Michael doesn't have to explain every individual step of his thought process -- most people don't, after all -- and Harry never asks. There's no reason for Michael to stop and go through all his thoughts.

Not walking through every step of his thought process is definitely not a "lie of omission," otherwise Harry is guilty of that to literally everbody he's ever interacted with.

To quote some of my posts upthread:

Quote

People can change their mind.

(about Michael contradicting himself)
True, but... you'd think he'd say something to Harry before Harry forced the situation. I mean, it is his job to make sure people know the truth about the Fallen, after all.

I mean, what happens if Harry goes through with it, gives up his powers, and still has the shadow? Is he just going to be fine with it? Given that Harry uses his powers to protect people (and based on the books, it is entirely likely that Harry would have to deal with innocent people dying because he refuses to use his power to save them) I think if he realized that Michael had lied to him he would be far more likely to disregard everything that Michael says/has said...and given that Harry still has Lasciel's shadow...

Suggested reasons for Michael to lie to Harry is ... that he was initially mistaken and did not correct his statement later because doing so risked encouraging Harry to take up Lasciel's coin.

Even if he sincerely believed the first statement and later found out that he was wrong, I find the assumption that telling this to Harry just slipped his mind to be utterly untenable--in which case it was a deliberate omission intended to leave Harry with misinformation. That's not technically a lie, granted (it's something the fae could do) but I think it's equivalent.

He never bothered to tell Harry that he was mistaken, even though, as I pointed out earlier, the consequences of Harry following through on it if it were false are potentially disastrous.

This is why I believe Michael not telling Harry before Harry forced the situation was a lie of omission. It has nothing to do with "explaining every individual step of his thought process"--it is because the consequences of Michael not explaining to Harry were potentially disastrous, and were specifically disastrous such that it was Michael's job as a KotC to try to prevent them, and that due to this I can't believe that it simply didn't occur to Michael to tell Harry: thus, by definition, he was deliberately not sharing that information.

I can't think of another explanation. If you can, however, please say so.

I don't think she can command Harry to use wizard magic.  I believe she can control his physical body, and use of Winter ice magic.  Wizard magic requires real belief to do.  So Harry would become no different than any other Winter Knight, losing his value to Mab.

This makes a lot of sense.

There could be one thing that gives Harry more free will.  The Fallen's words that lead to Harry becoming the Winter Knight, and having Kincaid shoot him, caused his lack of free will.  To balance the scales, Uriel gave his free will back.  Harry, unlike other Winter Knights may have a form of angelic protection from Mab's total control over him.  But I'm not sure.  Even Harry admitted that Mab could make him a meat puppet but it would make him virtually useless to her.

I'm not sure...I think what Uriel did was tell Harry a bit of "cosmic" level truth, rather than giving him any particular power. Knowing he has free will will certainly help him keep it, but I think it's sort of like Lea's magic feather trick.

I was talking about a quote where Jim was talking about the third favor ending his obligation to Mab.

Do you think you could dig up the quote/source? I've never seen this one.

A fun theory I just thought of is that the knife is more of a Saint's weapon (a wizard who uses Faith Magic).  It would be one heck of a foci tool

Just imagine using it as an athame in a ritual!

Of course, now that he's Winter Knight, she doesn't have to request anything of him, she can just outright command it.

Well, she can't command anything. We know she can't command him to harm those he loves, and I've theorized that there are commands that he can refuse without Mab even having the option to force him to obey (namely, killing people unaffiliated with the Courts and outright lying).

Does anyone else have ideas for things Mab can't command him to do, or things she can't try to force him to do if he refuses her command?

It occurred to me that Lasciel could have not been effected at all by the circle, but was letting Harry think he had the upper hand. I'm not saying I believe it; it's just a thought I had.

Very possible.

Personally, I believe that the circle had nothing to do with how restricted Lasciel was from interacting with Harry--I think what caused that was Harry's choice to attempt to lock her away, and it would have had the same result no matter what method of containment he chose to use.

So picking up the coin wasn't accidental or unwitting

I think the Knights, at least, believe that picking up the coin without knowing what it is still gets you a shadow in your head--that's why Shiro stops Harry from touching Ursiel's coin before he knows about Denarians and why Michael says that if his son had touched the coin he would have been raised by Lasciel as a weapon against his family.

So yeah, perhaps Mab can command Harry to do anything she wants, however she cannot force him to do any of it, it is still his choice.

I think the issue is that Mab can force him to do things, but she can't force him to choose to do them, and it's the choice that is important. At least, that was what I understood from the end of Ghost Story.

Given Mab's limitations and the reason why the faerie Knights exist, however, I doubt that Mab could force Harry to kill a mortal unassociated with the Courts or outright lie. That might be a way for Harry to fulfill his third favor to Mab, but on the other hand I have a hard time thinking of a situation where Mab would need to force Harry to lie outright or where Harry would refuse to kill someone as Mab's Knight but would do so to fulfill a favor.

The answer may end up lying in Mab's promise not to order him to harm anyone he loves after all--if Elaine is infected with Nemesis, for instance, Mab would want her dead but could not command Harry to kill her.

I'm trying to reconcile two seemly different points of view.  If what you assert here is true then it would be impossible for the coin to pass the Shadow to a host. Since to put the Shadow in, the Fallen must act outside the coin.  While Harry could be accused of willingly cooperating the child can't.

I think the issue here might be that "willing" is not the same as "knowing". If the child had touched the coin willingly, it would have allowed the coin to place its shadow inside him even though he had no idea what he was doing. Does that make sense?