ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: groinkick on November 04, 2017, 04:37:58 AM
-
Just a theory of mine.
According to Jim the BAT will be when humans know about the supernatural world. I think Nicodemus will use this to his advantage knowing people will be looking for a savior.
I think that Nicodemus wants the Holy relics to perform miracles, and vanquish evil (with Spear of destiny) for the purpose of worshipers on a global scale. He wants Christians to view him as the second coming of Christ, the Jews to see him as God coming to Earth, and same for Muslims. With the combined worship of these billions of people he'd probably be the most powerful thing out there besides maybe TWG. However because TWG and the angels don't violate free will, they will not intervene. At least not directly.
He will tell the world about how all the others (Sidhe, demigods, ect) are work of satan, and that he alone can save them. Not only will this elevate him, but also in theory would begin sapping the strength of the others as all forms of worship either directly, or indirectly are greatly diminished as Nicodemus commands his followers on how to worship, and not to worship.
This is what Nicodemus means by saving the world. He does want to save it. He just wants to be greater than God. He wants the world to love, and worship him.
-
The antichrist.
-
More or less the anti-Christ in a way yes... I think it has to do with the specific rituals that tie the spirit of reality in place and the Yeat's poem the second coming plays around in it. The gyre in question creating an opposite mirror image of the actions and people of the last cycle of space/time. with two sides of the same coin choosing the opposing paths with different reasonings. Harry is more or less the antichrist in question... with Marcone being the dark mirror of TWC. But Nic totally wants to usurp the roles/powers of things I think, that or intentionally recreate a mirror image of the passion of TWC and steal the mojo for his evil self just like he did to Shiro.
Considering he wanted both the cup and specifically the knife, perhaps he wants to bleed a god or God?
-
Would bleeding an angel put Nico in touch with the power of TWG?
-
This is what Nicodemus means by saving the world. He does want to save it. He just wants to be greater than God. He wants the world to love, and worship him.
That has potential... Nick as Galadriel
Nicodemus: "ALL SHALL LOVE ME AND DESPAIR!!!!"
You know.... It's probably a good thing he's not. Harry would have been killed by now if Nicky was a hot elf chick.
-
Would bleeding an angel put Nico in touch with the power of TWG?
I don't know... But the worship of billions thinking he is God might.
-
I don't think angels have blood. They are essentially energy beings, being made up entirely of soul fire. When Uriel gave his grace to Michael, he created a human, mortal body to inhabit, but no longer had a connection to TWG.
-
I don't think angels have blood. They are essentially energy beings, being made up entirely of soul fire. When Uriel gave his grace to Michael, he created a human, mortal body to inhabit, but no longer had a connection to TWG.
IDK man, thought that was the whole point of the MacFinn higher circle, to introduce beings that are both spirit and physical formation simultaneously, which explicitly included Archangels of which, if anyone qualifies would be Uriel.
-
beings that are both spirit and physical formation simultaneously, which explicitly included Archangels of which, if anyone qualifies would be Uriel.
Uriel is not both spirit, and physical form. He's pure soulfire. He's just capable of creating a body to house his consciousness like in Skin Game. Not positive but I thought Jim even said something like he's just projecting a tiny part of himself into reality because his whole form is too big.
-
Uriel is not both spirit, and physical form. He's pure soulfire. He's just capable of creating a body to house his consciousness like in Skin Game. Not positive but I thought Jim even said something like he's just projecting a tiny part of himself into reality because his whole form is too big.
Negligible to what he actually manifests as. Uriel is either Both, or not an Archangel, just an angel. An I'd still say him being precisely the same without the grace is proof of his physical and spiritual existence in manifestation. Doesn't matter how big or small the toe, but the quality of the toe... lmao.
*The emboldened part reminds me more of what Fetches or demons do, spiritual entities.(neither of whom coincidently have 'soul')
-
Whether there is a physical component to Uriel's manifestations or not, I still don't think he has blood. Now, the blood his mortal form had would likely have had some interesting properties, but it would still have been just human blood.
And BTW, I would not classify MacFinn as anywhere near Uriel in power. That higher circle wouldn't have done diddly to a being who can snuff out galaxies with a though.
-
No but he appreciates a nice circle and you will hav a talking point to start the concersation.
-
Whether there is a physical component to Uriel's manifestations or not, I still don't think he has blood. Now, the blood his mortal form had would likely have had some interesting properties, but it would still have been just human blood.
And BTW, I would not classify MacFinn as anywhere near Uriel in power. That higher circle wouldn't have done diddly to a being who can snuff out galaxies with a though.
That's power level, not genetic make up, like comparing WL with MW. Both technically fairy..
Putting Macfinn's beast on a different weight class that hasn't otherwise been used was intentional. Though the only quantifiable difference I can point out offhand is, Being both the spirit of rage and the human MacFinn simultaneously gave one of the biggest superbeasts the ability to directly effect fate, unlike creatures for whom higher circles hold no purpose. Angels can do similar, it just costs them so much more on the scale of things, i.e. personal balance. Archangels though, (maybe i'm pointing the idea of Archangel too close to the idea of 'horseman' for reality...) seem to have the quantity of both mortal and immortal one the same being.(as opposed to being a mortal combined with an immortal mantle)
Random incomplete tangent:
Woj is, N can't effect Angels because they are too absolute. Take the example of Lash possibly being the Reaper in GS, she came to being by dying utterly, combination of soul and spirit fused to new form, ala anybody dying per Bob. An Yes, it's very indicative she was a spiritual entity existing in a human that became an Angel proper.
So.. Take say TWC, who died utterly(especially if they used Medea's Bodkin on him as the spear tip) but was also reborn utterly. He is both powerful diety and Mortal underneath, but they are one and the same thing. Giving him Archangel like power and Mortalish form(like Mac perhaps? ;) ) and a heavy need to make no choices or take no actions because of unintentional results.
-
That's power level, not genetic make up, like comparing WL with MW. Both technically fairy..
Putting Macfinn's beast on a different weight class that hasn't otherwise been used was intentional. Though the only quantifiable difference I can point out offhand is, Being both the spirit of rage and the human MacFinn simultaneously gave one of the biggest superbeasts the ability to directly effect fate, unlike creatures for whom higher circles hold no purpose. Angels can do similar, it just costs them so much more on the scale of things, i.e. personal balance. Archangels though, (maybe i'm pointing the idea of Archangel too close to the idea of 'horseman' for reality...) seem to have the quantity of both mortal and immortal one the same being.(as opposed to being a mortal combined with an immortal mantle)
Random incomplete tangent:
Woj is, N can't effect Angels because they are too absolute. Take the example of Lash possibly being the Reaper in GS, she came to being by dying utterly, combination of soul and spirit fused to new form, ala anybody dying per Bob. An Yes, it's very indicative she was a spiritual entity existing in a human that became an Angel proper.
So.. Take say TWC, who died utterly(especially if they used Medea's Bodkin on him as the spear tip) but was also reborn utterly. He is both powerful diety and Mortal underneath, but they are one and the same thing. Giving him Archangel like power and Mortalish form(like Mac perhaps? ;) ) and a heavy need to make no choices or take no actions because of unintentional results.
I believe Uriel actually made a statement about beings like Thomas who are half immortal. What he said disputes your claim about him being mortal underneath as he differentiated between a being like himself, and another as Thomas who has a mortal half, and immortal half.
-
I believe Uriel actually made a statement about beings like Thomas who are half immortal. What he said disputes your claim about him being mortal underneath as he differentiated between a being like himself, and another as Thomas who has a mortal half, and immortal half.
Not at all, imagine if Thomas's other half were born through/into him, would he cease being a mortal? or would an immortal being be 'born' into our world? Which means it's less to do with having a 'mortal' underneath and more to do with belonging to reality proper, which by proxy would seem to make one entirely mortal here sans an immortal existence elsewhere simultaneously.
On a (presumed offhand) scale,
1Mortals
2Gods who gave up true immortality to dwell here(Odin/Norse)
3Gods who dwell in the NN but are still of here(fae queens)
4Gods purely of the NN, spiritual deity
5Angels, Those who exist beyond.
6Archangels, those who exist both beyond and here at the same level
4-6 seem to also house various levels of outsiders though.... *sigh* i'm still working on this obviously. The why forths are holding me back as I can't directly see define the differences between certain groups. Some of them I can presume at and some of them would rely on building up a whole explanation/theory into and of itself.
-
Not at all, imagine if Thomas's other half were born through/into him, would he cease being a mortal? or would an immortal being be 'born' into our world? Which means it's less to do with having a 'mortal' underneath and more to do with belonging to reality proper, which by proxy would seem to make one entirely mortal here sans an immortal existence elsewhere simultaneously.
On a (presumed offhand) scale,
1Mortals
2Gods who gave up true immortality to dwell here(Odin/Norse)
3Gods who dwell in the NN but are still of here(fae queens)
4Gods purely of the NN, spiritual deity
5Angels, Those who exist beyond.
6Archangels, those who exist both beyond and here at the same level
4-6 seem to also house various levels of outsiders though.... *sigh* i'm still working on this obviously. The why forths are holding me back as I can't directly see define the differences between certain groups. Some of them I can presume at and some of them would rely on building up a whole explanation/theory into and of itself.
Well it comes down to if these angels were elevated from the mortal realm. If they did, you're right. If they did not, you're not. I don't know of woj that puts it firmly on either side.
-
Well it comes down to if these angels were elevated from the mortal realm. If they did, you're right. If they did not, you're not. I don't know of woj that puts it firmly on either side.
Yep, only example I can give is if Lash became the Reaper in GS from existing as part of Harry. Which quite besides this theory is one I put weight behind.(although I prefer Susan myself, the blackness of her representing a metaphor for the tattoo's that helped hold hersefl together in life)
-
So, the idea is heavily favored that the reaper in GS is someone familar to Harry, like Lash or someone else who died? Might make for a good poll?
-
I think we've discussed this before, but ...
If you'll recall, the circle in MacFinn's townhouse was actually three in one circles.
One for purely mortal beings.
One for purely spiritual beings.
One for a mix of mortal and spiritual beings.
I'm thinking someone with an iron will COULD contain Uriel in such a circle.
-
I think we've discussed this before, but ...
If you'll recall, the circle in MacFinn's townhouse was actually three in one circles.
One for purely mortal beings.
One for purely spiritual beings.
One for a mix of mortal and spiritual beings.
I'm thinking someone with an iron will COULD contain Uriel in such a circle.
How, though? I don't think Uriel is like Mab or the Erlking in that he has to answer a summons. So he can just glance at the circle, think 'ah no' and appear outside it.
Or he can just use your Name and make you release him.
-
I think we've discussed this before, but ...
If you'll recall, the circle in MacFinn's townhouse was actually three in one circles.
One for purely mortal beings.
One for purely spiritual beings.
One for a mix of mortal and spiritual beings.
I'm thinking someone with an iron will COULD contain Uriel in such a circle.
All the will in the world couldn't contain something like Uriel. Archangels are absolute which is why they are immune to Nemesis. Their will is simply beyond what anyone is capable of achieving. If it were possible someone like Nicodemus would have worked with a group of dark wizards to do it.
-
See, I don't agree. I believe that Free-will has power over those who do not have it. And intimately Uriel does not have it.
Further, Harry DID summon him in Changes.
And summoning circles are just for summoning, so if he is Summonable, than that circle(s) would possible do the trick.
-
There is the circle in demonreach he used to summon Mab.
-
See, I don't agree. I believe that Free-will has power over those who do not have it. And intimately Uriel does not have it.
Further, Harry DID summon him in Changes.
And summoning circles are just for summoning, so if he is Summonable, than that circle(s) would possible do the trick.
Well... Uriel does have free will. He just only has one Choice.
This, to me, sets him apart from other beings who lack Free Will (like possibly Mab, and certainly nearly everything controlled under Winter Law). Of course Ivy also is partly human, and so locking her in a circle required a whole host of measures to block her Will simply tearing the circle apart... and I rank Uriel more powerful, so it would require a truly imposing effort to even come close to imprisoning him.
In fact, given it took an Archangel to imprison Ivy, who I rank significantly lower on the power totem pole, it wouldn't surprise me if only TWG or the Outer Gods (provided such outsiders exist) could even attempt it - and with TWG, at least, it seems obvious that Falling would have weird interactions with such an attempt.
-
Avernite is correct. Uriel does have free will in that he can make a choice, it just is that if he chooses to misbehave he falls. Mab on the other hand cannot choose to violate her Mantle.
Also there is a difference in summoning a Being against it's free will, and summoning it and it choosing to answer. Harry was able to influence Toot because he knows his Name, he summoned Titania but she came by choice, not because he forced her to appear.
Jim said that the entire White Council might be able to take Mab if they had her Name... I don't see Mab at Uriel's level considering he can destroy a galaxy with a thought.
I don't see how an individual, or even large number of wizards could summon Uriel against his will.
-
Okay, perhaps we are talking about two different but related things.
I'm talking about containing him, not necessarily summoning him.
MacFinn wasn't summoned, he was contained in the triple-circle. It's my opinion that Uriel could be contained.
Summoned ... I'll have to think on it, but we know that Harry has already summoned him once.
-
Okay, perhaps we are talking about two different but related things.
I'm talking about containing him, not necessarily summoning him.
MacFinn wasn't summoned, he was contained in the triple-circle. It's my opinion that Uriel could be contained.
Summoned ... I'll have to think on it, but we know that Harry has already summoned him once.
I don't believe he can be contained by any mortal construct. Demon Reach? Maybe but I agree with Griff that there was some major players involved with that, perhaps even an Archangel's Grace. Other than that I don't see any little circle holding him.
-
See, I don't agree. I believe that Free-will has power over those who do not have it. And intimately Uriel does not have it.
Further, Harry DID summon him in Changes.
And summoning circles are just for summoning, so if he is Summonable, than that circle(s) would possible do the trick.
Dude, you can summon a grizzly bear into your tent. That doesn't mean you're in control of the situation.
-
Dude, you can summon a grizzly bear into your tent. That doesn't mean you're in control of the situation.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/c8YC8htf5YQg0/giphy.gif)
-
Dude, you can summon a grizzly bear into your tent. That doesn't mean you're in control of the situation.
On the other hand, just because you dig a pit to trap a boar, doesn't mean it cannot trap/hold a bear.
-
Yeah, look how well digging a pit for a werewolf worked out.
-
Yeah, look how well digging a pit for a werewolf worked out.
It obviously was never built to spec though.
-
On the other hand, just because you dig a pit to trap a boar, doesn't mean it cannot trap/hold a bear.
No but it wouldn't trap Godzilla... The power scale between a werewolf, and Uriel is astronomical. It's like the flame of a candle compared to a star.
-
No but it wouldn't trap Godzilla... The power scale between a werewolf, and Uriel is astronomical. It's like the flame of a candle compared to a star.
But we're talking about Magic here. We've been told that a Wizard can change reality it's self with it. Uriel is part of that reality.
-
But we're talking about Magic here. We've been told that a Wizard can change reality it's self with it. Uriel is part of that reality.
First we don't know how much angels are part of reality. Outsiders are outside of reality, and can enter. Uriel, and the others may be elevated so far away from the mortal realm that they are effectively outside of reality warping abilities that wizards can do.
There are limits to magic based on the person who uses it. Harry gets tired flipping over a car with magic. Uriel can destroy galaxies with no effort. There is a reason Mab is so feared, and her power scale is far below that of Uriel. If the entire White Council can't take on Mab, why would anyone be able to contain Uriel?
-
First we don't know how much angels are part of reality. Outsiders are outside of reality, and can enter. Uriel, and the others may be elevated so far away from the mortal realm that they are effectively outside of reality warping abilities that wizards can do.
There are limits to magic based on the person who uses it. Harry gets tired flipping over a car with magic. Uriel can destroy galaxies with no effort. There is a reason Mab is so feared, and her power scale is far below that of Uriel. If the entire White Council can't take on Mab, why would anyone be able to contain Uriel?
Curiously i'm not sure how I feel on this one, on one hand i'd give it to the angels as outsiders, on the other I remember how damned worried Uriel was when Harry tried to give him a nickname.... but that could specifically be a starborn feature in Harry affecting things.
-
GK, I really do get what you are saying. I'm still of the opinion that a mortal wizard DOES have the ultimate power.
-
GK, I really do get what you are saying. I'm still of the opinion that a mortal wizard DOES have the ultimate power.
The ultimate power in the dresdenverse is the power to tell stories. A good story that catches on changes how the spiritual world manifests in the dresdenverse.
-
The ultimate power in the dresdenverse is the power to tell stories. A good story that catches on changes how the spiritual world manifests in the dresdenverse.
I'm not so sure about story telling. Though that is a kind of magic on it's own.
-
I'm not so sure about story telling. Though that is a kind of magic on it's own.
The Archive is based upon it and there is a reason Mab thinks the Grimm book is so important. Odin changed when his story changed.
-
Well, now, that's not entirely true.
The archive is ALL writing, not just story-telling.
Mab had the Grimm brothers tell her story to keep them tied more closely to the mortal realm.
and Santa hasn't changed. He carries a sword and is really buff. Not the image Coca-Cola portrays really.
-
GK, I really do get what you are saying. I'm still of the opinion that a mortal wizard DOES have the ultimate power.
Lets say you're right about Angels once being mortal, and their power grew. Wouldn't that make them a wizard + about a billion times more power? If they were mortals who obtained insane amounts of power, why would a mortal wizard somehow have power over them? Logically speaking they would be basically super wizards.
-
Well, now, that's not entirely true.
The archive is ALL writing, not just story-telling.
All knowledge about creatures. Basically their story. There is a nice woj about the archives real purpose.
Mab had the Grimm brothers tell her story to keep them tied more closely to the mortal realm.
To tie themself to the mortal realm and how they express themselves there.
and Santa hasn't changed. He carries a sword and is really buff. Not the image Coca-Cola portrays really.
He is not the same odin anymore either or does he still want human sacrifices hanging on a tree? His story has changed because humans did so.
-
I mean Vadderung probably wouldn't object too much to a few ritualistic human sacrifices, those are worth quite a bit in God Currency- particularly in these days, where worship is running low (though between Marvel and Santa, Odin is probably doing better than most)
-
The truly ultimate power in the Dresden universe is Jim Butcher.
-
As long as he doesn't write himself into the series like Stephen King did with the Dark Tower.
-
As long as he doesn't write himself into the series like Stephen King did with the Dark Tower.
You know, aside from the obvious self-aggrandizement and inflated sense of importance it takes to do that particular brand of metafiction, has anyone ever counted the number of times Stephen King has written his accident into stories? It's been, like, six times in the last decade. It was even in Kingdom Hospital, and the man responsible suffered a horribly karmic death for hitting an artist with his car.
-
You know, aside from the obvious self-aggrandizement and inflated sense of importance it takes to do that particular brand of metafiction, has anyone ever counted the number of times Stephen King has written his accident into stories? It's been, like, six times in the last decade. It was even in Kingdom Hospital, and the man responsible suffered a horribly karmic death for hitting an artist with his car.
Can't fault him on that, it's his form of therapy.
-
When I read the Dark Tower Cycle, it was kind of distracting for him to be written into the book.
I mean, doesn't he usually make a cameo in any movies that are made out of his works? Is he going to play himself in this one? I haven't seen the Dark Tower movie that just came out, but I kind of doubt that part was even included.
-
His writing took a big hit when he took a big hit. The best of the bunch afterwards, at least what I have read, was the JFK book.
-
The Dark Tower is the only post Van ... incident, work I've read of his since the accident.
-
I could be mistaken but I don't think you are missing much.
-
I could be mistaken but I don't think you are missing much.
Apparently the van didn't either.
-
OOOHHH, good one!
-
Apparently the van didn't either.
Bah-dump-bump.
-
Nic may want to be a god, but it was his daughter who died for us. Maybe she got the Jesus mantle and we will see her again in future books?
-
Nic may want to be a god, but it was his daughter who died for us. Maybe she got the Jesus mantle and we will see her again in future books?
I think Hades had different plans.
-
Yeah, tortured by thousands of paper cuts. LOL.
-
I think Hades had different plans.
Time can pass differently there, so maybe she will return to Dresden's timeline after three days. :D I thought the parallel was too much for it to be accident.
-
Nic may want to be a god, but it was his daughter who died for us. Maybe she got the Jesus mantle and we will see her again in future books?
No.... She didn't die for people. She did it for her father.
-
If deirdre returns it will be as a spirit near Nico's end.
-
No.... She didn't die for people. She did it for her father.
She gave her life to save the universe. Also, the jesus mantle bearer’s “father” was involved in sending him on that mission as well.
-
I don't have my copy handy, but I suggest you follow Hades' advice to harry about re-checking his sources and what Hades' judgements were like, and how they might apply to one such as Dierdre/her Denarian.
;)
:|
:(
-
She gave her life to save the universe. Also, the jesus mantle bearer’s “father” was involved in sending him on that mission as well.
Rising from death, and defeating sin by rising to save humankind is not the same as dying to save the universe as you describe. I also seriously doubt that she did it purely as a selfless act. To think she did it to be selfless goes against everything we have seen from the Denarians to this point.
-
Rising from death, and defeating sin by rising to save humankind is not the same as dying to save the universe as you describe. I also seriously doubt that she did it purely as a selfless act. To think she did it to be selfless goes against everything we have seen from the Denarians to this point.
Dying for someone you love IS pretty selfless even if it IS for your father. Not humanity, not really.
-
Dying for someone you love IS pretty selfless even if it IS for your father. Not humanity, not really.
We don't know their motivation. For all we know he had promised to bring her back through some kind of ritual with the relics. That may have been a lie, or is a real plan. We just don't know.
Proclaiming she died for all of us, and may somehow get a Jesus Mantle goes against everything I have seen from Dresden Files lore.
-
If Deirdre is the Messiah; I'll go wait in line for the first train to Purgatory.
-
We don't know their motivation. For all we know he had promised to bring her back through some kind of ritual with the relics. That may have been a lie, or is a real plan. We just don't know.
Proclaiming she died for all of us, and may somehow get a Jesus Mantle goes against everything I have seen from Dresden Files lore.
Nic done said it right to her face, her motivation was love. "you'll be safe here from the enemy." doesn't imply a backdoor plan what so ever. Her motivation was she thought she was helping her dad save the world.... considering YOU directly said much the same No.... She didn't die for people. She did it for her father.
So i'm not sure why your arguing this except your erroneously connecting it to the other idea as below.
I wasn't saying it was Jesus like at all, so mayhaps you should save the argument for those whom do?
-
Rising from death, and defeating sin by rising to save humankind is not the same as dying to save the universe as you describe. I also seriously doubt that she did it purely as a selfless act. To think she did it to be selfless goes against everything we have seen from the Denarians to this point.
She told Dresden that she was trying to save the universe. I think she was unusually candid in her talk with Dresden, revealing herself a bit. She was on the cusp of ultimate sacrifice and so, I think, open. Her selfless sacrifice was for the greater good as she saw it. There are plenty of stories about redemption and change. Why can’t Deirdre’s be one? I don’t actually think this mantle acquisition will happen, but it is parallel adjacent to the myth and it’s not impossible that this sort of selfless sacrifice for the universe is how the jesus mantle is acquired.
And, it could be a fun twist if Deirdre came back as the jesus mantle holder. That would put Nic in the role of the father figure in the trinity. Plenty of posters here predict some sort of redemption for Nic, so why not? It’s not like the mythical figures who have held roles in this construct are fluffy bunny good creatures, after all. They did plenty of petty stuff, wholesale slaughter and nastiness.
Also, keep in mind this is all taking place in a fantasy universe where all this myth and magic is real, not our universe.
-
Nic done said it right to her face, her motivation was love. "you'll be safe here from the enemy." doesn't imply a backdoor plan what so ever. Her motivation was she thought she was helping her dad save the world.... considering YOU directly said much the same So i'm not sure why your arguing this except your erroneously connecting it to the other idea as below.
I wasn't saying it was Jesus like at all, so mayhaps you should save the argument for those whom do?
I quoted you, but most of my answer was actually in response to another post. I doubt that her motive was entirely selfless, other than her devotion to her father. That may actually be the biggest evil of all. She did it for him, while he sacrificed her for his self interest. Now with her gone, he's got little left to lose. This may have been more an Anduriel ploy to remove what little humanity Nicodemus had left.
Again I see this all leading to a greater evil, not some sort of good.
-
She told Dresden that she was trying to save the universe. I think she was unusually candid in her talk with Dresden, revealing herself a bit. She was on the cusp of ultimate sacrifice and so, I think, open. Her selfless sacrifice was for the greater good as she saw it. There are plenty of stories about redemption and change. Why can’t Deirdre’s be one? I don’t actually think this mantle acquisition will happen, but it is parallel adjacent to the myth and it’s not impossible that this sort of selfless sacrifice for the universe is how the jesus mantle is acquired.
And, it could be a fun twist if Deirdre came back as the jesus mantle holder. That would put Nic in the role of the father figure in the trinity. Plenty of posters here predict some sort of redemption for Nic, so why not? It’s not like the mythical figures who have held roles in this construct are fluffy bunny good creatures, after all. They did plenty of petty stuff, wholesale slaughter and nastiness.
Also, keep in mind this is all taking place in a fantasy universe where all this myth and magic is real, not our universe.
Sometimes I have to remove my serious hat. I see where you're going. It's kind of like me wanting to see Darth Vader as a good guy. At the end of the story he changed his ways, and it was neat to see someone beyond redemption (besides killing millions, billions? he had murdered children with his own light saber) find redemption.
I see the desire to see at least some of the Denarians turn out to be good. I disagree, but perhaps some of them will find redemption, including Deirdre. That being said, Hades didn't seem to think she deserved any kind of redemption, but instead horrible torment.
-
I quoted you, but most of my answer was actually in response to another post. I doubt that her motive was entirely selfless, other than her devotion to her father. That may actually be the biggest evil of all. She did it for him, while he sacrificed her for his self interest. Now with her gone, he's got little left to lose. This may have been more an Anduriel ploy to remove what little humanity Nicodemus had left.
Again I see this all leading to a greater evil, not some sort of good.
I could certainly get behind that idea.
-
Sometimes I have to remove my serious hat. I see where you're going. It's kind of like me wanting to see Darth Vader as a good guy. At the end of the story he changed his ways, and it was neat to see someone beyond redemption (besides killing millions, billions? he had murdered children with his own light saber) find redemption.
I see the desire to see at least some of the Denarians turn out to be good. I disagree, but perhaps some of them will find redemption, including Deirdre. That being said, Hades didn't seem to think she deserved any kind of redemption, but instead horrible torment.
I don’t actually think this is where the story is going, but rather extending out a thought and highlighting the parallel. One point, though; you guys seem to be diminishing Deirdre’s ability to make her own choices and ascribing power to others. Look again at the talk she has with Dresden; she is a true believer in her cause. Her eyes are open. She is going to save the universe! Whether there are strings being pulled to create this scenario is irrelevant as all situations are contrived at some level and free will is an illusion.
Also, what Hades thinks in context of Deirdre and Nic motivations doesn’t matter. They didn’t consult him regarding their plan to save the universe. Change the locale and his opinion about Deirdre is just some random being’s opinion and that hardly matters. Unfortunately for messiah Deirdre, the venue is not the best for her. And, torturing someone for eternity sounds really sick (not to mention Dresden wishing her punishment in that place). That’s way worse than Deirdre has ever done on camera. ;P
-
Believing in a cause does not make the cause, by itself, good. And, as for eternally punishing someone for an extended lifetime of evil acts that is called accountability.
-
Believing in a cause does not make the cause, by itself, good. And, as for eternally punishing someone for an extended lifetime of evil acts that is called accountability.
I wonder if Nicodemuse's last request/deal will be for Harry to save his daughter. Because Harry loves his daughters so much he will agree to help her because she was innocent, and very young when she was corrupted by the Coin.
-
Doubt it, Deirdre made her bed, now time to take a dirt nap.
-
Doubt it, Deirdre made her bed, now time to take a dirt nap.
I doubt that she'll be getting much napping done.
She spent the last few centuries committing horrible atrocities for "The Greater Good" Stop saying that! and the Greeks were big on ironic punishments. So, seeing as she liked to use her hair to blenderize people, she's probably going to spend all of eternity crawling naked through a field of Razor wire.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer girl.
-
I doubt that she'll be getting much napping done.
She spent the last few centuries committing horrible atrocities for "The Greater Good" Stop saying that! and the Greeks were big on ironic punishments. So, seeing as she liked to use her hair to blenderize people, she's probably going to spend all of eternity crawling naked through a field of Razor wire.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer girl.
I know classically Hades has been big on the physical torments but on this one I hope he goes after her broken psyche more.
Honestly though look at the poor lass, how can she possibly be any more fugged up? Argues with mom, sleeps with dad in a hero worship relationship, not only commits horrible atrocities but casual evils under the guise of greater good? idk man. Hades don't got nothin on what's been done to her on that level... guess that's why he's a physical torment guy, the Greeks were already emotionally disturbed enough.
-
Believing in a cause does not make the cause, by itself, good. And, as for eternally punishing someone for an extended lifetime of evil acts that is called accountability.
My point about her sincerity was that she was speaking honestly and openly about herself and her goals. She is not a witless puppet, but a willing participant in giving her life to help save the universe. That she may not have all information is rather beside the point. There and then, she is selfless and willing to sacrifice for the greater good.
On eternal torture and punishment- it’s madness. It’s cruelty unbound. It’s straight vengeance porn. It’s a bizarrely cruel concept for humans to have invented (though, quite effective as a means of control). As the perpetrator of this cruelty, Hades is one of the most twisted characters we’ve met so far in the series. Imagine yourself in such a role, doling out cruelty, pain, torture, unending anguish day after day for years, decades, centuries. What would that make you? I know how the story handled it, but the story indulges the fantasy. The practical reality of such a thing is beyond ugly, however.
-
Historically as far as I remember those punishments were only for a few special cases and the greek gods were never described as all good. For the rest it was just a grey and boring place.
for the real eternal sadism you have to go to later religions.
-
My point about her sincerity was that she was speaking honestly and openly about herself and her goals. She is not a witless puppet, but a willing participant in giving her life to help save the universe. That she may not have all information is rather beside the point. There and then, she is selfless and willing to sacrifice for the greater good.
Here is why I think the highlighted section may be wrong. Nicodemus believes God is going to lose. He said words to the effect that because God believes in love, he's going to lose. Nicodemus has some sort of end game. His end game may be to either rise to a god himself, or to ally with someone who will be a god, or is already a god. It's also possible he has a plan that will force Hades to give up his daughter.
What I'm saying is I don't believe she is actually sacrificing herself for some greater good. I believe that the plan is Nicodemus will come back for her, and she will rise again, and be by his side. Her sacrifice will be a temporary one, and for their own power, and not some greater good.
-
Historically as far as I remember those punishments were only for a few special cases and the greek gods were never described as all good. For the rest it was just a grey and boring place.
for the real eternal sadism you have to go to later religions.
I think Deirdre warrants special case consideration. But, yep, I agree with Arjan completely.
-
Historically as far as I remember those punishments were only for a few special cases and the greek gods were never described as all good. For the rest it was just a grey and boring place.
I’m familiar with the greek pantheon (my favourite plays are from Aeschylus). I was addressing the other posters’ glib take on doling out eternal torture and the practical reality of engaging in it in this fantasy world. It’s very easy to say someone deserves this or that, but, if one thinks what she is saying through, then such casual pronouncements might be more haltingly made or, better yet, not be made at all.
For the greek gods, Niobe is proof enough of what capricious and terrible beings they could be in the myths. I thought the portrayal of Hades was far too congenial.
for the real eternal sadism you have to go to later religions.
Definitely.
-
Eh, Hades was always much more... professional? as far as Greek Gods go. He was mostly too busy making sure the trains in Hades ran on time to stir up trouble the way his brothers did.
Now if Harry had ran into say, Poseidon, then I would expect shit to start flowing downhill at a rapid pace.
-
Here is why I think the highlighted section may be wrong. Nicodemus believes God is going to lose. He said words to the effect that because God believes in love, he's going to lose. Nicodemus has some sort of end game. His end game may be to either rise to a god himself, or to ally with someone who will be a god, or is already a god. It's also possible he has a plan that will force Hades to give up his daughter.
What I'm saying is I don't believe she is actually sacrificing herself for some greater good. I believe that the plan is Nicodemus will come back for her, and she will rise again, and be by his side. Her sacrifice will be a temporary one, and for their own power, and not some greater good.
You’re talking about Nic. I’m talking about Deirdre. She is her own person. I think you’re conflating the two.
Deirdre became aware of the universe’s peril. Deirdre acquired information regarding a way to avoid said peril. Deirdre decided she would sacrifice herself to enact the method. Deirdre committed to and engaged in a selfless act to save the universe.
Nic may have his own counsel, method and motive, but that’s Nic, not Deirdre. Think of the potential for irony if she came back with the jesus mantle and they were at odds, thus proving “The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men Gang aft agley”.
On the topic of Nic, he may be right that the god mantle holder’s plans are incorrect. Maybe he would do a better job in that role? However, more irony potential, the mantle may be one that moulds the holder such as the winter court roles and thus, in the long term, Nic would become what he fought against through his own actions.
-
IMHO, I cannot see Deirdre as anything more than a delusional, sadistic killer. Now, whether she drank the kool-aid willingly or caved into prolonged peer pressure is debatable. But, an individual that tries to create flesh-confetti out of people with their Medusa-like razor hair is not a nice person nor should they spend their afterlife walking with angels.
-
Oh yeah, Deirdre is totally a monster.
The Tragedy of her situation is that she never really had a chance to be anything else- I doubt she was as old as 3 before a Fallen Angel took up residence in her brain. It's like if a child was raised from birth to believe down was up. She really drew a bad hand.
Though I doubt it makes much difference to her, since tragic or not, she's still going to spend the rest of forever trapped in a giant blender set to "puree"
-
You’re talking about Nic. I’m talking about Deirdre. She is her own person. I think you’re conflating the two.
Deirdre became aware of the universe’s peril. Deirdre acquired information regarding a way to avoid said peril. Deirdre decided she would sacrifice herself to enact the method. Deirdre committed to and engaged in a selfless act to save the universe.
Again, It's my belief that she thinks she will rise again, and obtain great power. Therefor her "sacrifice" was nothing about helping people, or the greater good. It was about being part of a plan that will result in her benefit, the opposite of self sacrifice.
-
Again, It's my belief that she thinks she will rise again, and obtain great power.
What exactly are you basing belief in the existence of this possibility in the DV on ?
-
What exactly are you basing belief in the existence of this possibility in the DV on ?
#1. She doesn't seem the type for self sacrifice. Haven't seen any redeeming quality from her the entire series.
#2. Nicodemus believes God will lose, making me believe he has an idea or plan on why he'll lose.
#3. Nicodemus stored her soul in a place where their "enemy" can't get it which makes me believe he cannot gain access to hell, but he can return to Hades realm.
#4. His plan was to obtain many powerful holy relics which uses are unknown but considering that a powerful being who's blood touched them rose from the dead gives reason to believe that they may have the power to raise someone else.
#5. There is a girl within the series who has been in a coma, and therefor her importance for the story could be her body being used as a vessel. If she serves no importance, why have her in the story at all?
#6. Hades is not the power he once was. Souls are stored in his realm but he does appear to be a being that can make deals, or be simply overpowered, meaning the souls are not in some unbreakable vault.
-
I doubt that she'll be getting much napping done.
She spent the last few centuries committing horrible atrocities for "The Greater Good" Stop saying that! and the Greeks were big on ironic punishments. So, seeing as she liked to use her hair to blenderize people, she's probably going to spend all of eternity crawling naked through a field of Razor wire.
Couldn't have happened to a nicer more deserving girl.
Fixed that for you. ;)
But really, in my opinion, her sincerity is real, but meaningless. WoJ has said that actions, not intentions, matter, and produce consequences. I see her punishment in Hades more as a consequence of her acts than as a retributive sentence levelled by a jury trial. I think that is more what Hades was trying to convey to Harry in that conversation, even though the resulting outcome (torment) may approach similarity.
-
#1. She doesn't seem the type for self sacrifice. Haven't seen any redeeming quality from her the entire series.
#2. Nicodemus believes God will lose, making me believe he has an idea or plan on why he'll lose.
#3. Nicodemus stored her soul in a place where their "enemy" can't get it which makes me believe he cannot gain access to hell, but he can return to Hades realm.
#4. His plan was to obtain many powerful holy relics which uses are unknown but considering that a powerful being who's blood touched them rose from the dead gives reason to believe that they may have the power to raise someone else.
#5. There is a girl within the series who has been in a coma, and therefor her importance for the story could be her body being used as a vessel. If she serves no importance, why have her in the story at all?
#6. Hades is not the power he once was. Souls are stored in his realm but he does appear to be a being that can make deals, or be simply overpowered, meaning the souls are not in some unbreakable vault.
Well done there..
-
#1. She doesn't seem the type for self sacrifice. Haven't seen any redeeming quality from her the entire series.
#2. Nicodemus believes God will lose, making me believe he has an idea or plan on why he'll lose.
#3. Nicodemus stored her soul in a place where their "enemy" can't get it which makes me believe he cannot gain access to hell, but he can return to Hades realm.
#4. His plan was to obtain many powerful holy relics which uses are unknown but considering that a powerful being who's blood touched them rose from the dead gives reason to believe that they may have the power to raise someone else.
#5. There is a girl within the series who has been in a coma, and therefor her importance for the story could be her body being used as a vessel. If she serves no importance, why have her in the story at all?
#6. Hades is not the power he once was. Souls are stored in his realm but he does appear to be a being that can make deals, or be simply overpowered, meaning the souls are not in some unbreakable vault.
You’re talking about Nic again, not Deirdre. You’re really conflating the two. What is in the book is a frank talk from Deirdre about Deirdre saving the universe. Her conversation contains no hint that she has a trick up her shirt. She is being sincere, in my opinion. That’s why I had mentioned her openness and vulnerability in the chst she had with Dresden.
-
Fixed that for you. ;)
But really, in my opinion, her sincerity is real, but meaningless. WoJ has said that actions, not intentions, matter, and produce consequences.
I don’t follow Butcher’s q&a stuff from his marketing appearances, just the book (no short stories, either). An interesting side effect of this statement, though, is how we should then look at the death of Susan. If only actions matter, then Dresden murdered his daughter’s mother. And, that’s just one of the most obvious actions to revisit. I’d think a more nuanced perspective would work better otherwise, you’re into absolutism in a grey world.
What I like about this character, Deirdre, is that she represents both horror, ugliness and pain on one hand, but also victimhood, love and selfless sacrifice on another.
As most here would agree, she is a self serving, angry person with a long history of brutal and perhaps even casual violence doling out death when it suits her without a second thought. Her disdain for those outside her circle was made clear.
On the other hand, she seems to truly love her family and, for lack of better word, her colleagues. She was born into that circumstance. She was as much a victim of the denarians as any others cited in the books. Moreso than most, even as they got death’s release whereas she was moulded into complicity. She’s the twisted reflection of herself; her capacity to love, to care corrupted and turned on itself. Yet, she stll holds the capacity for love, for selfless sacrifice.
Anyway, I think she one of the more interesting characters in the books. Most are pretty shallow, but her appearance in this last book elevated the character over most of the others in the serial.
-
You’re talking about Nic again, not Deirdre.
I have said repeatedly why she's doing what she did, personal gain. Nicodemus is mentioned because he's directly tied to the plan succeeding if there is such a plan.
You’re really conflating the two. What is in the book is a frank talk from Deirdre about Deirdre saving the universe. Her conversation contains no hint that she has a trick up her shirt. She is being sincere, in my opinion. That’s why I had mentioned her openness and vulnerability in the chst she had with Dresden.
She is talking to Harry, a man who always looks for the best in people, particularly women. She, and her Fallen would absolutely take advantage of that. It's possible she was being honest, and is trying to save the universe with no other motive. However her past cannot be ignored, and for her to sacrifice herself is to go against what we know of her. It would be like Harry deciding he didn't feel like saving a woman in distress... It goes against his very nature.
-
This is a woman who knowingly, willingly, and joyfully had sex with her father for possibly hundreds of years. I understand loving your family. But, you gotta stop before you get to the "bump and grind" part.
As for the similaritiy between Harry killing Susan and Nico killing Deirdre it is, basically, male lover penetrating their female lover with a sharp object until they experience the big death instead of the small death. Other than that, the similarities decline and the differences take over.
-
This is a woman who knowingly, willingly, and joyfully had sex with her father for possibly hundreds of years. I understand loving your family. But, you gotta stop before you get to the "bump and grind" part.
As for the similaritiy between Harry killing Susan and Nico killing Deirdre it is, basically, male lover penetrating their female lover with a sharp object until they experience the big death instead of the small death. Other than that, the similarities decline and the differences take over.
The question you can ask yourself is if there is any transgression that justifies eternal punishment. If someone can not be saved and is a danger for everyone else locking her up forever or if that can not be achieved securely ending her existence is probably justified but torture forever?
There were serious saints who argued in their writings that one of the joys in haven is to watch the torturing of the damned downstairs from your place in the clouds. That is not healthy. Just get it over with.
-
Personally, I go the agnostic atheist road. But, within the Dresdenverse, Heaven and Hell do seem to exist and they seem to be similar to the Demesne visited in GP just larger in size and encompassing more than one person's POV. So, in that case, the afterlife should reflect the actions and intentions of the person when they lived.
Carmichael alive was a good cop who died heroically but a bit of a jerk and a slob. In his afterlife, he is still a cop but in the best shape of his life. Agatha Hagglethorn was an abused wife who killed her child and her husband, the first was accidental and the second wasn't. Her afterlife reflects the torments of her life and the acts of madness that occurred prior to her death. In GS, there are numerous ghosts that still carry the burdens or benefits of their living actions.
Now, we have Deirdre. While we don't know the entirety of her life; from the sampling we have seen, we can speculate that it was not a life well-lived. For her to be rewarded seems to run counter to previous examples. So, therefore, some punishment is due and should be expected. Hades expressed quite firmly that Deirdre would not be driving down Gravy street on biscuit wheels. Now, whether it should be eternal punishment or not; I leave to the creator.
-
This is a woman who knowingly, willingly, and joyfully had sex with her father for possibly hundreds of years. I understand loving your family. But, you gotta stop before you get to the "bump and grind" part.
As for the similaritiy between Harry killing Susan and Nico killing Deirdre it is, basically, male lover penetrating their female lover with a sharp object until they experience the big death instead of the small death. Other than that, the similarities decline and the differences take over.
Oh no, thematically those two acts are just as similar as they are opposite.. in the grand scheme of things one could say Nico's made every bad choice Dresden was ever offered. He's the perfect inversion of everything Harry is. Harry and Susan's selflessness is just as defining as Nic and (I always forget her name) *insert name here* lack of.
-
I agree that Nico's actions are twisted mirroring of Harry's actions when it came to their daughters. Harry didn't get to raise his daughter; Nico did. Harry saved his daughter from an evil power; Nico made Deirdre the host to one. Harry found Maggie a good home and family structure, though it was not his home; Nico did not. Harry sacrificed another in Maggie's place; Nico maybe could have but chose not to. Harry accepted a terrible burden to save a daughter; Nico sacrificed a daughter to gain a prize.
I was thinking in terms of how Harry and Nico are connected in terms of sacrificing their respective lovers. Which, in Harry's case, was someone that he was not related to; a claim that Nico can not make.
-
She is talking to Harry, a man who always looks for the best in people, particularly women. She, and her Fallen would absolutely take advantage of that. It's possible she was being honest, and is trying to save the universe with no other motive. However her past cannot be ignored, and for her to sacrifice herself is to go against what we know of her. It would be like Harry deciding he didn't feel like saving a woman in distress... It goes against his very nature.
This is better. Now, you are talking about Deirdre.
The thing about her is that we know very little of her inner-self. We only know what biased information that Dresden gives us until her short conversation with him. I think that was meant to be an insight into her, even though filtered through Dresden’s contempt for her.
What do we actually know of her?
She was a child victim of the denarians.
She was twisted, corrupted and otherwise turned into a dark reflection of a loving daughter as a child.
She went on to be part of the cult she was born into, indoctrinated into as an adult.
She killed people for her own reasons in the amoral social structure of which she was a part.
She feels deeply (if her short chat is truly mesnt to be an insight).
She willingly sacrificed herself to save the universe.
That’s what we know. The rest is speculation based on the unreliable and biased narration of someone who holds her in contempt.
I see most conversation about her immediately turns to Nic, but I think (after skin game (before that, she was pretty undefined)) she’s an interesting character on her own and worth a closer examination (which I can’t do now because i am making dinner).
-
This is better. Now, you are talking about Deirdre.
The thing about her is that we know very little of her inner-self. We only know what biased information that Dresden gives us until her short conversation with him. I think that was meant to be an insight into her, even though filtered through Dresden’s contempt for her.
What do we actually know of her?
She feels deeply (if her short chat is truly mesnt to be an insight).
*she claims*
She willingly sacrificed herself to save the universe.
*she claims*
That’s what we know. The rest All of this is speculation based on the unreliable and biased narration of someone who holds her in contempt.
I see most conversation about her immediately turns to Nic, but I think (after skin game (before that, she was pretty undefined)) she’s an interesting character on her own and worth a closer examination (which I can’t do now because i am making dinner).
Basically, you seem to be claiming that Harry is a bad biased unreliable narrator until he reports the parts that seem to support your desired outcome, and then he is an accurate unbiased recorder of events. This is a conflation of watsonian and doylist viewponts, forced by you into the books themselves. I cannot therefore accept your propositions as valid. I have inserted what I believe to be appropriate modifications to your claims as quoted above, and would like to hear an argument made that clearly separates in-novel viewpoints from reader viewpoints as applied to what we have read.
-
Basically, you seem to be claiming that Harry is a bad biased unreliable narrator until he reports the parts that seem to support your desired outcome, and then he is an accurate unbiased recorder of events. This is a conflation of watsonian and doylist viewponts, forced by you into the books themselves. I cannot therefore accept your propositions as valid. I have inserted what I believe to be appropriate modifications to your claims as quoted above, and would like to hear an argument made that clearly separates in-novel viewpoints from reader viewpoints as applied to what we have read.
Sorry, UNTIL refers to having no glimpse into her inner-self UNTIL that conversation not that the narrator suddenly became reliable. In essence, that was the first time we heard her talk about herself, therefore my use of UNTIL. I can see how that could be unclear with the way I wrote it, though. Since that miscommunication was the basis for your response, I think we can drop all that followed as predicated on a misunderstanding.
*I used caps rather than bold as on a mobile device and it was easier.
-
Deirdre had either centuries or millennia to figure out that murder was wrong, and she never did. There comes a certain point where indoctrination is no longer a valid excuse and you have to take responsibility for your own actions. I'll give her a hundred year pass. Still leaves a dozen or two centuries or gleeful murder.
As for her sacrificing herself to save the universe, I don't believe that for a second. If she and Nic are trying to save reality, it's because nobody is allowed to break their toys but them. It's not about selflessness, it's about possession. I see her sacrifice as a Thanatos Gambit, where her death was part of a plan to defeat her enemies. I see it as spite. Her sacrifice, in my opinion, is a dark mirror of Shiro's.
-
Yep, the good guys tend not to smile so much as they kill priests and bankers.
-
She probably genuinely believed in what she did and that gave her a inner peace of mind. She killed people and she knew she was doing the right thing. She sacrificed herself in the same spirit. It made her smile.
The problem is people believe all kind of dung especially if it is spoon fed from birth. Nicodemus kept feeding her with the assistence of fallen angels.
In the end she was a victim of the fallen just like the other denarians. That is why the knights try to save them. But she was a victim who was making victims so something had to be done.
Free will is a problematic concept. Assigning free will to someone basically says you hold him responsible for his actions. In that sense children have no free will, their parents are responsible.
But nobody is completely responsible for his actions, he is made by his genetic makeup, his upbringing, his whole environment and every accident in life that can happen.
At a certain point we hold someone responsible and sometimes we don’t. But even if we don’t the problem does not go away and if she is not responsible for the problem she is (part of) the problem.
-
I'm sorry; but, that sounds like deferrring accountability. Everybody is born with limitations on what they can and can't do. How we overcome those hindrances and what we learn and achieve are what define a person. Deidre had evil parents. She had an evil being co-existing inside her body. So, her limitations were greater than any normal person experiences. But, she could have overcome these obstacles. Good people have come from bad parents. People, like Sanya and Harry, have dropped their coins. She has been in 3 books. In every book she was in, she killed people with a smile on her face and a song in her heart.
-
I'm sorry; but, that sounds like deferrring accountability.
Not really. Just trying to find cause and effect. For an individual this is mostly guesswork but you could also research what happens with populations if the environment changes.
Besides it does not really matter. Prison is meant to correct, punish them and keep them from the street. For those that we deem not accountable mental institutions are there to cure them and keep them from the street. And some prisoners belong to mental institutions.
If you really want to make them accountable you have to go back to the old germanic system and ask her wergeld for everyone she has killed to compensate the families.
Everybody is born with limitations on what they can and can't do. How we overcome those hindrances and what we learn and achieve are what define a person. Deidre had evil parents. She had an evil being co-existing inside her body. So, her limitations were greater than any normal person experiences. But, she could have overcome these obstacles. Good people have come from bad parents. People, like Sanya and Harry, have dropped their coins. She has been in 3 books. In every book she was in, she killed people with a smile on her face and a song in her heart.
Some can and some can not, that in itself points to capabilities and lack of them. But to do so you first have to be convinced it is a worthy goal in itself. Whatever mistakes Harry makes he has a moral compass which in itself is an asset not everybody has.
To hold people as much as possible accountable for their deeds is a convention. A useful convention which helps society to function because who else would be responsible and what would people do if they discovered they were not accountable? Because holding people accountable in itself shapes environment and influences people. So continue.
But if you want to examine how people came to their actions and how free their will really was this preconception only gets in the way.
Besides accountability seems to work perfectly well without free will. When we train dogs we hold them accountable for what they do and punish and reward accordingly. Seems to work better than for a lot of humans.
-
But if you want to examine how people came to their actions and how free their will really was this preconception only gets in the way.
I've liked your posts on this topic. Just a tangent here (haven't had time to post lately). You may be getting to this point, especially with your dog example, but I thought you might enjoy this talk about how free will does not exist. https://youtu.be/pCofmZlC72g
-
Whatever mistakes Harry makes he has a moral compass which in itself is an asset not everybody has.
I'd say moral sense rather than moral compass; he does lean an awful lot on what he feels to be right rather than any particularly consistent overall set of directions.
Besides accountability seems to work perfectly well without free will. When we train dogs we hold them accountable for what they do and punish and reward accordingly. Seems to work better than for a lot of humans.
One of the things that intrigues me about the DV is it being a specified axiom of that universe that humans have far more and more significant free will than I've ever seen people have in real life.
-
I'd say moral sense rather than moral compass; he does lean an awful lot on what he feels to be right rather than any particularly consistent overall set of directions.
But.. that's why it's a compass and NOT a sense, with a sense it's always there, the compass is for when you get lost like Dresden does lol
One of the things that intrigues me about the DV is it being a specified axiom of that universe that humans have far more and more significant free will than I've ever seen people have in real life.
Not really, everyone has that potential here and there. Just like here, there people apparently don't actually use their free will all that often. But it seems to be free will in the DF, as far as using it goes, is breaking of preset patterns or choices subliminally made.(maybe i'm channeling too much Tim Robbins here lol) Though I've noticed anytime Harry's choice may spin off another reality he usually get's a stark choice.
-
Maybe I am getting old and set in my ways; but, I take responsibility for my actions. Harry takes responsibility for his actions. He judges himself harshly; he compares his actions with the actions of those he see as noble and good. If he finds himself lacking; then he feels guilt over not being better. Michael and Shiro were his paragons of virtue. McCoy represent what a good wizard should be. When he discovered Eb's status as Blackstaff; Harry was angry with disappointment. It took a long time for him to reconcile the idea with the man. Now, I am not saying this is the best way to be. But, it is a method of being accountable that I can understand.
-
Maybe I am getting old and set in my ways; but, I take responsibility for my actions. Harry takes responsibility for his actions. He judges himself harshly; he compares his actions with the actions of those he see as noble and good. If he finds himself lacking; then he feels guilt over not being better. Michael and Shiro were his paragons of virtue. McCoy represent what a good wizard should be. When he discovered Eb's status as Blackstaff; Harry was angry with disappointment. It took a long time for him to reconcile the idea with the man. Now, I am not saying this is the best way to be. But, it is a method of being accountable that I can understand.
Thanks for sharing this. I enjoyed reading it.
That said, for me, I find Dresden’s internal dialogue to often be too rigid and even overly simplistic. His ideals about women are absurd. His thinking tends to run too much toward black and white. Though, he has at least shown through actions that he can be more flexible as the series progresses.
I grew tired of his guilt stuff really quickly. The way he applied it seemed to put himself above others in a way. Let me give you an example.
His guilt about Susan becoming a vampirette was all focused on himself. She was an independent person who made her own decisions. She chose to go to the fest even after he warned her. She put a lot of effort into making that choice. It was hers. Yet Dresden took all agency from her by taking all the blame. He needed to get over himself.
-
Harry started out pretty immature, it creates space for character development. It is even worse if you read his flashbacks in Ghost Story.
The guilt thing is probably something he and Ebenezar cultivated to counter his inner warlock. It is an over reaction but quite understandable given the circumstances. Breaking the laws has always consequences even if the wardens don’t get you in the end.
It is the reason he refuses to use his magic for personal comfort.
From that point of view it is actually good writing. Harry starts as a messed up person with good intentions but all kinds of bad impulses .
-
If Harry's internal thoughts seem rigid and overly simplistic; then, it may because his thoughts are alot of guy's thoughts. I know my thoughts are often the same way. I tend to tunnel-vision over broadband. I can identify with his method of thinking.
Yes, Susan is an individual capable of making her own decisions. But, they were decisions lacking the fullest possible understanding of what she was walking into. Susan was given some information; hence, her basket of goodies. But,not enough understanding to secure her safety. And, that is where Harry holds himself responsible and carries his guilt. Harry's knowledge of the supernatural is marginal compared with older wizards; but, it is far greater than what normals understand.
And, he did hold Susan very accountable for keeping Maggie's existence a secret from him.