Author Topic: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread  (Read 57684 times)

Offline TheCuriousFan

  • Special Collections Division
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 16609
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #105 on: November 04, 2012, 03:55:03 AM »
Harry fixed Little Chicago or more accurately Lash used Harry to fix it.

Lash is the only one with the means, know how and chance to fix it.
It wouldn't be the first time Lash had intervened to protect Harry from death.
Basically Lash knew it was broken, she tried to get Harry to take up the coin to protect himself and when he refused she chose to fix it to prevent Harry from dying.

There was no gap between Lash warning Harry about LC and him using it where she could have fixed it IIRC. And if she had fixed it beforehand why try to warn Harry?

And that's ignoring all the alternative theories, there are plenty of suspects besides Lash.
Currently dealing with a backlog of games.

If you want me to type up a book quote or find a WoJ quote, send me a PM.

Rest in peace mdodd.

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #106 on: November 04, 2012, 02:26:58 PM »
As far as harry getting hit by the car, why can't it be a regular accident?  There are people who don't have insurance that would flee from an accident to avoid having to pay to fix the other person's car. 

Whether it's an accident or conspiracy makes no difference to whether Rashid could have foreseen it and seen that it was required for Harry to be at home in time to take Molly's call, that I can see.
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline Aminar

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1386
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #107 on: November 04, 2012, 02:50:36 PM »
As far as harry getting hit by the car, why can't it be a regular accident?  There are people who don't have insurance that would flee from an accident to avoid having to pay to fix the other person's car. 

I think LC was very useful to Harry, it just didn't get a lot of screen time.  LC was mostly used to speed up the tracking of lost items.  Therefore LC could simply be something that Harry made to speed up his business and because he though it would cool.  I know a lot of people who go home and make random things that serve absolutely no purpose besides being fun to make.  Heck, Legos has made a ton of money on that.  Why can't Harry do something to test his abilities?
Go read the accident scene again.  It's clearly an attack.  The driver backs off and them hits him again.
This discussion is based on the idea Jim only shows us plot significant things.  If LC weren't important he'd have spent far less time describing it and how it was made than he did.  Harry can't do something to test his abilities because Jim putting it on paper like he did would he sloppy writing and out of stylistic character.

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #108 on: November 04, 2012, 10:58:24 PM »
This discussion is based on the idea Jim only shows us plot significant things.

Are you arguing for the position that there is nothing in the books that's just there for other purposes, without plot significance ? Like illustrating character, pointing up bits of how the DV works as a world, or being funny ?

I would be very surprised if Harry's preferences for Coke over Pepsi, Marvel over DC and Burger King over just about anything have a purpose other than to illustrate his tastes and his character thereby.  (Finding Spiderman cooler than Superman says something about a person, for example.)
« Last Edit: November 04, 2012, 11:02:48 PM by the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh »
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline X

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #109 on: November 04, 2012, 11:22:22 PM »
While Little Chicago is a interesting mystery to me, I liken it to his Force Rings or Shield Bracelet.  At the beginning of the series, he had his staff and blasting rod and a few knick knacks.  Then, his rings became 3 rings in one n a couple fingers, then by the time changes came around, his bracelet was able to stop physical, thermal, electrical, and magical attacks and his rings were on each finger with at least three on each finger.

This says to me, as a few people have argued, that this was mostly Jim showing us Harry's progression and development as a wizard, and this was the most prominent, mainly due to Bob saying how impressed he was with what Harry had done.

I personally view LC as a rough draft, and we'll eventually see something bigger and better that will have a specific purpose say maybe 3 or 4 books from now
Think of me like you would Homer Simpson with a Black "?" bag on his head, except with an X.  Obviously, instead of Mr. Anonymous, I'm Mr. X.  Except without the Mr.

Offline Orbweaver

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 4570
  • Let the games begin.
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #110 on: November 04, 2012, 11:37:21 PM »
I have a suspect nobody has mentioned yet. Remember how Harry was able to choke Nicodemus into unconsciousness on the boat in Small Favor at the end of the climactic scene?

And how one of the Swords lit up for him? It was only a single flash, but it was enough to repel Anduriel at a critical moment.

If Harry had blown his head off during Proven Guilty due to a mistake on LC, he never would have been there to stop Nicodemus from taking the Sword, corrupting it, and also gaining the majority of the free-roaming coins in the process.

I think that on the particular timeline our Harry is on, and with the events that happened during Small Favor, whoever was behind that Sword flash had a vested interest in keeping Harry's head attached to his shoulders.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2012, 11:49:51 PM by Orbweaver »
In a world of black, white, and grey's... I'd be bright freaking purple. Resident Female Forum Denarian.

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #111 on: November 05, 2012, 12:07:55 AM »
If Harry had blown his head off during Proven Guilty due to a mistake on LC, he never would have been there to stop Nicodemus from taking the Sword, corrupting it, and also gaining the majority of the free-roaming coins in the process.

If Harry had died in PG, though, who would Mab have sent to retrieve Marcone ?  I can't see Nicodemus getting hold of Ivy, let alone getting in a position to bargain for Fidelacchius with whoever got it next, without Harry.
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline X

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #112 on: November 05, 2012, 01:12:21 AM »
I view PG and SmF as two separate stories, in that the actions of PG did not impact the events of SmF beyond the experience themselves.  Keep in mind also, that if someone on the White God's team stepped in to fix LC, that would mean that somebody on the Fallen Angel's side would've had to have cheated and damaged LC, and on that, we have absolutely no proof.  Uriel says its all about balance, and he can't act before the other side.

So without evidence that the other side cheated, we have no way to argue that somebody working for the White God acted on Little Chicago, even to protect the swords.
Think of me like you would Homer Simpson with a Black "?" bag on his head, except with an X.  Obviously, instead of Mr. Anonymous, I'm Mr. X.  Except without the Mr.

Offline Orbweaver

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 4570
  • Let the games begin.
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #113 on: November 05, 2012, 01:12:52 AM »
If Harry had died in PG, though, who would Mab have sent to retrieve Marcone ?  I can't see Nicodemus getting hold of Ivy, let alone getting in a position to bargain for Fidelacchius with whoever got it next, without Harry.

It's not as if Mab doesn't have other options, and Nicodemus likely would still have made the deal with the power source for the circle that cut off the Archive's access to magic. Had he killed a KOTC (Sanya is most likely), tricking someone into helping him unmake the Sword would have been child's play from there.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2012, 01:33:07 AM by Orbweaver »
In a world of black, white, and grey's... I'd be bright freaking purple. Resident Female Forum Denarian.

Offline Orbweaver

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 4570
  • Let the games begin.
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #114 on: November 05, 2012, 01:31:47 AM »
I view PG and SmF as two separate stories, in that the actions of PG did not impact the events of SmF beyond the experience themselves.  Keep in mind also, that if someone on the White God's team stepped in to fix LC, that would mean that somebody on the Fallen Angel's side would've had to have cheated and damaged LC, and on that, we have absolutely no proof.  Uriel says its all about balance, and he can't act before the other side.

Not necessarily. I suspect that if Uriel/TWG had acted to fix LC, the other side would've taken liberties elsewhere. The two do not necessarily have to be related by area, only in scope.

And actually, now I"m wondering if part of the reason Hell decided to work with the Denarians on circling the Archive was because someone from the opposite team fixed Little Chicago.

Quote
So without evidence that the other side cheated, we have no way to argue that somebody working for the White God acted on Little Chicago, even to protect the swords.

It's inconclusive. We know that he/she/it has been willing to allow the Swords to be unmade in the past, but it was always a mortal's decision to do so. I'm not sure the Denarian half-breeds count in terms of tipping that balance.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2012, 01:49:27 AM by Orbweaver »
In a world of black, white, and grey's... I'd be bright freaking purple. Resident Female Forum Denarian.

Offline the neurovore of Zur-En-Aargh

  • O. M. G.
  • ***
  • Posts: 39098
  • Riding eternal, shiny and Firefox
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #115 on: November 05, 2012, 02:21:17 PM »
It's inconclusive. We know that he/she/it has been willing to allow the Swords to be unmade in the past, but it was always a mortal's decision to do so.

I don't think we do, because the swords have not actually been unmade; how many "oh, sword at risk - ooh, fortuitous rescue before it gets harmed" instances do you need before you start suspecting the WG of poking things here and there to prevent them ever actually being destroyed ?
Mildly OCD. Please do not troll.

"What do you mean, Lawful Silly isn't a valid alignment?"

kittensgame, Sandcastle Builder, Homestuck, Welcome to Night Vale, Civ III, lots of print genre SF, and old-school SATT gaming if I had the time.  Also Pandemic Legacy is the best game ever.

Offline Snaps At Fireflies

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 773
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #116 on: November 05, 2012, 02:56:23 PM »
Not to derail the pages and pages of theoretical guesswork about Little Chicago but, is there a WoJ from someone asking him about LC's lack of use in the story?   Because I always felt that it was more of a storyteller, narrative element issue myself.   That Jim sort of wrote himself into a corner with LC, having such a powerful tool would make suspense and tension difficult to maintain for a book, when Harry could frequently solve problems with:

"And then I booted up LC and found *insert important plot element*"  Instead of having Harry get his ass kicked for 200 pages to obtain the same information.  It would make for a less interesting story basically.   Given how much speculation about this has come up, has anyone ever asked him why he didn't use it more than he did?  And did he ever directly answer it?

taishojojo

  • Guest
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #117 on: November 05, 2012, 03:03:49 PM »
I've stated this before, Ill do so again.

Quote from: WOJ
There was just no way it could have survived the fire. And no, the FBI didn’t confiscate it.
The important part is what is not said. What is not said is "LC was destroyed..." "LC was removed by [Mab/Lea/JL/elves]" Trust me... I have a couple of decades of working with tweens/teens. They like to play these word games... alot. Given how easy it is to say "LC melted and Harry's precautions kicked in so no supernovae formed." This is on par with removing chekov's gun in act ii. These games consist of throwing out a dot (that doesn't answer the question). The listener makes a connection to a false assumption that they think answers the question they posed.
Everybody has made a huge stinkin deal about Mab/Lea/Molly/whoever having access to Harry's humble abode that no one has acknowledged the possibility [at least according to my personal observation and search-fu]. Somebody told me I was full of it for bringing it up.
Since this is an issue that still vexes the DV community as a whole...
I may very well be wrong. LC (like Maggie Sr) is still kickin it somewheres.

Just to note also... when other things have gone missing we were provided sound explainations "The bear belt and other trinkets required too much maintenence" "Potions were a crutch." etc....

Offline robertltux

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1375
  • Cat Sith Must rise again
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #118 on: November 05, 2012, 03:46:21 PM »
the whole LC melted and RC didn't go BOOM thing could be the simple matter of the "Power Core" being one of the No Nos that Harry tossed in the Gym Bag (or for that matter it could be that BOB is part of LC (Operator/CnC Officer??) )so thats why No Boom.


of course LC 2.0 could be a lot more area "mapped"
Jim/Bast could we have more Cat Sith???

Offline Cozarkian

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1981
    • View Profile
Re: The YLC (Why Little Chicago) thread
« Reply #119 on: November 05, 2012, 04:19:31 PM »
Okay, lots of topics to address.
The Gatekeeper

Before Molly's phone call, Harry was going to use LC to investigate black magic. Without the Gatekeeper's message, Harry wouldn't have been planning on using LC to track black magic. Instead, he would have been looking into the Eb's request or investigating the accident. That said, I think there is too much evidence the Gatekeeper doesn't want Harry dead and that the Gatekeeper could easily kill Harry and make him disappear to believe that the Gatekeeper is trying to get Harry to kill himself.

The significance of the accident

JB is a lazy writer and doesn't introduce events that don't have a significance. Granted the significance might be character development rather than plot development, but there really isn't much character development in the fact that Harry can be the victim of random accidents, so I doubt that is the case. Now, the accident was the means JB used to prompt the Harry/Murphy conversation, and it's purpose could have been limited to setting up that conversation. However, like Uriel, JB likes to kill two birds with one stone, so I think the accident will have later significance. Specifically, I think Harry will discover the attempted murder was a moment-of-opportunity attack by someone who was present in Chicago for the execution and saw an opportunity to possibly remove Harry as a problem.

The interrupting phone call

This event is entirely separate from the accident. I reject the theory that the accident was designed to delay Harry so the phone call would be in time to save him. First, as indicated by the cop's comments, the accident was far too serious to be a benign attempt to save Harry. Second, there was far too much time between the accident and the phone call and the phone call was far too close to the start of the ritual for anyone to have planned it so precisely. If anyone could accurately predict the exact time that Harry would use LC, it makes far more sense that they would manipulate the timing of the interrupting phone call than trying to delay the use of LC until after the call. In fact, don't we find out that Molly was prompted/manipulated into calling Harry? Given Lea's backdoor into Harry's apartment, someone like Mab would be able to monitor Harry's use of LC and convince Molly to call at the right time to stop it. Alternatively, someone time traveling might have knowledge of the exact time when Harry would try to use LC and convince Molly to call at the right time to stop it. It's much easier than setting up an accident and hoping it causes a long enough delay to stop Harry from using LC while not injuring Harry too severely.

Lash and LC
Adding to the lack of time argument, here is the following:

Lash spent considerable effort to convince Harry not to use LC. If she had known about the specific flaw, her next step would have been to use that as a bargaining chip. Once Harry had proven he was going to use LC at any cost, she would have told him she knew of a specific flaw and warned him that he would never be able to fix it in time to save Molly. She then would have offered to identify the flaw and taught him to fix it, either as part of a bargain (maybe an agreement that he would sit and talk with her for 30 minutes) or as a display of her good will (i.e. making Harry more dependent upon her knowledge). There is no way she has Harry secretly fix it, losing whatever advantage she could have gotten from helping him fix it.

Was LC destroyed

Personally, I think yes, but given JB's vague answer, that's really just a guess. However, it's important not to cut off the rest of JB's answer to that question:

Quote from: WoJ
It was made of (mostly) pewter. The rest was plastic. Harry hadn’t taken steps to make it less destructible (which would have interfered with its function anyway–it was built to be sensitive, not tough). There was just no way it could have survived the fire. And no, the FBI didn’t confiscate it.
Changes is, in many ways, about loss. About encountering it and feeling its pain. That happens to all of us, sooner or later. There’s no avoiding it.
The real question is, how do you pick up the pieces and keep going, afterward.

I think the bolded part of that quote provides strong evidence that if LC is still around, Harry won't be getting it back. Instead, it will be used to complicate Harry's life, either because it is a powerful tool in the hands of an enemy or because there might be some way to track its creation back to him, which would be bad if the Wouncil found it, or both.