ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DF Spoilers => Topic started by: Zelchar on July 15, 2024, 03:34:37 AM
-
First time poster here, so I have some catching up to do in the fan speculation stuff here. Harry's mom is composed of about 90% hearsay and rumors. Let's add some more by speculating wildly here.
Who is LeFay's mom? I'd be disappointed if it was some yet unnamed vanilla human. My money is on the Leanansidhe. Who can we add to the suspect list?
LeFay was also about a century old before she died. Do Harry and Thomas have any older siblings?
Now a hypothesis: LeFay met Malcolm after hiring him for Thomas's birthday on Valentines day. Nine months later, Harry was born on Halloween. Plausible?
What other head cannon have you been filling Margaret Gwendolyn McCoy LeFay's backstory with?
-
I think there is a WOJ that Margaret Le Fay's mother was mortal.
APG
-
That tracks. Harry’s already leaning very close to being the specialest special one because he was born special as it is, with more details about the storborn situation coming to light.
Most of what we think we know about LeFay is from Ebenezer's bias, and name drops from the spooky side of town. I'm hyped fo fining out more about her.
For now, I'll have to content myself with rampant speculation, loose conjecture, and inductive reasoning.
So here I go... Lea might have met Ebenezer while glammed as a human. After the birth of their daughter, Ebenezer may have had an unfortunately vehement reaction to the reveal of Lea's Fay nature, like a Blackstaff might. Young Margaret might have had a predictably rebellious reaction upon learning all this, and started wondering if her dad was right about all of the bad guys being bad guys. Thus the unsavory associations
-
First time poster here, so I have some catching up to do in the fan speculation stuff here. Harry's mom is composed of about 90% hearsay and rumors. Let's add some more by speculating wildly here.
Who is LeFay's mom? I'd be disappointed if it was some yet unnamed vanilla human...
Sorry, I'm afraid you're disappointed:
Do you have it planned out who Harry’s grandmother is? @6:05
Yes… Well she’s not alive any more.
Was she significant?
Well, she was a mortal. That was about it.
Editor’s note: There’s a 2011 WoJ Where Jim says if he remembers right, she died around 1810
-- https://wordof.jim-butcher.com/index.php/word-of-jim-woj-compilation/woj-on-harrys-family/
We can fanfic otherwise, but I think this is a pretty solidly established "fact" of the Dresdenverse -- straight from the Butcher's mouth.
-
Sorry, I'm afraid you're disappointed:-- https://wordof.jim-butcher.com/index.php/word-of-jim-woj-compilation/woj-on-harrys-family/
We can fanfic otherwise, but I think this is a pretty solidly established "fact" of the Dresdenverse -- straight from the Butcher's mouth.
Except the date of 1810 doesn't exactly track with Margaret's age when Harry was born, does it? That would put her close to or over 200 when she died, I had the impression that she was closer to 100 to 150 in age. I think pushing 200 is a bit past child baring age for even a wizard, but I could be mistaken. What I base that on is the age of Luccio when her old body was replaced in Death Masks. and I seem to remember her telling Harry that at that age she no longer had a lot of sexual desire.. I know that doesn't mean she still couldn't have children, but the two usually track together.
-
Except the date of 1810 doesn't exactly track with Margaret's age when Harry was born, does it? That would put her close to or over 200 when she died, I had the impression that she was closer to 100 to 150 in age. I think pushing 200 is a bit past child baring age for even a wizard, but I could be mistaken. What I base that on is the age of Luccio when her old body was replaced in Death Masks. and I seem to remember her telling Harry that at that age she no longer had a lot of sexual desire.. I know that doesn't mean she still couldn't have children, but the two usually track together.
Margaret spent a considerable amount of her time in the NeverNever, much more than the average wizard. That could easily account for her extended youthfulness.
-
Zelchar, thanks for opening this topic.
My WAG but a considered one - the Leanansidhe is a mantle, just like Mab, Titania, the Winter and Summer Ladies, Kringle, etc. Otherwise, that would make Lea – the most powerful in the Winter Court after Mab - the only high level Sidhe that isn’t a mantle.
And just like those with mantles, the Leananside was mortal once.
And the mortal who has the Leanansidhe mantle is an ancestor of Harry. I think it likely Harry’s grandmother or maybe his great grandmother. (I thought maybe Margaret at one point, and while I don’t rule her completely out, I don’t think the math works even though at times Lea calls Harry “Son.”) This would solve a number of unknowns and curiosities surrounding Lea but it was Lea’s participation in Mexico against the Red Court that pretty much seals it for me. Mab allowed or directed Lea to go - and to indulge herself - even though Mab had earlier openly questioned why she would risk losing her Knight in a matter in which Mab had no interest and, also, would have resulted in hostilities between the Winter Court and the Red Court unless Harry wholly eliminated the Red Court. Why? Because the Red Court’s planned curse to kill Harry and Eb would have killed the mortal wearing the Lea mask. Also, note that in the aftermath of Red Court’s elimination when Eb asks to speak to Harry alone, Eb says “Family business” and Lea smirked at Eb. Maybe that was acknowledgement that Lea knew of the family relationship between Eb and Harry, but I think that’s what Butcher wants us to think. I think it has deeper meaning than that (and Eb doesn’t know a relative is wearing the Lea mantle).
To those who want to cite WOJ to refute this, I consider Jim to be an unreliable narrator when it comes to things that could reveal major plot points in his planned, yet-to-be-published books. He can’t give away critical pieces of the game with so much left so he understandably obfuscates. And lest anyone forget, Butcher is a huge Star Wars nerd and by extension, so is Harry. When Butcher says Harry’s grandmother is dead, I just think of Obi-Wan telling Luke that Vader killed Luke’s father. From a 'certain point of view,' Harry’s grandmother (or maybe great grandmother, even Margaret herself) wearing the Lea mantle is just as dead as Anakin was wearing the Vader mask.
-
And just like those with mantles, the Leananside was mortal once.
Where does it say that? It is my understanding that Lea was always a Fae.
-
Where does it say that? It is my understanding that Lea was always a Fae.
Canon doesn't, thus WAG.
At the same time, I don't think that canon - and by that, I mean clearly stated by a 'cannot lie' Fae in straightforward text - has her as mantle-less. I'm happy to be shown wrong if I've missed that. If the Leanansidhe isn't a mantle, that would make Lea sui generis among the powerful Fae who all wear one or more mantles. I don't think canon has explained Lea's uniqueness or at least hasn't yet. Butcher is fairly logical and consistent with his story and world structures, and I don't think 'Lea is Mab's BFF' or 'Lea's been around a long time' is the answer. To me, Lea being a mantle fits given what we know or have been led to believe about the Fae.
Heck, I even considered the idea that like with Odin and Kringle, Lea wasn't a different Fae but was just Mab wearing the Leanansidhe mantle at times. But I don't think the canon supports that nearly as well as Lea being a separate former mortal wearing a Lea mantle. But even so, I don't think Odin/Kringle is the only multi-mantled Fae there is. Really, no reason for Butcher to do that unless he's scheming a future reveal. We just haven't been shown any other . . . yet.
-
Sorry, I'm afraid you're disappointed:-- https://wordof.jim-butcher.com/index.php/word-of-jim-woj-compilation/woj-on-harrys-family/
We can fanfic otherwise, but I think this is a pretty solidly established "fact" of the Dresdenverse -- straight from the Butcher's mouth.
Did he specifically say it was Harrys Maternal grandmother? ie Ebs wife? or could be have been referencing Malcolms mother?
-
I wouldn't put it past Jim to bury the lead like that.
That begs the question about Malcolm's parents. Could Malcolm be an un-manifested scion?
-
Margaret spent a considerable amount of her time in the NeverNever, much more than the average wizard. That could easily account for her extended youthfulness.
JB has more or less said as much. What I gather, from various words of Jim and the implications of the story, was that Margaret was about a century old when she had Harry, in terms of her personal experience of time, that is, she had lived for a century. But that century was spread out over a longer period of time because of Faerie time distortion (remember Rip van Winkle, or the stories of people who spend a day or two in Faerie and return to discover that everyone they knew has died of old age).
So measured by the calendar, Margaret might have been close to 160+ when she had Harry, but she had probably only lived a century or so of it.
But that's a conclusion I put together from various statements and implications and it could be off.
-
I wouldn't put it past Jim to bury the lead like that.
That begs the question about Malcolm's parents. Could Malcolm be an un-manifested scion?
In theory he could. But I sure hope not. Making Malcolm supernatural messes up his characterization and role in the backstory, IMHO.
-
In theory he could. But I sure hope not. Making Malcolm supernatural messes up his characterization and role in the backstory, IMHO.
Agreed, the push about Malcolm all through the series was he was an ordinary vanilla human with "a heart of gold" as they used to say about extraordinary good and decent people. That's the ingredient that sets star born Harry apart from the other star borns we've met, he inherited his father's "good heart" or nature. That theme is repeated again and again all through the series, it is significant.
-
At the same time, I don't think that canon - and by that, I mean clearly stated by a 'cannot lie' Fae in straightforward text - has her as mantle-less. I'm happy to be shown wrong if I've missed that. If the Leanansidhe isn't a mantle, that would make Lea sui generis among the powerful Fae who all wear one or more mantles. I don't think canon has explained Lea's uniqueness or at least hasn't yet. Butcher is fairly logical and consistent with his story and world structures, and I don't think 'Lea is Mab's BFF' or 'Lea's been around a long time' is the answer. To me, Lea being a mantle fits given what we know or have been led to believe about the Fae.
I doubt that Lea has a mantle. She is high up in the Winter Court and is powerful, but it's because she is a powerful Fae, not that she has a mantle. I need to go back and reread parts of Summer Knight when the Courts begin to war with one another, but I seem to remember other Fae "generals" being mentioned, powerful, but not with mantels. Maybe the rule is, and I don't know it for a fact, but the Ladies,Queens, and Mothers have to begin as mortals, it's the mantle that changes them over time to the immortal powers that they are. Knights are a bit different, their mantels make them powerful but they remain mortal. Harry maybe an exception, but so far we haven't heard different.
-
... Now a hypothesis: LeFay met Malcolm after hiring him for Thomas's birthday on Valentines day. Nine months later, Harry was born on Halloween. Plausible? ...
If she was intimate with Malcolm at-or-shortly-after Valentine's Day, that would call for Harry to be (at least a couple of weeks) premature; not impossible, but AFAIK nothing to hint at it has ever been stated.
The (semi) official timeline has:
~26-27 BSF: Thomas is given a pentacle necklace on his fifth birthday. His mother escapes Lord Raith.
26 BSF: Maggie LeFay meets Malcolm Dresden.
("BSF" stands for "Before Storm Front")
This strongly implies that "meets Malcolm Dresden" is a wholly-separate (and later) event: it is a separate entry from the paired events of "Thomas gets his pentacle necklace" + "Maggie escapes Lord Raith"
The DF wiki (which is entirely unofficial, but more often right than wrong) has:
... When her son was about five, she escaped Lord Raith, abandoning Thomas to the mercy of his father, who had killed all his other sons. The next year[5], she met Malcolm Dresden.
-
I doubt that Lea has a mantle...
You may be correct; I don't think we have enough info to say one way or another.
But notice this: "Lea" isn't, in fact, "Lea:" that's not her name.
She is the Leanansidhe.
That's a title, a role.
We don't actually have any hint what her name is!
How many such titles/roles do we know? The Queen, the Lady, the Mother, the Eldest, the Erlking, etc... these are all mantles in Faerie.
Do we know any other Fae titled as "the ...<X>" which are not Mantles?
We also know of at least one ("Kringle") which seems to be an actual name (but is also a Mantle)... but I don't think is relevant to the case of the Leanansidhe.
-
You may be correct; I don't think we have enough info to say one way or another.
But notice this: "Lea" isn't, in fact, "Lea:" that's not her name.
She is the Leanansidhe.
That's a title, a role.
We don't actually have any hint what her name is!
How many such titles/roles do we know? The Queen, the Lady, the Mother, the Eldest, the Erlking, etc... these are all mantles in Faerie.
Do we know any other Fae titled as "the ...<X>" which are not Mantles?
We also know of at least one ("Kringle") which seems to be an actual name (but is also a Mantle)... but I don't think is relevant to the case of the Leanansidhe.
All mantles? My problem is I think we the readers over use the term, or maybe misunderstand it. I include myself in that, I think the overall problem of labeling this or that title a mantle is it loses it's importance and meaning after a while. You could be correct about Lea, but then again how many ordinary non mantled Fae have we met aside from Toot and his people? Just what are the characteristics of an ordinary member of the High Sidhe of the Winter Court?
-
... but then again how many ordinary non mantled Fae have we met aside from Toot and his people? ...
Actually, quite a few, depending on what you mean by "met."
All of the Gruffs (including "Tiny") other than Eldest Gruff are, I presume, not mantles.
I'm pretty sure WoJ has stated that "Eldest" is Kind of a Big Deal in faerie, and those are mantles.
But Maeve's little ambush-party at Harry's Wintercourt birthday-party, including the redcap & the rawbones & the ogre &c were all afaik non-Mantle'd fae, as were the fae in the garden when Harry met Lily, etc.
It's just that, generally speaking, the "mantled" fae are both more-powerful (with the consequent storytelling value to Jim, of playing in Harry's power-league) & more-interesting; Toot is certainly an exception, but note that Toot has both increased in personal power, & recruited the force-multiplying "Za-Lord's Guard..." I wonder if there is such a thing as "Eldest Pixie" ... I wonder if Toot is going to become the first "Eldest" of all pixie'dom?
-
Where does it say that? It is my understanding that Lea was always a Fae.
WoJ says:
All the fae are part mortal. There is some bit of mortal in every single one of the fae.
-- https://wordof.jim-butcher.com/index.php/word-of-jim-woj-compilation/woj-on-the-fae/
As always, standard disclaimers apply: Jim may have changed his mind since then, or been actively lying to keep back a surprise, etc.
-
Actually, quite a few, depending on what you mean by "met."
All of the Gruffs (including "Tiny") other than Eldest Gruff are, I presume, not mantles.
I'm pretty sure WoJ has stated that "Eldest" is Kind of a Big Deal in faerie, and those are mantles.
But Maeve's little ambush-party at Harry's Wintercourt birthday-party, including the redcap & the rawbones & the ogre &c were all afaik non-Mantle'd fae, as were the fae in the garden when Harry met Lily, etc.
It's just that, generally speaking, the "mantled" fae are both more-powerful (with the consequent storytelling value to Jim, of playing in Harry's power-league) & more-interesting; Toot is certainly an exception, but note that Toot has both increased in personal power, & recruited the force-multiplying "Za-Lord's Guard..." I wonder if there is such a thing as "Eldest Pixie" ... I wonder if Toot is going to become the first "Eldest" of all pixie'dom?
Or the term is over used and loosely used. It isn't a catch all title, there are the kinds of mantles that are physically passed on like the Ladies, Queens, Mothers, and Knights, i.e. being in the right place or wrong place at the right time and being a vessel to recieve it.. And then there are those that are acquired over time by deeds, that's the type of mantle that Toot wears. When we first meet him he is merely a little pizza loving pixie, but with his brave acts and loyalty to Harry he has grown physically and earned the mantle of Major General, and the power that goes with it.
-
"Mantles"
Or the term is over used and loosely used...
I expect we here in the fandom overuse it sometimes, yes.
But add all the "Eldest..." (Malk, Gruff, Fetch, etc) to the "Big" mantles that you listed -- plus Kringle, of course! -- because Jim has specified that all the "Eldest..." are Mantles.
Beyond that... I think all is our speculation.
In particular, it's 100% speculation on my part the Toot has gained (or will or might gain) a mantle of the Pixies. AFAIK neither the books nor WoJ has suggested this.
But it strikes me as the kind of thing Harry does: he invests himself in others, and those he invests in grow far beyond what they originally were (looking especially at Lash, here).
-
LeFay was also about a century old before she died. Do Harry and Thomas have any older siblings?
I believe JB has said that Thomas is Harry's only siblings, though I can't recall exactly where.
Nicodemus' words to Harry back in the day hinted that there might be others, he referred to Harry as Margaret's 'youngest' rather than 'younger', but that's hardly proof of anything. Of course it's possibly in theory that Margaret could have had kids when she was much younger, who never studied magic and died of old age before Harry and Thomas were born. But I don't consider that at all probable.
Now a hypothesis: LeFay met Malcolm after hiring him for Thomas's birthday on Valentines day. Nine months later, Harry was born on Halloween. Plausible?
Possible, yes. Likely, no.
The Raith family is rich beyond rich. It's not very likely they'd have hired a struggling stage magician as entertainment, the more so because the adult Raiths no magic is real.
I think it far more likely that Margaret went on the run, and then met Malcolm along the way.
What other head cannon have you been filling Margaret Gwendolyn McCoy LeFay's backstory with?
Head canon is too strong a word. I have head speculations. It's hard to be very confident until we can reconcile what Eb and Thomas and so forth told Harry and what Stacy told Harry, though.
-
In particular, it's 100% speculation on my part the Toot has gained (or will or might gain) a mantle of the Pixies. AFAIK neither the books nor WoJ has suggested this.
Don't think I have been clear on this, what is the difference between mantel of power and mantel of power. Toot might gain the type of mantel the President of the United States or any leader gets, all sorts of power but no actual supernatural gain, or in other words, the mantel of the office. Then there is the mantel, something totally different, hard to define, it seems to be able to move from vessel to vessel and in some cases over runs the host, as we have seen even Harry struggle with it.
-
I have always thought that Margaret was randomly walking around a random park. That Malcolm was randomly walking around at the same time. While 3 random men with random swords were randomly near by while randomly being random. And Marget just randomly bumped into A random Malcolm.
-
I have always thought that Margaret was randomly walking around a random park. That Malcolm was randomly walking around at the same time. While 3 random men with random swords were randomly near by while randomly being random. And Marget just randomly bumped into A random Malcolm.
Shiro, back in the day: "Hmm, I wonder why God wanted me to cut off that random stage magician in traffic."
or something along those lines.
-
Don't think I have been clear on this, what is the difference between mantel of power and mantel of power. Toot might gain the type of mantel the President of the United States or any leader gets, all sorts of power but no actual supernatural gain, or in other words, the mantel of the office. Then there is the mantel, something totally different, hard to define, it seems to be able to move from vessel to vessel and in some cases over runs the host, as we have seen even Harry struggle with it.
Within discussions of the Dresdenverse, I usually assume the term "mantle" refers to the supernatural kind; and I was suggesting that some combo of:
[free-willed mortal] X [brawny wizard] X [Starborn] X [time & attention & emotional investment]
could have given (or be in the process of giving) such a mantle to Toot.
He took a soulless construct (Lasciel's Shadow) and in just a few years gave it free will, gave it a soul.
He frightened the archangel Uriel by casually shortening that beings name.
And the same person who did those things?
He has been interacting with Toot for decades.
I think a new mantle is entirely within the scope of "reasonable outcomes" here.
-
Within discussions of the Dresdenverse, I usually assume the term "mantle" refers to the supernatural kind; and I was suggesting that some combo of:
[free-willed mortal] X [brawny wizard] X [Starborn] X [time & attention & emotional investment]
could have given (or be in the process of giving) such a mantle to Toot.
He took a soulless construct (Lasciel's Shadow) and in just a few years gave it free will, gave it a soul.
He frightened the archangel Uriel by casually shortening that beings name.
And the same person who did those things?
He has been interacting with Toot for decades.
I think a new mantle is entirely within the scope of "reasonable outcomes" here.
I still think what is called a "mantel" is way to broad. I understand, it is a cool word to throw around, it impresses. Now the outcome when Harry is involve might very well be like you suggest, but only because Harry is a unique being apart from other wizards, or even other star borns.
-
I still think what is called a "mantel" is way to broad. I understand, it is a cool word to throw around, it impresses ...
More to the point: Jim uses it to convey something in the Dresdenverse.
It has a particular meaning, in the stories.
I don't think he has ever pinned the details down for us, not completely.
This leaves plenty of room for fan speculations & WAGs.
You may find the fandom use "way too broad," and I don't think I'd argue with that. But I hope you give the author the respect of letting him build his universe the way he envisions it... and there are a LOT of mantles in Jim's Dresdenverse, far more than he has ever named in the books.
-
Except the date of 1810 doesn't exactly track with Margaret's age when Harry was born, does it? That would put her close to or over 200 when she died, I had the impression that she was closer to 100 to 150 in age. I think pushing 200 is a bit past child baring age for even a wizard, but I could be mistaken. What I base that on is the age of Luccio when her old body was replaced in Death Masks. and I seem to remember her telling Harry that at that age she no longer had a lot of sexual desire.. I know that doesn't mean she still couldn't have children, but the two usually track together.
The date(s) may be off a bit; but the fact that (as per the OP's query) Maggie Sr's mother is firmly fixed as a mortal woman.
AFAIK Eb's parents (and all the rest of the Senior Council) are entirely un-addressed in either canonical stories or WoJ's. Jim may -- or may not -- have some "Meaningful Revelations" for us, there... :o
-
I believe JB has said that Thomas is Harry's only siblings, though I can't recall exactly where.
You are correct:
Q: Do Harry and Thomas have any other siblings out there?
A: NO
-- https://wordof.jim-butcher.com/index.php/word-of-jim-woj-compilation/woj-on-harrys-family/
(quoted from "Some 2008 booksigning pulled off of youtube" (but the link is dead))
Nicodemus' words to Harry back in the day hinted that there might be others, he referred to Harry as Margaret's 'youngest' rather than 'younger', but that's hardly proof of anything. Of course it's possibly in theory that Margaret could have had kids when she was much younger, who never studied magic and died of old age before Harry and Thomas were born. But I don't consider that at all probable
Agreed; technically possible, but improbable; and even if true virtually-certain to not be relevant (as such, Jim could well retcon it to be "true" just so some badguy could toss it under Harry's nose as a red herring)
-
The date(s) may be off a bit; but the fact that (as per the OP's query) Maggie Sr's mother is firmly fixed as a mortal woman.
AFAIK Eb's parents (and all the rest of the Senior Council) are entirely un-addressed in either canonical stories or WoJ's. Jim may -- or may not -- have some "Meaningful Revelations" for us, there... :o
I didn't say Margaret's mother wasn't a mortal, just that the date of Margaret's birth from the other information we have seems way off. Unless her spending decades in the Nevernever kept her younger than she actually was.
-
Maybe someone has already wrote this in this thread - or cited canon that disproves it - but I believe a "mantle" to refer to a role/level of power/set of abilities that MUST transfer when the entity (vessel) that currently contains that mantle dies.
Winter/Summer Lady dies, when the W/S Knight dies, the mantle MUST go immediately to another. Presumably same applies to Mother W/S, Mab, and Titania, except that those mantles automatically pass to the next in the hierarchical line based on Battle Ground (Mab - 'kill Molly if I die; she's not ready for the Mab mantle').
But the transfers at the bottom of the Mother/Queen/Lady hierarchy isn't controlled by the dying entity or even apparently the Fae hierarchy, who seem only able to position a possible vessel for the bottom tier mantle to take but the mantle goes the the closest, "best" vessel (whatever "best" means and is determined).
Whether that causes an automatic cascading effect (e.g., Mab's mantle automatically to Molly, then the WL mantle automatically exits to head to another vessel) or whether a vessel simultaneously can take the "seeking" mantle and keep the mantle already contained isn't revealed by canon. But maybe Mab's 'kill Molly' hints that Molly would have had both the Mab mantle and the WL mantle, and that's what she couldn't handle.
The Winter/Summer Knight mantle may be different, though, and seem controllable by the W/S Queen. Insofar as we know or has been hinted, the W/S Knight mantle is an appointed position, not part of a hierarchy, and the selection of the vessel is controlled by the W/S Queen to at least some degree.
Maybe the Leanansidhe mantle - if it is one - is similarly controlled by Mab.
-
First time poster here, so I have some catching up to do in the fan speculation stuff here. Harry's mom is composed of about 90% hearsay and rumors. Let's add some more by speculating wildly here.
Who is LeFay's mom? I'd be disappointed if it was some yet unnamed vanilla human. My money is on the Leanansidhe. Who can we add to the suspect list?
LeFay was also about a century old before she died. Do Harry and Thomas have any older siblings?
Now a hypothesis: LeFay met Malcolm after hiring him for Thomas's birthday on Valentines day. Nine months later, Harry was born on Halloween. Plausible?
What other head cannon have you been filling Margaret Gwendolyn McCoy LeFay's backstory with?
I hope Maggie Sr. mom was mortal. I’m tired of every character in the DF having to have some supernatural connection. I loved Murphy in part because she was a competent vanilla mortal.
I hope Harry’s grandmother was a woman Eb fell deeply in love with who had his daughter and we discover later… exactly why Eb has such a deep seated hatred of vampires.
-
...
I hope Harry’s grandmother was a woman Eb fell deeply in love with who had his daughter and we discover later… exactly why Eb has such a deep seated hatred of vampires.
I've long suspected that Eb is particularly anti-whampire because they cost him his wife (Maggie-Sr's mother).
-
Maybe someone has already wrote this in this thread - or cited canon that disproves it - but I believe a "mantle" to refer to a role/level of power/set of abilities that MUST transfer when the entity (vessel) that currently contains that mantle dies.
Winter/Summer Lady dies, when the W/S Knight dies, the mantle MUST go immediately to another. Presumably same applies to Mother W/S, Mab, and Titania, except that those mantles automatically pass to the next in the hierarchical line based on Battle Ground (Mab - 'kill Molly if I die; she's not ready for the Mab mantle').
But the transfers at the bottom of the Mother/Queen/Lady hierarchy isn't controlled by the dying entity or even apparently the Fae hierarchy, who seem only able to position a possible vessel for the bottom tier mantle to take but the mantle goes the the closest, "best" vessel (whatever "best" means and is determined).
Whether that causes an automatic cascading effect (e.g., Mab's mantle automatically to Molly, then the WL mantle automatically exits to head to another vessel) or whether a vessel simultaneously can take the "seeking" mantle and keep the mantle already contained isn't revealed by canon. But maybe Mab's 'kill Molly' hints that Molly would have had both the Mab mantle and the WL mantle, and that's what she couldn't handle.
The Winter/Summer Knight mantle may be different, though, and seem controllable by the W/S Queen. Insofar as we know or has been hinted, the W/S Knight mantle is an appointed position, not part of a hierarchy, and the selection of the vessel is controlled by the W/S Queen to at least some degree.
Maybe the Leanansidhe mantle - if it is one - is similarly controlled by Mab.
I'm pretty sure that there are at least hints, and maybe overt statements, that the Queens and the Mothers can override the auto-succession and hold onto a lesser mantle. But they almost never do so: it's really bad for the respective Court, and/or for Reality itself, to have those roles "empty."
Cannot cite sources at the moment, sorry.
-
I'm pretty sure that there are at least hints, and maybe overt statements, that the Queens and the Mothers can override the auto-succession and hold onto a lesser mantle. But they almost never do so: it's really bad for the respective Court, and/or for Reality itself, to have those roles "empty."
Cannot cite sources at the moment, sorry.
If the Queens can override automatic succession, why did Mab want Harry to kill Molly if something happened to her? Couldn't she just have put an override on it so the succession wouldn't have happened? Also another little problem doesn't she have to be dead before the mantel can jump in the first place? And if she were dead, how could Mab override the succession?
-
If the Queens can override automatic succession, why did Mab want Harry to kill Molly if something happened to her? Couldn't she just have put an override on it so the succession wouldn't have happened? Also another little problem doesn't she have to be dead before the mantel can jump in the first place? And if she were dead, how could Mab override the succession?
Context, Mira.
I was replying to -- quoting -- the specific context of Kinbote saying that the succession is always automatic, and cannot be stopped. I think -- if they really need to -- that the Mothers can each hold on to any of their lesser mantles, while they move their pawns into the right configurations. And the Queens, I think, can do the same with the mantles of their Ladies and their Knights. But the Queens & Mothers almost never see the need to do so.
You're correct (I think, we have no canon here) that a dead Mab couldn't interfere with Molly ascending to the Queenmantle, and I wasn't trying to suggest that.
-
the specific context of Kinbote saying that the succession is always automatic, and cannot be stopped
I think that was pretty well established in Summer Knight, that the mantel will always flow to the nearest vessel that can receive it. The Mothers confirmed that when Harry visited them. Also confirming that was what happened in Cold Days, if Mab had her preferences Sarissa would have gotten the Winter Lady's mantel and Molly the Summer Lady's mantel, but it was out of her hands once the mantels began to migrate.
-
I think that was pretty well established in Summer Knight, that the mantel will always flow to the nearest vessel that can receive it. The Mothers confirmed that when Harry visited them.
I think in Summer Knight it was a special case: an unexpected murder, done by surprise. I don't think Titania had the chance to intervene.
I'll have to re-read the scene with the mothers, though.
Also confirming that was what happened in Cold Days, if Mab had her preferences Sarissa would have gotten the Winter Lady's mantel and Molly the Summer Lady's mantel, but it was out of her hands once the mantels began to migrate.
Sarissa got the Summer mantle 1st. That one is outside Mab's control -- she couldn't hold it.
So that one was a done deal... then the Winter mantle also had to move (and Sarissa was already taken).
(eta: I have long wondered, though -- why not move to one of the Winterfae that Maeve had brought there...? Does the Ladymantle *want* a mortal host??!?)
-
I've long suspected that Eb is particularly anti-whampire because they cost him his wife (Maggie-Sr's mother).
That seems likely, though it could be someone else.
Also...when he was warning Harry about the danger of WV 'friendships' in Turn Coat, he did say that the WVs are so good at lying that maybe they sometimes even believe it themselves (that they are friends with a mortal). Considering how much he hates them, that's an odd thing for him to allow.
This theory doesn't have much hard basis, it's just a WAG on my part, but it might explain Eb's comments to Harry in TC: I just wonder if Eb's wife and/or Margaret's mother (they could still theoretically be different women) died because Eb, or she, or both were 'friends' with a WV who lost control of his/her demon at some point, and killed her.
Because that can happen. We've already seen, in Turn Coat for ex, that even Thomas, who desperately wants to not be evil, is still an unexploded bomb around mortals, potentially. As Eb said, if Thomas gets Hungry enough, the demon takes over and nobody is safe until it feeds. Eb wasn't wrong about that. Thomas would have killed Molly if she hadn't had that force-field defense.
Harry received more or less the same warning about the danger of White Vampires from Bob, all the way back in book five or so.
-
...
Because that can happen. We've already seen, in Turn Coat for ex, that even Thomas, who desperately wants to not be evil, is still an unexploded bomb around mortals, potentially. As Eb said, if Thomas gets Hungry enough, the demon takes over and nobody is safe until it feeds. Eb wasn't wrong about that. Thomas would have killed Molly if she hadn't had that force-field defense ...
I mean... something similar is true for anyone strong or well-trained.
I'm no John Wick, but if I seriously snapped, facing someone untrained, I could kill them in just a few seconds. Anyone with a gun & a lost temper can do it even faster. Murphy talks about it with Harry, once or twice, likening her training as aikidoka to Harry's as a wizard; the danger that they both are, the training and discipline they both need.
In PT, Eb would have killed Harry, if Harry hadn't been piloting a Faerie Exosuit.
-
I mean... something similar is true for anyone strong or well-trained.
I'm no John Wick, but if I seriously snapped, facing someone untrained, I could kill them in just a few seconds. Anyone with a gun & a lost temper can do it even faster. Murphy talks about it with Harry, once or twice, likening her training as aikidoka to Harry's as a wizard; the danger that they both are, the training and discipline they both need.
In PT, Eb would have killed Harry, if Harry hadn't been piloting a Faerie Exosuit.
Slight correction, Eb did kill Harry, but it was his doppelganger and not him, thanks to his foresight and the ring that Molly made for him..
-
...
Because that can happen. We've already seen, in Turn Coat for ex, that even Thomas, who desperately wants to not be evil, is still an unexploded bomb around mortals, potentially. As Eb said, if Thomas gets Hungry enough, the demon takes over and nobody is safe until it feeds. Eb wasn't wrong about that. Thomas would have killed Molly if she hadn't had that force-field defense ...
I mean... something similar is true for anyone strong or well-trained.
I'm no John Wick, but if I seriously snapped, facing someone untrained, I could kill them in just a few seconds. Anyone with a gun & a lost temper can do it even faster. Murphy talks about it with Harry, once or twice, likening her training as aikidoka to Harry's as a wizard; the danger that they both are, the training and discipline they both need.
It's not the same thing.
Yes, anyone can snap and kill someone else. I could go nuts while driving down the road and deliberately drive into a crowd and run down some people, etc.
But in each case those are all 'ifs'. Any given person might snap and do something lethal, but in most people it's very improbable. There's no specific condition where it's essentially 100% certain to happen. Even a person who is dying of starvation, and whose only possible source of food is to kill and eat a friend or relative or whatever, is not certain to murder to live. People can and have died rather than violate their morals or their loyalties. Not everyone will do so, but it's always a possibility, and the flip side is that it's never certain that a given person will go bad.
But any WV is a different story. If he or she gets Hungry enough, the demon shuts down the human personality and takes over, and that WV turns into nothing more than a very, very dangerous predator optimized to feed on humans. He or she will remain in that state until the demon feeds, or the WV is destroyed.
Not might. Not could. It will happen, if the demon gets sufficiently Hungry. And that's true of every WV, including Thomas.
It's the full 'silver eyes' state, and in that state, the WV doesn't care if he or she eats an enemy, a friend, a lover, whoever. Any human within strike range is potential food for the demon.
Thomas managed, one time, to break off feeding on Justine just before she was dead. But it was apparently a close-run thing even there, and it happened only after the demon had fed on her to the point of near-death (assuming that whole incident wasn't somehow a Nemesis deception).
A WV that kills in that state might regret it afterward. I'm sure Thomas would have been wracked with horror and guilt if he had eaten Molly. But though he might weep over her grave (assuming someone didn't immediately kill him for it), Molly would be no less dead.
The thing is that that demon is always there, always waiting, always ready to go on a feeding spree if it gets Hungry enough. One could even argue, mathematically, that it's certain that any WV that lives long enough will, sooner or later, fall into a situation where he or she loses control of their demon. It's kind of like an asteroid impact, improbable today or tomorrow or any other given day, but nearly certain over unlimited time.
WV are dangerous.
-
A WV that kills in that state might regret it afterward. I'm sure Thomas would have been wracked with horror and guilt if he had eaten Molly. But though he might weep over her grave (assuming someone didn't immediately kill him for it), Molly would be no less dead.
Would he have? I'm not so sure, at the end of Turn Coat, Thomas fully admits in so many words after the Hunger Demon took over he enjoyed feeding on and killing those girls. Just a personal opinion, but I wish Jim had developed this Thomas more for Harry to deal with, I think Jim dropped the ball there.
page 413 Turn Coat;
"Then talk to me," I said, urgently. "Thomas, Jesus Christ. This is not you."
"Yes, it is," he spat, the words a blended hiss. "That's what it taught me, Harry. At the end of the day, I'm just an empty place that needs to be filled." He shook his head. "I didn't want to kill those girls. But I did it. I killed them, over and over, and I loved how it felt. When I think back on the memory of it, it doesn't make me horrified." He sneered. "It just makes me hard."
I was really disappointed, because that could have set up some really interesting conflict, and nothing, if anything was done with this. In Changes, Thomas was pretty back to who he was before the Skinwalker got a hold of him, and so was his relationship with Harry. Possible we might see it yet, now that Thomas is on the island reliving his crimes. I hope so.
-
Would he have? I'm not so sure, at the end of Turn Coat, Thomas fully admits in so many words after the Hunger Demon took over he enjoyed feeding on and killing those girls. Just a personal opinion, but I wish Jim had developed this Thomas more for Harry to deal with, I think Jim dropped the ball there.
page 413 Turn Coat;
I was really disappointed, because that could have set up some really interesting conflict, and nothing, if anything was done with this. In Changes, Thomas was pretty back to who he was before the Skinwalker got a hold of him, and so was his relationship with Harry. Possible we might see it yet, now that Thomas is on the island reliving his crimes. I hope so.
I think the key word is just that. What Shagnasty revealed to Thomas was that his 'friendly neighborhood vampire' approach was an illusion, that inside, he was still what he was, and that he had been that all along. His relationship with Harry, and his attitude, have returned to more or less what they were before, but now the presence of that demon has been revealed, it's been revealed that Thomas is a danger to mortals around him, that the demonic part of him likes being a predator, it's always there.
Thomas had been telling himself, before, that maybe he could change, stop being what he is, Shagnasty took that illusion away. Now he continues to try to be decent, to be safe...but the menace is never far away.
JB had to go back to at least a similar relationship to what they had before, if Thomas had kept on as he was in the immediate aftermath of the Shagnasty affair, well...that story only goes one place and it gets there fairly quickly. If they had gone down that road, Harry, or someone, would have had to terminate Thomas, or else he'd have become a full-on enemy and the brother-relationship would just be gone.
But the danger that Thomas represents, the nastiness that is the White Court with the facade torn aside, now it's out there. I think part of what JB was doing, in Turn Coat, was 'deconstructing' the then-popular idea of the Romantic Tragic Vampire, both with Thomas and his victims, and with the interaction of Lara and Madeline.
-
I think the key word is just that. What Shagnasty revealed to Thomas was that his 'friendly neighborhood vampire' approach was an illusion, that inside, he was still what he was, and that he had been that all along. His relationship with Harry, and his attitude, have returned to more or less what they were before, but now the presence of that demon has been revealed, it's been revealed that Thomas is a danger to mortals around him, that the demonic part of him likes being a predator, it's always there.
Thomas had been telling himself, before, that maybe he could change, stop being what he is, Shagnasty took that illusion away. Now he continues to try to be decent, to be safe...but the menace is never far away.
JB had to go back to at least a similar relationship to what they had before, if Thomas had kept on as he was in the immediate aftermath of the Shagnasty affair, well...that story only goes one place and it gets there fairly quickly. If they had gone down that road, Harry, or someone, would have had to terminate Thomas, or else he'd have become a full-on enemy and the brother-relationship would just be gone.
But the danger that Thomas represents, the nastiness that is the White Court with the facade torn aside, now it's out there. I think part of what JB was doing, in Turn Coat, was 'deconstructing' the then-popular idea of the Romantic Tragic Vampire, both with Thomas and his victims, and with the interaction of Lara and Madeline.
Maybe, but Harry hasn't come to grips with it either. Now it may come to a head in Twelve Months, because unlike her little brother, Lara has never fought what she was. Actually she seem pleased with the results of Shaggy's "treatment" of Thomas, in her eyes he was now acting normal. If the marriage between her and Harry doesn't happen, this will be one reason behind it.
I disagree, I think the story could have gone on for some time, more complex certainly, but it didn't mean that Thomas would die or have to be killed.
Here is a further WAG, that this little problem will come to a head sooner than later. Harry will come to realize that Eb was right about vampires, they cannot change who they are. However, then what? Harry still loves his brother.
-
I believe that WC vampires can change who they are and bring their demons under control otherwise the conversation that Harry had with Uriel in GS makes no sense.
“It’s hard for the half-born,” Uriel observed in a quiet, neutral tone. “What did you call him?” I asked. Belligerently. Which probably wasn’t really bright, but Thomas was my brother. I didn’t like the thought of anyone judging him. “The scions of mortals and immortals,” Uriel said, unperturbed. “Halflings, half-bloods, half-born. The mortal road is difficult enough without adding a share of our burdens to it as well.” I grunted. “That skinwalker got hold of him a while back. It broke something in him.” “The naagloshii feel a need to prove that every creature they meet is as flawed and prone to darkness as they themselves proved to be,” Uriel said. “It…gives them some measure of false peace, I think, to lie to themselves like that.” “You sound like you feel sorry for them,” I said, my voice hard. “I feel sorry for all the pain they have, and more so for all that they inflict on others. Your brother offers ample explanation for my feelings.” “What that thing did to Thomas. How is that different from what the Fallen did to me?” “He didn’t die as a result,” Uriel said bluntly. “He still has choice.” He added, in a softer voice, “What the naagloshii did to him was not your fault.”
Butcher, Jim. Ghost Story (The Dresden Files, Book 13) (p. 560). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
From this, I get that it's harder for the WC, but if they still have choice, then they can be redeemed in some fashion. Where there's life, there's hope, even for a WC vampire.
-
I believe that WC vampires can change who they are and bring their demons under control otherwise the conversation that Harry had with Uriel in GS makes no sense.
“It’s hard for the half-born,” Uriel observed in a quiet, neutral tone. “What did you call him?” I asked. Belligerently. Which probably wasn’t really bright, but Thomas was my brother. I didn’t like the thought of anyone judging him. “The scions of mortals and immortals,” Uriel said, unperturbed. “Halflings, half-bloods, half-born. The mortal road is difficult enough without adding a share of our burdens to it as well.” I grunted. “That skinwalker got hold of him a while back. It broke something in him.” “The naagloshii feel a need to prove that every creature they meet is as flawed and prone to darkness as they themselves proved to be,” Uriel said. “It…gives them some measure of false peace, I think, to lie to themselves like that.” “You sound like you feel sorry for them,” I said, my voice hard. “I feel sorry for all the pain they have, and more so for all that they inflict on others. Your brother offers ample explanation for my feelings.” “What that thing did to Thomas. How is that different from what the Fallen did to me?” “He didn’t die as a result,” Uriel said bluntly. “He still has choice.” He added, in a softer voice, “What the naagloshii did to him was not your fault.”
Butcher, Jim. Ghost Story (The Dresden Files, Book 13) (p. 560). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
From this, I get that it's harder for the WC, but if they still have choice, then they can be redeemed in some fashion. Where there's life, there's hope, even for a WC vampire.
Harry is still trying to make an excuse for Thomas and kind of taking the blame for it. While Uriel isn't unsympathetic of the plight of Thomas, he doesn't come off the fact that Thomas does have choices.
That is the point, at the end of Turn Coat, seemingly Thomas has made his choice. He feels no guilt about killing those young women, he says thinking about it, "just makes him hard." No remorse. Uriel also tells Harry that he has no responsibility, it's the choice of Thomas. Now it's possible that his love for Justine prompted Thomas to chose yet again, but what happens when he finds out that she duped him?
-
Whampires are still, in part, human.
They still (mostly) have their free will (until/unless their Hunger Demon gets into "starvation" mode).
... That is the point, at the end of Turn Coat, seemingly Thomas has made his choice. He feels no guilt about killing those young women, he says thinking about it, "just makes him hard." No remorse ...
You're falling into the Naagloshii's mental trap, just like Thomas did.
It took away Thomas' choice; he had had a stable life, without murdering people; that was his choice, and it was working. It kidnapped him, held him until the Hunger overcame his choice; it's much like forcing drugs onto someone, that strips their choice away, too.
It conditioned him to think that this was "who he was" -- but it's not. It's an inescapable part of him, but it doesn't define all of him, or even most of him... unless he chooses to let it (or if somebody takes his choice away).
In that scene, Thomas was still mentally/emotionally trapped by the Naagloshi's manipulations. Physically free, but (much like with Stockholm Syndrome) not mentally. As with most successful lies, it includes a nugget of truth: there really is a "monster" inside Thomas. But it doesn't follow that Thomas is necessarily & inescapably therefore "a monster."
-
Harry is still trying to make an excuse for Thomas and kind of taking the blame for it. While Uriel isn't unsympathetic of the plight of Thomas, he doesn't come off the fact that Thomas does have choices.
That is the point, at the end of Turn Coat, seemingly Thomas has made his choice. He feels no guilt about killing those young women, he says thinking about it, "just makes him hard." No remorse. Uriel also tells Harry that he has no responsibility, it's the choice of Thomas. Now it's possible that his love for Justine prompted Thomas to chose yet again, but what happens when he finds out that she duped him?
You're not paying attention to the timeline here. At the end of Turn Coat, Thomas was just days removed from the Nagloshii's torture. That was him at his lowest point.
The passage I posted is from Ghost Story, so Thomas has had several years to heal and regain his balance. He was much closer to being his reformed self in Changes and in GS he was dealing with Harry's death along with the constant Hunger.
But he wasn't going out and being a predator, he was denying his Hunger and suffering for it. He's still trying to do the right thing but is subject to a relapse just like any other recovering addict. He's making the right choices but the wrong one's whisper strongly to him.
-
You're not paying attention to the timeline here. At the end of Turn Coat, Thomas was just days removed from the Nagloshii's torture. That was him at his lowest point.
The passage I posted is from Ghost Story, so Thomas has had several years to heal and regain his balance. He was much closer to being his reformed self in Changes and in GS he was dealing with Harry's death along with the constant Hunger.
But he wasn't going out and being a predator, he was denying his Hunger and suffering for it. He's still trying to do the right thing but is subject to a relapse just like any other recovering addict. He's making the right choices but the wrong one's whisper strongly to him.
That's true. It's not that Thomas doesn't feel guilt at the end of Turn Coat, he does. If he didn't, he'd be at peace with it, relaxed. Instead he's obviously bitter and trying to escape his own conscience.
As Uriel notes, Thomas has a choice. But Thomas is not alone in his head. The demon is in there too, and it both is and is not a separate thing. As long as Thomas is awake, he has free will and can potentially choose not to act in accordance with his vampiric impulses. But when Thomas is suppressed, when the demon is the only guiding mind (I'm actually not sure how intelligent the demon is, it seems almost like an animal in some ways), then Thomas' free will isn't relevant because Thomas is not Thomas at that point. Thomas is asleep, or unconscious, or whatever we want to call it.
It's like the loup-garou. MacFinn isn't guilty for the murders the monster commits, but the danger is still very real. MacFinn has free will, but the loup-garou suppresses MacFinn, so his free will isn't in play when the monster is loose.
What happened to those girls that Shagnasty fed to Thomas is not Thomas' responsibility...mostly. There is an element to it like the loup-garou, where the human side has an obligation to plan for situations to prevent the monster from being able to murder.
But there are two perspectives to it. There's the abstract moral responsibility, the distinction between the human in the WV and the demon. And then there's the practical perspective of the potential victims.
That's what Eb is getting at, what Bob was trying to warn Harry about back in the day. From the POV of view of a human, any WV is a bomb waiting to go off, in much the same way as the loup-garou lurked within MacFinn. In fact, it's worse in way. The loup-garou only manifested when a certain trigger condition was right, and it was predictable. The full moon comes on a regular schedule, and preparations can be made. The White Vampire demon can get loose at any time the WV is Hungry enough, or otherwise weakened.
(I suspect that one nasty move a warlock could try using mind magic would be to weaken the human mind enough for the demon to come to the fore at a bad moment.)
From the mortal perspective, it hardly matters if the monster attacking and devouring them is Thomas or Thomas' demon. Their life and their sanity are in danger either way, and where Thomas goes, so goes the demon. It's always there, always present, always waiting to get loose.
Which in turn makes associating with White Vampires, being friends with them, dating one or marrying one or just hanging out with one, risky. Eb and Bob have both tried to warn Harry about this over the years. He's in denial about it somewhat. Remember his reaction to watching Lara drain Madeline while tearing her apart physically. It's really easy to forget that White Vampires are monsters, when you're used to their civilized side.
Thomas regained enough of his balance, after some time passed, to regain his normal relationship with Harry and to try and behave decently again, and he probably works harder than ever to keep his demon on a leash. But notice that he quit trying to live a normal human life, too. He feeds more regularly now, probably out of fear of getting too Hungry and it getting loose again. He lives with the White Court again, he's no longer trying to pretend to himself that he's not what he is, at least to that extent.
Is that good? Or bad? Or both? I'm honestly not sure. You could make an argument either way on a reasonable basis.
I mentioned above that it's mostly not Thomas' responsibility that those girls are dead. The intent lay with Shagnasty, Thomas was the target, the girls were the collateral damage. But if Thomas wants to be a 'good person', he does have a moral responsibility to recognize the danger he himself represents to other people, just as a loup-garou host (at least one who knows what he is) does. He has a duty to take what steps he can to make sure the demon never gets into control again. If he doesn't at least make a solid effort in that direction, then he does share some responsibility for what the demon does if it gets loose.
If I discover that I am under the loup-garou curse, and I don't take any precautions and I'm careless about the moon phase and so forth, then yeah, I'm at fault if the monster kills someone. Not as much at fault as I would be if I shot them with a pistol, but in that scenario I would not be innocent. A WV who wants to be 'good' has the same challenge.
-
If I discover that I am under the loup-garou curse, and I don't take any precautions and I'm careless about the moon phase and so forth, then yeah, I'm at fault if the monster kills someone. Not as much at fault as I would be if I shot them with a pistol, but in that scenario I would not be innocent. A WV who wants to be 'good' has the same challenge.
MacFinn did make a choice though, the only one he had short of suicide, he contained the Loop the only other way he could with that circle. Others sabotaged his intent, and people died, you could argue that it was MacFinn's choice because he chose to remain in the populated world.
At the end of the day, Thomas did commit murder, you can argue about his motives, but he was willing to kill and it wasn't the Hunger Demon driving him to do it.
-
... At the end of the day, Thomas did commit murder, you can argue about his motives, but he was willing to kill and it wasn't the Hunger Demon driving him to do it.
Cite, please?
In the quote by Thomas, upthread, he specifically said "... I didn't want to kill those girls..."
So he was, in fact, driven by his Hunger in those instances.
-
MacFinn did make a choice though, the only one he had short of suicide, he contained the Loop the only other way he could with that circle. Others sabotaged his intent, and people died, you could argue that it was MacFinn's choice because he chose to remain in the populated world ...
I'm a bit puzzled, honestly, about MacFinn.
He had his magic circle (likely, I suspect, made to hire by a prior MacFinn).
But it's physically fragile, pretty easily broken by mundane means (as happened).
I wonder that he didn't have better physical barriers as backup. With modern tech, and MacFinn wealth, it's certainly possible...
"Early Episode" problem, I expect (but this is decidedly off-topic, and if folks want to pursue "The MacFinn Anomly" I suggest a new thread).
And in fact the whole "Thomas' culpability & motivation" topic is well&truly drifted!
= = =
Let's get back to the OP's ask -- Maggie Sr.
My new sub-question: was she ever enthralled to Papa Raith?
If not, how the hell not? Per WoJ, she was having "lots of awesome vampire sex" which seems to make an enthrallment a pretty foregone conclusion! Had she figured out some magical "solution" that Raith (who was (at the time) the strongest Whampire in the world, & at the height of his prowess!) somehow couldn't bypass??!?
But then if (as frankly seems nigh-inevitable) she was enthralled... how did she break free? She didn't meet & fall in love with Malcolm until later! And letting one of your thralls run free is a real "n00b error" that I cannot see from Raith (at that point (q.v. "strongest Whampire in the world" and "at the height of his prowess") in his life). I actually do have an idea, here: it was Lea. We know that Maggie was already "LaFey" and with an extensive suite of Fae info/contacts (presumably including Lea). And Lea's specialty was "inspiring mortals... to their eventual doom" per WoJ; it's "how she made her bones" in Winter & got to be the powerhouse we see in the books. Presumably Lea had the power to "inspire" Maggie to break free (I'm sure Lea's power beats Papa Raith's).
-
If not, how the hell not? Per WoJ, she was having "lots of awesome vampire sex" which seems to make an enthrallment a pretty foregone conclusion! Had she figured out some magical "solution" that Raith (who was (at the time) the strongest Whampire in the world, & at the height of his prowess!) somehow couldn't bypass??!?
My theory was she was still pushing for a star born, or perhaps Mab was pushing her in that direction. I seriously doubt that she was enthralled by him. She may have had just enough arrogance to think she could handle him, also she may have fallen into another trap that women often fall into, she thought he'd treat her differently.
But then if (as frankly seems nigh-inevitable) she was enthralled... how did she break free? She didn't meet & fall in love with Malcolm until later! And letting one of your thralls run free is a real "n00b error" that I cannot see from Raith (at that point (q.v. "strongest Whampire in the world" and "at the height of his prowess") in his life). I actually do have an idea, here: it was Lea. We know that Maggie was already "LaFey" and with an extensive suite of Fae info/contacts (presumably including Lea). And Lea's specialty was "inspiring mortals... to their eventual doom" per WoJ; it's "how she made her bones" in Winter & got to be the powerhouse we see in the books. Presumably Lea had the power to "inspire" Maggie to break free (I'm sure Lea's power beats Papa Raith's).
As I said, I doubt that she was enthralled, she may have simply tired of Raith and his antics. Also once she fell in love with Malcolm she may have felt protected by true love. She could very well have been, but that was physical contact, but couldn't save her from an entrophy spell.
-
... I seriously doubt that she was enthralled by him ...
To be clear, I mean specifically the Whamp-mojo kind of "enthrallment," not just the normal "honeymoon phase" hot-new-romance "they're enthralled with their new lover" kind.
Unless Papa Raith took pains not to enthrall her, the things we have seen tend to suggest that Maggie would inevitably have become enthralled... And we have little-to-no evidence tht Raith would have been motivated not to.
-
To be clear, I mean specifically the Whamp-mojo kind of "enthrallment," not just the normal "honeymoon phase" hot-new-romance "they're enthralled with their new lover" kind.
Unless Papa Raith took pains not to enthrall her, the things we have seen tend to suggest that Maggie would inevitably have become enthralled... And we have little-to-no evidence tht Raith would have been motivated not to.
Except I don't remember where it says anywhere that White Court vamps can enthrall anyone.
-
Except I don't remember where it says anywhere that White Court vamps can enthrall anyone.
It's how the White Court gets full control of somebody. The amazing sex can be addictively-good -- and as with other addictions, almost impossible to break (particularly with a sapient addiction, like a whampire!!!); but if they want to, the whampires can go even further than that.
We saw it in Turn Coat: Vince Graber (the PI) was hired by a mortal lawyer, Evelyn Derek; she in turn was enthralled by a Whampire -- likely Madeline Raith.
-
At the end of the day, Thomas did commit murder, you can argue about his motives, but he was willing to kill and it wasn't the Hunger Demon driving him to do it.
Yes, it was the Hunger demon doing it. Shagnasty starved him to the point that the demon took over, then fed the girls to it while Thomas more or less wasn't there anymore. Then Shagnasty would let the Hunger feed enough for Thomas to regain himself, realize what had happened, then repeat the process...over and over.
My theory was she was still pushing for a star born, or perhaps Mab was pushing her in that direction. I seriously doubt that she was enthralled by him. She may have had just enough arrogance to think she could handle him, also she may have fallen into another trap that women often fall into, she thought he'd treat her differently
As I said, I doubt that she was enthralled, she may have simply tired of Raith and his antics.
Since she was partaking of supersex on an apparently ongoing basis, it's hard to imagine that she wasn't addicted.
Almost every account we've heard speaks of Margaret 'escaping' from the White Court. However it started (and I have no doubt Margaret's self-confessed arrogance led her into it), by the time it ended she was not in control. What we don't know are the details. Was she trapped purely by addiction? Or were there other restraints in play?
I have no doubt LR is arrogant enough to assume that his whammy is too strong for a woman to escape. But at the same time, Margaret was a valuable possession, it would have been in the interests of others to capture her, so I imagine there were guards or some safety check in place.
But we have no details.
It's how the White Court gets full control of somebody. The amazing sex can be addictively-good -- and as with other addictions, almost impossible to break (particularly with a sapient addiction, like a whampire!!!); but if they want to, the whampires can go even further than that.
We saw it in Turn Coat: Vince Graber (the PI) was hired by a mortal lawyer, Evelyn Derek; she in turn was enthralled by a Whampire -- likely Madeline Raith.
Yeah, most of the time it's just straight-up addiction. You can call addiction a form of enthrallment, but Evelyn Derek is beyond that. OTOH, we don't know if the WVs can do that level of mind manipulation to just anyone, either. Messing with Derek's mind is one thing, a White Council level Witch is another.
But yeah, it's almost impossible to imagine that Margaret could regularly get busy with Lord Raith (one of the most powerful WVs) and not be, in effect, a junkie before long.
JB has told us very little about the details of Margaret's escape...and that's probably intentional, because the details would probably tell us a lot about the overall Big Picture that Harry is trapped within.
-
Regarding Margaret and her escape, we have to assume that Eb is telling the truth when he told Harry that she had broken the First Law, among others, and that by the time Harry was born the Wardens were actively hunting her. Even if it started out as simply 'watching' her, as Luccio said, Eb said specifically that it had gone way past that by the end.
We have to assume that, because otherwise, when she escaped and went on the run, Margaret could have turned to the Council for protection. She could easily make it worth the Wardens' while to protect her and Malcolm from the WVs, IF she was just still a misguided idealist. After all, she would be an absolute platinum mine of juicy intel about the White Court. She could deliver inside information about the innermost circles of the organization.
But in the event, she was running from both the Council and the Court.
-
... We have to assume that, because otherwise, when she escaped and went on the run, Margaret could have turned to the Council for protection ...
Not necessarily.
For example -- Eb says she broke the First Law, and they were hunting her.
But what if she had been framed?
Knew she was innocent, but that she was under a kill-on-sight order?
Alternatively, I (and others) suspect that the "Dinner Party" she had invited Eb to -- he one with the white King & Duchess Arianna (where she spotted that Eb & Maggie "fought like family") -- was likely a "Black Council" initiative, an effort to recruit Eb. And if she was inside the "Black Council," it is entirely possible that she knew (or had excellent reason to suspect) that the White Council was already too compromised for her to shelter safely there.
I'm sure that Jim could create other valid reasons for Maggie Sr. to be "less evil" than depicted, but unable to claim any sanctuary or safety with the White Council. We know our understanding of her to be woefully inadequate; both incomplete, and mistaken in (at least some of) the details.
-
I'm sure that Jim could create other valid reasons for Maggie Sr. to be "less evil" than depicted, but unable to claim any sanctuary or safety with the White Council. We know our understanding of her to be woefully inadequate; both incomplete, and mistaken in (at least some of) the details.
It is possible that Margaret was every bit as bad as the White Council says she was. If you can believe Chauncy, who said she was headed right into their arms, she was.. Eb loved her, blamed himself no doubt, but I don't think he has any illusions about her. There are those who tried to be sympathetic, Rashid, Listens to Wind, even Morgan, partly because of Eb, and maybe because they might have known her a bit better than others did. So yeah, she was bad, she broke laws, but she wasn't beyond redemption, and she was redeemed in the end, Chauncy said so, even if he didn't understand. The love of a very good man with a very good soul and loving him back, made her want to mend her ways, and she was redeemed.. So everything said about Margaret can be true, it is just very complicated.
-
Not necessarily.
For example -- Eb says she broke the First Law, and they were hunting her.
But what if she had been framed?
Knew she was innocent, but that she was under a kill-on-sight order?
Alternatively, I (and others) suspect that the "Dinner Party" she had invited Eb to -- he one with the white King & Duchess Arianna (where she spotted that Eb & Maggie "fought like family") -- was likely a "Black Council" initiative, an effort to recruit Eb. And if she was inside the "Black Council," it is entirely possible that she knew (or had excellent reason to suspect) that the White Council was already too compromised for her to shelter safely there.
I'm sure that Jim could create other valid reasons for Maggie Sr. to be "less evil" than depicted, but unable to claim any sanctuary or safety with the White Council. We know our understanding of her to be woefully inadequate; both incomplete, and mistaken in (at least some of) the details.
Agreed about out lack of knowledge.
But...this is where Ockham's Razor cuts sharply. We don't have much hard data about Margaret, but we've had lots of hints and clues, and most of them point in the same direction. Eb said point blank that she had broken the First Law, and added 'among others' IIRC. Nicodemus has 'fond memories' of Margaret, and her ability to make her own simulacrum and project it into Thomas and Harry's minds suggests she knew the Denarians well enough to study some of their abilities. Thomas called her 'one hell of a dangerous witch'. Chanzoggorth said Hell thought they were going to claim her. Lea said that Margaret acted like Harry...at the very end of her life. Not before. Goodman Grey, IIRC, called Margaret a 'piece of work'. That from a half-Nagloshi. She was plotting something with Lord Raith, who is known for being a Solid Guy (that's sarcasm, son, as Foghorn Leghorn would say), and Aramina, who is Aramina.
Out of all the hints and clues we've had from people who knew her or interacted with her, only Stacy's version is at all positive (and Lea's a little, Lea said she started acting like Harry acts at the very end). All the other references have been negative. Oh, yeah, one other tiny good sign: apparently Martha Liberty had some kind of positive opinion of Margaret, or so it's hinted at one point.
But the overall thrust is bad.
OK, maybe she was like Harry, broke Laws but not a true warlock, complicated extenuating circumstances and so forth. But contrast their reputations. A lot of people, on and off the Council, think Harry is a dangerous menacing warlock or worse...but there are also a lot of people, on and off the Council, who have very high opinions of him, too. It's not hard to find people in the Dresdenverse who'll tell you that Harry Dresden is a stand-up guy and solid. If a lot of people hate, fear, and distrust him, a lot of other people hold him in high regard and respect.
In contrast, almost everything we've received about Margaret is negative.
So what's the simplest interpretation of the data, as William of Ockham would ask?
One possibility (and I don't necessarily believe it, it's a WAG): during her idealistic wild youth, she might have found herself in a situation kind of like Harry's life, breaking a Law or two in extremis, and wrongly condemned for it. If she went down the wrong road after that, the twisting effects of black magic and bad company could have turned her into the Margaret we've all heard about.
Which might be part of why Eb is so worried about Harry's current activities...
-
Agreed about out lack of knowledge.
But...this is where Ockham's Razor cuts sharply. We don't have much hard data about Margaret, but we've had lots of hints and clues, and most of them point in the same direction. Eb said point blank that she had broken the First Law, and added 'among others' IIRC. Nicodemus has 'fond memories' of Margaret, and her ability to make her own simulacrum and project it into Thomas and Harry's minds suggests she knew the Denarians well enough to study some of their abilities. Thomas called her 'one hell of a dangerous witch'. Chanzoggorth said Hell thought they were going to claim her. Lea said that Margaret acted like Harry...at the very end of her life. Not before. Goodman Grey, IIRC, called Margaret a 'piece of work'. That from a half-Nagloshi. She was plotting something with Lord Raith, who is known for being a Solid Guy (that's sarcasm, son, as Foghorn Leghorn would say), and Aramina, who is Aramina.
Out of all the hints and clues we've had from people who knew her or interacted with her, only Stacy's version is at all positive (and Lea's a little, Lea said she started acting like Harry acts at the very end). All the other references have been negative. Oh, yeah, one other tiny good sign: apparently Martha Liberty had some kind of positive opinion of Margaret, or so it's hinted at one point.
But the overall thrust is bad.
OK, maybe she was like Harry, broke Laws but not a true warlock, complicated extenuating circumstances and so forth. But contrast their reputations. A lot of people, on and off the Council, think Harry is a dangerous menacing warlock or worse...but there are also a lot of people, on and off the Council, who have very high opinions of him, too. It's not hard to find people in the Dresdenverse who'll tell you that Harry Dresden is a stand-up guy and solid. If a lot of people hate, fear, and distrust him, a lot of other people hold him in high regard and respect.
In contrast, almost everything we've received about Margaret is negative.
So what's the simplest interpretation of the data, as William of Ockham would ask?
One possibility (and I don't necessarily believe it, it's a WAG): during her idealistic wild youth, she might have found herself in a situation kind of like Harry's life, breaking a Law or two in extremis, and wrongly condemned for it. If she went down the wrong road after that, the twisting effects of black magic and bad company could have turned her into the Margaret we've all heard about.
Which might be part of why Eb is so worried about Harry's current activities...
One of the themes of the series is redemption, that's what the Holy Knights are about. Their job isn't to kill Denarians, but to convince them to redeem themselves or try to. While maybe a Holy Knight didn't do it, Margaret managed to redeem herself in the end. Chauncy said it, they lost her in the end. So all the bad things said about her could all very well be true, but at the same time the good things said about her in the end were also true.
-
One of the themes of the series is redemption, that's what the Holy Knights are about. Their job isn't to kill Denarians, but to convince them to redeem themselves or try to. While maybe a Holy Knight didn't do it, Margaret managed to redeem herself in the end. Chauncy said it, they lost her in the end. So all the bad things said about her could all very well be true, but at the same time the good things said about her in the end were also true.
And yet you stand fast to the idea that Mab, Titania and Molly no longer have souls. That Thomas and all the other WC vampires are just monsters pretending to be human. Redemption is for everyone, not just the people we like. Why is Margaret Redeemable and not them?
-
And yet you stand fast to the idea that Mab, Titania and Molly no longer have souls. That Thomas and all the other WC vampires are just monsters pretending to be human. Redemption is for everyone, not just the people we like. Why is Margaret Redeemable and not them?
Margaret remained 100% human, with a human soul, powerful wizard maybe, but still human.. By her acts she put her soul in jeopardy, but she still had a soul. Same goes for the Denarians, they still have a soul, if they give up their coin, it is up to them to redeem themselves in their remaining time on Earth.. Mab is about 99.99% not human.. Debatable whether she has any soul left or not to redeem.
-
... and Aramina, who is Aramina.
Errr... who is Aramina?
(edit: do you mean the Rampire Duchess Arianna Ortega?)
... Oh, yeah, one other tiny good sign: apparently Martha Liberty had some kind of positive opinion of Margaret, or so it's hinted at one point ...
You forgot to mention Rashid; who is, likely, the very most Clued-In of all the White Council.
I think we see that he liked her, too. Maybe not 100% in agreement, but more in-agreement than not (and evidently with ample opportunity to take her out, if he had been so inclined).
... But the overall thrust is bad ...
Dunno.
You've listed Nic & Chaucy as key character-witnesses, here; and while their supernatural/Infernal state puts them very much in a position to know, their trustworthiness is worse than just "bad."
I'd be more inclined to think of them as con-artists, telling the story they want Harry to hear... including enough truth to be "that checks out" but also enough "bad stuff" to keep him from looking too hard for fear of what nastiness he might find.
Eb I think was trying really hard, still, to keep the secret of her parentage. So he couldn't investigate too hard, and maybe accepted the word of people he shouldn't have, about her lawbreaking behavior.
She was walking the wrong side of the line for a good long while, no mistake: politics may make "strange bedfellows," but she was literally in bed with the strongest Incubus in the world, having "awesome vampire sex" (Jim's phrase). I think Grey's experience of her was likely mostly from this "Black Council" period.
But when we look at Martha Liberty -- and especially Rashid -- then I think her overall image gets MUCH more shades-of-gray... and not necessarily one of the darker shades.
My headcanon has her "seduced by the Dark Side" for a while -- lured in via her idealism & the all-too-obvious failings of the White Council -- and working the "Starbabe Plan" on their behalf; but then broken-free (possibly/probably by Lea) and meeting Malcolm, and deciding a Starborn Wizard not under "Black Council aegis" was what the world needed (again, likely Lea's doing).
But also, Uriel was deep in those weeds, I think.
-
You've listed Nic & Chaucy as key character-witnesses, here; and while their supernatural/Infernal state puts them very much in a position to know, their trustworthiness is worse than just "bad."
Might add though that Chauncy admitted that she changed somehow, he didn't elaborate, and she was lost to his side. I think that can be trusted because I think it took a lot for him to admit a loss for his side.
My headcanon has her "seduced by the Dark Side" for a while -- lured in via her idealism & the all-too-obvious failings of the White Council -- and working the "Starbabe Plan" on their behalf; but then broken-free (possibly/probably by Lea) and meeting Malcolm, and deciding a Starborn Wizard not under "Black Council aegis" was what the world needed (again, likely Lea's doing).
But also, Uriel was deep in those weeds, I think.
I agree with this for the most part.
-
Errr... who is Aramina?
(edit: do you mean the Rampire Duchess Arianna Ortega?)
Yes, that's her, for some reason I always find myself thinking of her as 'Aramina'. I don't know where that comes from, but I keep doing it.
You forgot to mention Rashid; who is, likely, the very most Clued-In of all the White Council.
I think we see that he liked her, too. Maybe not 100% in agreement, but more agreement than niot (and evidently with ample opportunity to take her out, if he had been so inclined).
I can't prove it, but I suspect we're seeing a 'timeline' issue. That is, Stacy's version was Margaret in the early stages, before she crossed whatever lines she crossed. Probably Rashid's association with her was in those relatively early stages too, Stacy did mention that even back then, she was a genius at accessing Faerie. I suspect the nastier stuff came later.
Dunno.
You've listed Nic & Chaucy as key character-witnesses, here; and while their supernatural/Infernal state puts them very much in a position to know, their trustworthiness is worse than just "bad."
I'd be more inclined to think of them as con-artists, telling the story they want Harry to hear... including enough truth to be "that checks out" but also enough "bad stuff" to keep him from looking too hard for fear of what nastiness he might find.
I don't think Chauzoggoroth ever lied to Harry by commission. I'm not sure he even could directly lie to Harry, once the deal was struck. Certainly, even if he could, getting caught in a direct lie would wreck his credibility, and thus tend to drive off sucke-I mean customers. :lol:
Now Chaunzoggorth certainly lied to Harry by omission and implication, just as Mab and her ilk sometimes do. He was trying to sucker Harry in, and Harry only realized what an idiot he was being in dealing with Chaunzoggoroth when it was almost too late. But I don't think C ever directly lied to Harry during their interaction.
Notice how he structured his statements. Everything he told Harry was a simple, direct statement of fact, except for one tidbit: the idea that the source of the loup garou curse was Saint Patrick. When he got to that part, C said, 'it is said that'. C didn't say Patrick cursed the MacFinns, he said that 'it is said that he cursed them'. Which is probably not a direct lie, I'm sure it's been said by someone at some point, whether he really did or not. That suggests to me that C doesn't actually, technically lie during his contractual exchanges.
.
Eb I think was trying really hard, still, to keep the secret of her parentage. So he couldn't investigate too hard, and maybe accepted the word of people he shouldn't have, about her lawbreaking behavior.
That I do not buy. Eb is many things, but stupid isn't one of them, and I can't imagine he would be made the Blackstaff if he wasn't the sort of man who doesn't do 'sloppy'.
But when we look at Martha Liberty -- and especially Rashid -- then I think her overall image gets MUCH more shades-of-gray... and not necessarily one of the darker shades.
As I said, I suspect it's a timeline issue, it depends on at what point in her life we're talking about. A century is a long time, on a human scale.
-
I don't think Chauzoggoroth ever lied to Harry by commission. I'm not sure he even could directly lie to Harry, once the deal was struck. Certainly, even if he could, getting caught in a direct lie would wreck his credibility, and thus tend to drive off sucke-I mean customers. :lol:
Now Chaunzoggorth certainly lied to Harry by omission and implication, just as Mab and her ilk sometimes do. He was trying to sucker Harry in, and Harry only realized what an idiot he was being in dealing with Chaunzoggoroth when it was almost too late. But I don't think C ever directly lied to Harry during their interaction.
Notice how he structured his statements. Everything he told Harry was a simple, direct statement of fact, except for one tidbit: the idea that the source of the loup garou curse was Saint Patrick. When he got to that part, C said, 'it is said that'. C didn't say Patrick cursed the MacFinns, he said that 'it is said that he cursed them'. Which is probably not a direct lie, I'm sure it's been said by someone at some point, whether he really did or not. That suggests to me that C doesn't actually, technically lie during his contractual exchanges.
Yeah, I do think while Chauncy might not out right lie to Harry, I also think he could be deceptive.. If you aren't smart enough to figure that out it's on you, how many times have we heard Mab say that to Harry? In other words saying enough to where they aren't lying, but leaving out some important information allowing you to lie to yourself about what she said. Anyway that's off topic a bit, I don't think Chauncy lied about Margaret to Harry simply because I don't think it was any advantage in telling Harry that she redeemed herself in the end.
-
Yeah, I do think while Chauncy might not out right lie to Harry, I also think he could be deceptive.... In other words saying enough to where they aren't lying, but leaving out some important information allowing you to lie to yourself ...
THIS.
100%
You can tell the absolute truth, without coming anywhere close to the whole truth, and still be telling nothing but the truth.
If Chauncy tells a carefully-curated "worst 5%" of the truth to Harry; and puts careful spin and "implication" onto it -- loaded words without being false words, etc -- then he can deceive Harry quite completely, by telling "the truth."
Nicodemus/Anduriel even more-so, even more subtly. Without lying, he can imply things that will lead Harry to suspect certain things, that will spark certain ideas, that will get Harry to investigate in certain directions. If Harry then does as Nic predicted, well... that was Harry's free will, wasn't it? Even if the info Harry finds is untrustworthy/prejudicial... and that was known to Nic.
-
THIS.
100%
You can tell the absolute truth, without coming anywhere close to the whole truth, and still be telling nothing but the truth.
If Chauncy tells a carefully-curated "worst 5%" of the truth to Harry; and puts careful spin and "implication" onto it -- loaded words without being false words, etc -- then he can deceive Harry quite completely, by telling "the truth."
Nicodemus/Anduriel even more-so, even more subtly. Without lying, he can imply things that will lead Harry to suspect certain things, that will spark certain ideas, that will get Harry to investigate in certain directions. If Harry then does as Nic predicted, well... that was Harry's free will, wasn't it? Even if the info Harry finds is untrustworthy/prejudicial... and that was known to Nic.
Yeah, but that fails the Ockham's Razor test.
Yes, they could be lying indirectly...but Chaunzoggoth's statements about Margaret were pretty direct and basic. There wasn't much room for interpretation, as far as they went.
Now Nicodemus is certainly capable of lying, directly or indirectly, and certainly willing to do so...but again, under the circumstances when the exchange happened, he had no motive to do so. He was trying to recruit Harry, but he had already decided that if Harry wouldn't join up, then he was going to kill him then and there. So manipulation would be a waste of time. That whole conversation looks most likely to be just what it seemed like, Nicodemus trying to recruit Harry, mentioning in passing that he knew Harry's mother and about his sibling, and Harry refusing to play.
Nicodemus had every intention of killing Harry there and then, and he would have done so, except that Shiro showed up just in time to save him. So Nicodemus could have been playing con man...but under the circumstances, that fails the Razor test.
-
Yeah, but that fails the Ockham's Razor test.
Yes, they could be lying indirectly...but Chaunzoggoth's statements about Margaret were pretty direct and basic. There wasn't much room for interpretation, as far as they went.
Now Nicodemus is certainly capable of lying, directly or indirectly, and certainly willing to do so...but again, under the circumstances when the exchange happened, he had no motive to do so. He was trying to recruit Harry, but he had already decided that if Harry wouldn't join up, then he was going to kill him then and there. So manipulation would be a waste of time. That whole conversation looks most likely to be just what it seemed like, Nicodemus trying to recruit Harry, mentioning in passing that he knew Harry's mother and about his sibling, and Harry refusing to play.
Nicodemus had every intention of killing Harry there and then, and he would have done so, except that Shiro showed up just in time to save him. So Nicodemus could have been playing con man...but under the circumstances, that fails the Razor test.
It does pass it in the sense that what Nic was doing was twisting the knife and increasing Harry's emotional pain in hopes of weakening him to the point where Harry would give up and accept the coin because he would feel that the White Council wronged his mother and wronged him. He was playing Harry but not in the usual way.
-
Also, I think Nic & Anduriel are entirely capable of making a "safety" play & leaving Harry with an impression they'd like him to have, on the outside chance he survives.
They know there are KotC's in the field against them, so they know their "best-laid plans" may still not be good enough.
-
Also, I think Nic & Anduriel are entirely capable of making a "safety" play & leaving Harry with an impression they'd like him to have, on the outside chance he survives.
They know there are KotC's in the field against them, so they know their "best-laid plans" may still not be good enough.
Not to mention at this point Harry has no clue that unless very special precautions are taken Andriel can listen in to anything and everything he says to anyone. So in this case in particular, Nic has full advantage over Harry.
-
Also, I think Nic & Anduriel are entirely capable of making a "safety" play & leaving Harry with an impression they'd like him to have, on the outside chance he survives.
They know there are KotC's in the field against them, so they know their "best-laid plans" may still not be good enough.
Yeah, but that also fails the Ockham's Razor test. Yeah, that could be what's going on, but it's not the simplest explanation that fits the data. The whole conversation could be Nicodemus playing 7 dimensional chess. We know Nicodemus does sometimes play 7-d chess, so to speak.
But the simpler explanation is that he was prepared to offer Harry a Coin, because a corrupted Harry could be useful, but he's also smart enough to know Harry would be a handful to control, so he makes the offer but is prepared to just kill him otherwise. That fits the scene, fits the data, and requires fewer assumptions.
Likewise, we can build all sorts of scenarios where Margaret really wasn't so bad, and we can make them fit the available data...but they're never the simplest fit. The simplest fit for the available data is that Margaret started out as a misguided, short-sighted idealist, made friends and enemies along the way, and at some point became much, much worse, and then found redemption and salvation near the end of her life, and was then murdered by Lord Raith.
-
On the subject of Margaret, it occured to me today to wonder about something: did she know Kemmler?
She could have. The Council iced Kemmler in 1961. We don't know exactly when Margaret died, but it has to have been the early-to-mid 1970s. I'd say 1975-76 at the very latest, probably a little earlier. Harry is probably in the neighborhood of 50 these days, but IDR if it's ever been said precisely how old Harry is.
So it's possible that Margaret knew him. Heck, she might have fought alongside the Council against Kemmler, for all we know. Or possibly (though not I think very probably) she might have been on Kemmler's side against the Council.
Certainly, she was in the Game at the time when the Council took Kemmler down.
-
Likewise, we can build all sorts of scenarios where Margaret really wasn't so bad, and we can make them fit the available data...but they're never the simplest fit. The simplest fit for the available data is that Margaret started out as a misguided, short-sighted idealist, made friends and enemies along the way, and at some point became much, much worse, and then found redemption and salvation near the end of her life, and was then murdered by Lord Raith.
I think Margaret was that bad, but she was complicated and most people are. I think her motives may have started out good enough, i.e. that the Council needed reforming, but between her rebellion against Eb and other not so nice people exploiting her when she still was quite young, she did do all the bad things she was accused of. Love is also a big deal in the series, and the love of a good man made her want to change, and she did.
Yeah, but that also fails the Ockham's Razor test. Yeah, that could be what's going on, but it's not the simplest explanation that fits the data. The whole conversation could be Nicodemus playing 7 dimensional chess. We know Nicodemus does sometimes play 7-d chess, so to speak.
Except because of Andriel, Nic thought he had a handle on Harry's thinking, because of Andriel, it could very well be Ockham's Razor.
On the subject of Margaret, it occured to me today to wonder about something: did she know Kemmler?
Wouldn't be a shock if she did.
-
...
But the simpler explanation is that he was prepared to offer Harry a Coin, because a corrupted Harry could be useful, but he's also smart enough to know Harry would be a handful to control, so he makes the offer but is prepared to just kill him otherwise. That fits the scene, fits the data, and requires fewer assumptions ...
I am going to assert that it's virtually always incorrect to presume "Anduriel is only pursuing the simplest and most-straightforward plan, here" in any scene where Nic/Anduriel is onscreen (they are like Mab (and Odin) in this regard).
They don't play 7-d chess, they live and breathe it 24/7/365 and have been doing so for centuries.
In fact, Occam's Razor is the least-valid approach to these sorts of characters.
-
On the subject of Margaret, it occured to me today to wonder about something: did she know Kemmler?
She could have. The Council iced Kemmler in 1961. We don't know exactly when Margaret died, but it has to have been the early-to-mid 1970s. I'd say 1975-76 at the very latest, probably a little earlier. Harry is probably in the neighborhood of 50 these days, but IDR if it's ever been said precisely how old Harry is.
So it's possible that Margaret knew him. Heck, she might have fought alongside the Council against Kemmler, for all we know. Or possibly (though not I think very probably) she might have been on Kemmler's side against the Council.
Certainly, she was in the Game at the time when the Council took Kemmler down.
You're right, it's very possible they knew one another (I think inevitable that they at least knew of one another) . I'm betting there were some sort of meetings between them: it's exactly the sort of thing I think Jim would use to torment Harry!
The timing certainly works (Kemmler died about 10-20 years before Margaret, but they had over a century where they were both running 'round the world getting into trouble). We just don't know if there were ever any same-place-same-time actual face-to-face encounters. Detail-oriented fans created a semi-speculative timeframe (I think likely more-fully-researched than anything Jim himself ever did). It's good enough that Jim "adopted" it, and it's now hosted at his official website:
https://www.jim-butcher.com/timeline
-
I am going to assert that it's virtually always incorrect to presume "Anduriel is only pursuing the simplest and most-straightforward plan, here" in any scene where Nic/Anduriel is onscreen (they are like Mab (and Odin) in this regard).
There are a couple of unknowns, 1) Has Harry always been on Nic's radar? 2) Can Anduriel monitor every human at the same time?
I don't think it is Anduriel who is calling the shots as far as a plan goes. His value, and it is a HUGE advantage is gathering total intelligence about everyone.. I don't think Mab or even Odin can do this, there are things they don't know even now about Harry or how he thinks. Nic has that intelligence, that's why it was so easy for him to sucker Murphy into a fight and get a Holy Sword broken.
-
There are a couple of unknowns, 1) Has Harry always been on Nic's radar? 2) Can Anduriel monitor every human at the same time?
I don't think it is Anduriel who is calling the shots as far as a plan goes. His value, and it is a HUGE advantage is gathering total intelligence about everyone.. I don't think Mab or even Odin can do this, there are things they don't know even now about Harry or how he thinks. Nic has that intelligence, that's why it was so easy for him to sucker Murphy into a fight and get a Holy Sword broken.
1) I (very strongly) suspect so! Nic seems to have known Margaret -- possibly well -- and I suspect he particularly would have taken extra pains to "look in on her" when she fled from Papa Raith. Meeting Malcom, getting pregnant... these would have been known to him. Her baby being on-track for being Starborn, and the Salic-Law offspring of an unusually-powerful White Council witch, seems likely to be of passing interest to Anduriel. Whether Anduriel informed Nic... unknown.
2) I'm pretty sure Anduriel can multitrack much more info than humans can, but I'm guessing the limit is there, and likely more on the order of dozens-hundreds than the billions of "all of humanity" at once.
3) Anduriel has found a partner in Nic who already had a closely-aligned agenda, and millennia to subtly influence & adjust Nic's outlook to be even closer. Anduriel "called his shots" over millenia, with that subtle influence; and now mostly just sits back and "lives off the interest of those prior investments." He still steps in on Nic, occasionally. We saw it in the fight in Hades' vault, when Michael & Harry tried to get Nic to give up the coin: I don't think Nic was allowed to hear them.
Nic boasts to Harry that he's a "full partner" but that's honestly delusional of him: he has only the "independence" that Anduriel permits him (but that's a fair amount because Nic began close and only got closer as the years passed).
4) I think Anduriel & Mab & Odin each have different sorts of info where they have advantage "gathering intel." I doubt Anduriel's "listen from the shadows" ability is widely-known, and I think it very meaningful (and not at all accidental) that Harry was told. Fundamentally, though, the Fallen seem unable to understand humanity's "better side" -- recall that Harry baffled Lasciel's Shadow more than once, and that was "the Temptress'" best effort to create a mortal-influencing simulacrum (presumably the "Master of Shadows" is less-skilled). Faerie'dom has its own huge intel-gathering power (witness Harry using Toot & the Guard), and Mab thus surely knows stuff that Anduriel doesn't. I'm unclear what Odin's "special abilities" are, in this regard, but he surely has tricks of his own, advantages of his own.
-
I am going to assert that it's virtually always incorrect to presume "Anduriel is only pursuing the simplest and most-straightforward plan, here" in any scene where Nic/Anduriel is onscreen (they are like Mab (and Odin) in this regard).
They don't play 7-d chess, they live and breathe it 24/7/365 and have been doing so for centuries.
In fact, Occam's Razor is the least-valid approach to these sorts of characters.
Not really.
I actually disagree about their 'living and breathing' this stuff. Yes, they're good at it. Yes, they're often playing a deeper game, and usually a deeper one yet within it when they do. But they still have limits. Nicodemus is still a human being, an incredibly long-lived and very smart one, granted, but it's a mistake to see him as all-foreseeing, all-calculating, nigh-infallible. Sometimes he's just doing what he appears to be doing.
We've actually seen in-story that Nicodemus can be, and has been, outplayed by Harry, Mab and John Marcone. Now granted both the latter are masters at this themselves, but it's an example of Nicodemus' fallibility. Nicodemus is very good at this, but he's not necessarily the best there is. Though I think he thinks he's better at it than he really is.
(I think Margaret had some of the same thing going on.)
Remember what Uriel (a true 17-dimensional chessmaster) was doing during the Hades adventure. Even as Mab and Marcone played Nicodemus, Uriel was using that to destroy Nicodemus' illusion of omniscience and Ultimate Badassness with his own minions, in hopes of freeing them and eventually saving them. Seeing Nicodemus run away, totally outplayed, wiped out the perception they had of him as being a mega-infallible badass...and left them potentially open to better things.
And even the master-level players are not always playing at master level. I think it's a mistake, for example, to ascribe that sort of ability to the Black Council, or Nemesis. They too are to some degree playing it by ear, I think.
You're right, it's very possible they knew one another (I think inevitable that they at least knew of one another) . I'm betting there were some sort of meetings between them: it's exactly the sort of thing I think Jim would use to torment Harry!
Good point.
We just don't know enough about Margaret's motivations, back in the day, to assess what her attitude toward Kemmler would probably have been. Even if she was corrupt at the time herself, that doesn't guarantee they'd have gotten along, as an old line from a Disney show goes, sometimes 'the last thing a villain needs around is another villain'.
3) Anduriel has found a partner in Nic who already had a closely-aligned agenda, and millennia to subtly influence & adjust Nic's outlook to be even closer. Anduriel "called his shots" over millenia, with that subtle influence; and now mostly just sits back and "lives off the interest of those prior investments." He still steps in on Nic, occasionally. We saw it in the fight in Hades' vault, when Michael & Harry tried to get Nic to give up the coin: I don't think Nic was allowed to hear them.
I might need to reread that scene, but I don't think Anduriel was blocking Nicodemus' ears, so to speak. I'm not sure he'd have been allowed to do that, under the circumstances. IIRC, my impression was that Harry and Michael almost reached Nicodemus for a moment, he seemed to waver, and then Anduriel whispered something to him and fed his pride and ego and got him back on the evil track again.
Nic boasts to Harry that he's a "full partner" but that's honestly delusional of him: he has only the "independence" that Anduriel permits him (but that's a fair amount because Nic began close and only got closer as the years passed).
Absolutely. No mortal is ever really the one in control with those Coins in play. They'll let a mortal have his or her head if it's useful, but the final say is always in demonic hands. Deep down, Nicodemus probably knows that, even if he can't admit it to himself. The only way a mortal gets the last word with a Coin is by refusing it, or surrendering it.
-
We've actually seen in-story that Nicodemus can be, and has been, outplayed by Harry, Mab and John Marcone. Now granted both the latter are masters at this themselves, but it's an example of Nicodemus' fallibility. Nicodemus is very good at this, but he's not necessarily the best there is. Though I think he thinks he's better at it than he really is.
They did, but only because they now understand Nic's advantage. That's why the planning to out con Nic's con in Mac's bar worked so well, blocking Andriel removed Nic's advantage. Mab and company picked one of the few places where Andriel couldn't listen to their plans to plant Gray. Nic is clever, but it is easy to be clever when you know before hand what the other side is planning. Andriel is a fallen angel, so at one point he did have perhaps not all the power of an archangel, but he was still powerful. When he chose the wrong side and fell and became the prisoner of the coin, he still retains a lot of power, but he is only as good as his host in many ways. In other words, Nic has always been power hungry and is convinced that Andriel's cause is right, and has bought into the idea that they are an equal partnership. In my opinion one main reason why it didn't work out between Harry and Lasciel is that accidental soul gaze Harry had back in Death Masks when he first met the Denarians. From that he understood where any "partnership" was heading no matter how many promises Lasciel made, still it was a close thing because of the temptations of all the advantages given a host of a coin. Harry in the end didn't want to end up like the image he saw, thus with the help of his starborn unbelievably strong will he resisted and rejected Lasciel's coin. Nic doesn't have that kind of will, I also think he is more full of fear than ego and pride, that's why he didn't give in to Harry and Michael in what seemed like a weak moment. He still needs time as things around him turn south and he is no longer on top before he makes his decision.. We have yet to see what influence the Grail will have on him in the end. I trust Michael on that, and he thinks school is still out on that one.
I might need to reread that scene, but I don't think Anduriel was blocking Nicodemus' ears, so to speak. I'm not sure he'd have been allowed to do that, under the circumstances. IIRC, my impression was that Harry and Michael almost reached Nicodemus for a moment, he seemed to waver, and then Anduriel whispered something to him and fed his pride and ego and got him back on the evil track again.
I don't think Anduriel was blocking Nic either at that point, I don't think it was so much pride and ego that got to Nic, but fear.
Nic has been willing to sacrifice even his only beloved daughter for the cause, perhaps even believes that his daughter will rise again. My point is, Nic isn't disillusioned yet by why he is doing what he is doing, he still believes in it. Also he has no clue as to what would happen to him if he gave up his coin, he has been on the earth for a couple of thousand years maybe because of the coin. Nic has seen what has happened to those who did give up their coin and became mortal again. I mean the man is a couple of thousand years old, would he age rapidly like Cassius and die after a few years? Or just turn to dust?
-
I wonder...with a nickname like Margaret le Fay, JB has said it was at least partly because she was so tight with the Fae, but it's also an obvious call-back to Arthurian legend, along with so many other names in the DF.
I wonder if Margaret ever possessed Morgan's infamous dagger, that has caused so much trouble in Harry's world?
-
... Nicodemus is still a human being ...
Nic is, yes.
Anduriel emphatically is not.
And we don't have a good sense of what the Fallen's limitations are -- and are not -- when they're working with a host.
A Fallen Shadow can achieve anything any human can, surpassing all the limitations of "average," but not actually exceeding human capability -- the Shadow is still working with the stuff of mortality.
A full-fledged KotBD can go beyond those limits... they still do have limits, but we don't know what those are: we're speculating there, beyond what canon firmly tells us.
It seems unlikely to me that the stuff we know about is all of it... I presume they have secrets they hold in reserve!
-
Nic is, yes.
Anduriel emphatically is not.
True, but the powers of the Fallen in the Coins is limited, that's part of the point of the Coins. They have to work through human hosts, and that reduces their power substantially, and so yes, it matters that Nicodemus is human.
-
Another question that occurs to me about Margaret: how much did Malcolm know?
A lot of the same considerations that apply to Harry in relationships with baseline mortals would also apply to Margaret. She was only about a century old, in terms of her 'personal time', though we suspect she was closer to a century and a half in calendar terms.
Which means that (assuming she survived her numerous enemies), she could expect to live another 2 or 3 centuries when she married Malcolm. Now in practice she had made so many enemies that her prospects for living even a few more years were decidedly dicey, but still.
I wonder how much Malcolm knew about the supernatural world, how much she told him. I can't imagine that she hid her magical nature from him. I hope she told Malcolm about her enemies, so he would know what he was getting into by marrying her. (It's only fair to warn a prospective spouse about baggage, and Margaret McCoy was Miss Baggage 1970.)
It would be fascinating to know the details of how that played out.
-
Another question that occurs to me about Margaret: how much did Malcolm know?
A lot of the same considerations that apply to Harry in relationships with baseline mortals would also apply to Margaret. She was only about a century old, in terms of her 'personal time', though we suspect she was closer to a century and a half in calendar terms.
Which means that (assuming she survived her numerous enemies), she could expect to live another 2 or 3 centuries when she married Malcolm. Now in practice she had made so many enemies that her prospects for living even a few more years were decidedly dicey, but still.
I wonder how much Malcolm knew about the supernatural world, how much she told him. I can't imagine that she hid her magical nature from him. I hope she told Malcolm about her enemies, so he would know what he was getting into by marrying her. (It's only fair to warn a prospective spouse about baggage, and Margaret McCoy was Miss Baggage 1970.)
It would be fascinating to know the details of how that played out.
I doubt that Malcolm knew everything, however I don't think he was totally ignorant about Margaret's world either. I get the sense from Harry's soul gaze with Thomas when he talks with his mother, and his dream/vision of Malcolm when they talk, that the two of them did agree to conceive Harry for a reason. However we still don't know what Malcolm was told so he would go along with it. Then again, Margaret could have told Malcolm everything, but how much would he be able to understand or believe? You would think that Margaret would have run into the same problems that Harry did trying to explain his world to Susan and even Murphy.
-
True, but the powers of the Fallen in the Coins is limited, that's part of the point of the Coins. They have to work through human hosts, and that reduces their power substantially, and so yes, it matters that Nicodemus is human.
While in the coins, I think the Fallen cannot interact with the real world at all -- only with a mortal who touches one.
Once a mortal has taken up a coin, become a Knight, the Fallen get considerably more scope.
Certainly not the full capacity of their angel-caliber self; but each of the Fallen has various more-than-human powers they deploy.
Ursiel in "battle form" is probably capable of ripping-apart ordinary human beings largely without limit... 100, 1000, he's just a killing machine. Tessa's ability to transform into an insect-swarm, then re-form, is something I don't think even Listens to Wind could replicate. Anduriel can listen from any shadow, anywhere around the world; again, I think this is something beyond the ability of White Council magic to achieve.
I don't think we have any sort of sense of where the Denarian limitations are... in part because I think Jim is deliberately leaving many of them open for further storytelling use as-needed.
-
I doubt that Malcolm knew everything, however I don't think he was totally ignorant about Margaret's world either. However we still don't know what Malcolm
was told so he would go along with it. Then again, Margaret could have told Malcolm everything, but how much would he be able to understand or believe? You would think that Margaret would have run into the same problems that Harry did trying to explain his world to Susan and even Murphy.
Yeah. The more I think about, the more significant it gets. Morally, if Margaret really was trying to 'go straight', she had an obligation to make sure Malcolm understood what he was buying. He's getting a lot more than a sexy wife, after all.
Stop and think about it from Malcolm's POV: the biggest issue isn't necessarily Margaret being a Witch, though that's no small thing. There's also the fact that she's a century old. OK, maybe Malcolm was attracted to older women. But along with that, comes her own past crimes. Would you be casual about marrying a murderer? Or whatever else she had done?
Plus there's the fact that he's quite literally risking his life from her foes by getting entangled with Margaret.
Margaret was being hunted by the bad guys and the good guys. The (more or less) good guys wanted to disconnect her head from her shoulders, Lord Raith and who knows who else probably wanted to do substantially worse. A mortal caught in the line of fire is not safe. The Wardens probably would go out of their way to avoid harming Malcolm in getting at Margaret if they could. But if they couldn't...
The White Court and who knows who else was after her would at best be indifferent to Malcolm's survival, many would eat him or take pleasure in killing him along with getting her.
The more I think about the implications of the Margaret/Malcolm marriage, the more complicated and impressive they get.
-
The more I think about the implications of the Margaret/Malcolm marriage, the more complicated and impressive they get.
Nebulous and enigmatic as well.. Just reread the passages from Blood Rites and from Dead Beat, the first is Harry's soul gaze with Thomas resulting in the conversation with his mother. In it she takes full responsibility for Harry's birth and voices some regret that she placed such a burden on him. She says she was arrogant to have thought she could have pulled such a thing off. That suggests that it was all her, that Malcolm merely supplied the sperm. Then again, was she solely responsible? Or is she displaying a character trait that her younger son so often displays? A character flaw that is as dangerous as not ever taking responsibility for anything, something a fallen angel might take advantage of, " and it's all your fault!"
But then if you carefully read Harry's dream sequence of Malcolm in Dead Beat, it suggests something a bit more complicated, and yeah, in my opinion anyway, that Malcolm knew fully what he was getting into when he married Margaret, and even more so when they conceived Harry. When Harry wonders why he had hadn't dreamt of Malcolm before, Malcolm answers that he wasn't allowed to come in contact before. Who didn't allow him? Sounds like a bigger deal to me than just Mab for example. Malcolm says he was allowed because others crossed the line, then warns of the Jabberwock. Others? Who or what others? His last words to him was that he wishes he could have been there to help him prepare for what is to come. Maybe that is why Malcolm was murdered? Perhaps he was meant to help prepare young Harry, and someone or something took him out of the picture. Then muddied the waters so the likes of Morgan, and Eb is he was looking for him could find him, and Justin was able to step in.
To me at any rate this hints of a very complicated existential planning, I think Margaret told Malcolm, he understood as much as any mere vanilla mortal can understand, agreed and went along with the conception of Harry. Clearly he understands a hell of a lot more now.
-
... But then if you carefully read Harry's dream sequence of Malcolm in Dead Beat, it suggests something a bit more complicated, and yeah, in my opinion anyway, that Malcolm knew fully what he was getting into when he married Margaret, and even more so when they conceived Harry ...
I'll have to re-read it.
My memory is thinking that Jim had written it very carefully so that Malcolm was clearly clued-in (more even than Harry) during their chat, but that he never started outright whether he learned that stuff in life, or after death.
Remember Carmichael (the cop) & his relationship to the supernatural in life; and then how incredibly-much-more clued-in he was when Harry met him again in Ghost Story... I saw nothing in Malcolm's big "ghost/dream sequence" to make me think Malcolm's arc was all that different from Carmichael's.
Nor was there anything definitive to say that their "supernatural learning paths" were all that similar... I can only presume that Jim wrote the ambiguity deliberately.
Jim's a bastard that way. ;)
-
I'll have to re-read it.
My memory is thinking that Jim had written it very carefully so that Malcolm was clearly clued-in (more even than Harry) during their chat, but that he never started outright whether he learned that stuff in life, or after death.
I lean toward 'after death'. I suspect Malcolm is a major figure in Heaven.
Remember Carmichael (the cop) & his relationship to the supernatural in life; and then how incredibly-much-more clued-in he was when Harry met him again in Ghost Story... I saw nothing in Malcolm's big "ghost/dream sequence" to make me think Malcolm's arc was all that different from Carmichael's.
Nor was there anything definitive to say that their "supernatural learning paths" were all that similar... I can only presume that Jim wrote the ambiguity deliberately.
Jim's a bastard that way. ;)
[/quote]
-
My memory is thinking that Jim had written it very carefully so that Malcolm was clearly clued-in (more even than Harry) during their chat, but that he never started outright whether he learned that stuff in life, or after death.
I'm sure Malcolm learned a lot more after he died, but at the same time I don't think he was kept in the dark by his wife as to why she wanted to conceive a child at that particular time. What we don't know is whether or not there is ritual involved when a star born is conceived. I think there must be otherwise there would be thousands of star borns running around, I don't think there are. If there is a ritual, Malcolm would have to have some knowledge. Also is it the conception or the birth that is more important? Conception you might have some control, but babies tend to have their own way as to when exactly they are born,
-
I'm sure Malcolm learned a lot more after he died, but at the same time I don't think he was kept in the dark by his wife as to why she wanted to conceive a child at that particular time. What we don't know is whether or not there is ritual involved when a star born is conceived. I think there must be otherwise there would be thousands of star borns running around, I don't think there are. If there is a ritual, Malcolm would have to have some knowledge. Also is it the conception or the birth that is more important? Conception you might have some control, but babies tend to have their own way as to when exactly they are born,
One issue is that we have so little info about what it means to be a "Starborn."
Maybe only wizards can be Starborn... if so, the natural rarity of wizarding talent means that most of the (potentially) relevant births are rendered irrelevant by their lack of magic.
Even of the wizard-born, some will just go crazy; some will go black-magic and get snicker-snacked by a greycloak; some will get moralistically-preached that "magic is bad" and suppress the gift, and likely there's multiple other ways for them to crash & burn.
But we don't know if any of that is true or relevant.
Thank you Jim. :o
-
Maybe only wizards can be Starborn... if so, the natural rarity of wizarding talent means that most of the (potentially) relevant births are rendered irrelevant by their lack of magic.
Maybe, but there is no evidence of that. Neither Listens or Drakul strike me as having been wizards at one time. However you could be right about natural talent.
But we don't know if any of that is true or relevant.
Thank you Jim. :o]
:o Agreed.. The only hint I can glean, at least in Harry's case, what little we learned from Lash, that a conscience effort goes into conceiving a star born child. Now Listens and Drakul might be total accidents and that's why they seem character wise anyway different from Harry, or their parents had totally different intentions than Margaret and Malcolm.
-
Maybe, but there is no evidence of that ...
Yes, as I said.
Though I'd argue that the sheer lack of Starborn's is (at least circumstantial evidence). It seems to need something beyond mere "time of birth."
But the most detail we have, I think, is Lash's microsecond "Starborn for Dummies" from the Raith Deeps, but IIRC she only mentioned the time & "circumstances" of the birth; the whole Hagrid-y "Yer a Wizard, Harry!" might have been an obvious element to skip, given the brain-frying accelerated-mind effect (or Jim may have had Doylist reasons).
But also, that "time and circumstances" (my emphasis added) could be doing some really heavy lifting, here. What "circumstances" then, eh??!?
My own WAG is that Raith had put out a deadly entropy-curse on Margaret, but she had foiled it with a Winterfae-magic "can't find me" fueled by Lea and/or Mab, linked specifically to Harry, as part of the "Fairy Godmother" bargain. Foiled it, but not dispelled it: the moment Harry was born, the protection on Harry no longer covered Margaret, and Raith's lurking curse struck: "died in childbirth."
So maybe one thing to qualify as "Starborn" is "Outsider-Magic active during childbirth" or "survived a death-curse at birth" or etc... That would certainly increase Starborn rarity! There's a certain satisfying symmetry about Outsider-magic being part&parcel of Starborn origins...