previous statement in GP is wrong/retconned. It's a good workaround you have provided.

I don't think it's a workaround. CE says Michael is in his fifties. The timeline (based on what was said in GP) says he's in his fifties or maybe just turned 60. CE just narrows Michael's birth year by one year. Harry's previous statement isn't inconsistent with his later statement.

Some WoJ on the Laws of Magic:

2009 Whisper radio interview @1:14:22
What kind of laws govern the use of magic in the world?
The White Council enforces Seven Laws of Magic.  They are basically a list of “Thow Shalt Nots,” and their purpose is to enforce these laws and prevent wizards from using their abilities to abuse people.  These are supposed to be laws that are restraining wizards from using their powers to do too much harm.  And to enforce the laws they have a group of wizards who are known as Wardens, and the Wardens are sort of the White Council’s interior police.  If you break one of the laws, it’s the Wardens who are the ones who drag you off for a trial and generally if you’re not killed resisting arrest, you’re killed pretty much after you show up for trial… Right to a speedy trial and an even speedier execution.

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.

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.

I think it's both. The Council's Laws are used to limit wizard's ability to abuse people because Black Magic (i.e., the magic that corrupts) is the best way to accrue power. But if Black Magic wasn't a corrupting influence, I don't think the Council couldn't come together and ban what they believe to be Black Magic. I think they tried to get the 7 Laws as close to the real thing as they could.

[morriswalters]

Eleven years later and it still isn't clear.  However with the exception of Harry no wizard kills with Magic.  The Black Staff uses a magical murder device that does the dirty work.  Kind of like super dooper howitzer, like Harry's favorite pistol.

The Time Line wasn't created by Jim.  Jim doesn't even know how many buildings Harry has burned.  Much less how old Michael is.  You probably know the text better than he does.

[g33k]

... The Black Staff uses a magical murder device that does the dirty work ...

No; technically the Blackstaff (the person) uses his own magic and the Blackstaff (the magical murder device) absorbs the universe's metaphysical fallout, while the WC just has an exception in their laws.