Mr. Death! Glad to hear back from you.
Yeah, last couple weeks have been crazy. Wedding (not mine), honeymoon (also not mine, I was conscripted into grilling by the bride), and other stuff.
There is a difference, psychologically, between impulsive action and reasoned choice that I think you’re ignoring here. The Winter Mantle impacts a person’s baser instincts, but doesn’t change who they are (per Uriel). It causes Harry to have these moments of intense anger and aggression, which you’ve repeatedly held as examples that he isn’t in a fit mental condition to be custodian of the swords.
The problem is, Cold Days and Skin Game show nothing but Dresden having these sudden bursts of Id, then asserting his choice and free will to choose whether to follow them or indulge in them. Every time. The only time that he ever does choose to follow the mantle’s influence, it is a reasoned choice in order to fight Maeve, and Harry also chooses to stop it when he realizes how ineffective it is.
My argument to you was that the swords were only in danger if they were left suspect to these bursts of Id; the primate brain reacting before the rational brain can assert itself. I posited that the only circumstance that this would happen in is if Harry was carrying the Sword or chose to be a wielder of the Sword – two things that would only happen if Harry had already choose poorly, which was something that the Mantle wouldn’t influence him to do.
The Mantle doesn't stop at just poking the Id. Harry as a whole is impacted and influenced by it -- Harry has a strong enough will to resist it and remain himself, but it's a battle to do so during Cold Days.
The Mantle won't forcibly change Harry, but Harry as a human does have the capacity to fall under its influence and give into it. There are bits in Cold Days where it's a close thing and Harry pulls back at the last second, such as the confrontation with Maeve.
The Mantle and Mab may not be able to change Harry, but by the same token they weren't able to change Slate either -- and yet, according to Sarissa, who he was as a man did indeed change.
Harry can resist the Mantle's influence -- but it's by no means a guarantee, and during the span of Cold Days is when he's most vulnerable. If his anger and aggression got him the Swords that he wanted, that's going to reinforce the Mantle's influence; getting a reality check that Murphy gave him is by contrast going to reinforce Dresden.
You countered my argument by giving several examples of ways in which Harry could harm the swords which also would not happen by the Winter Mantle amping his primate brain, but only by Dresden making a conscious choice to do so. I don’t see any of your examples, including the out-of-universe example, as successfully countering my argument. Unless you can find an example or provide an argument as to why my reasoning is faulty, I see my argument as standing.
My point was, if the Mantle did succeed in getting to Harry, it would change his choices. Harry, as he is now, is not someone who will hoard the Swords out of a need to possess them; the Mantle, if he couldn't control it, could turn him into someone who would.
During Cold Days, Harry is at a crossroads in regard to the Mantle, still trying to master it. Until he does, keeping the Swords away from him is safest for both him and the Swords.
First – are you conceding to my initial argument, that the swords have an intended holder and owner by TWG, per the evidence given? Your comments seem ambiguous of that.
I don't think that the Swords had an intended holder at any given time was the issue, but yes. My point, though, is that the intended holder changes based on circumstance. And mortals and free will get into the picture, which only makes things even more murky.
Second – I do agree that custodianship isn’t permanent, but for different reasons. When Harry enters into custodianship of each sword, he is given the sword and tasked to give it to the next bearer. I’m not sure if TWG has temporal omniscience or not – Michael claims that he does, but that may be his Catholicism talking - but it’s clear that his servants do not; Uriel indicates that the angels operate by extremely accurate prediction of human behavior which only occasionally surprises them. At the very least, Uriel’s reaction to Dresden’s comment about predestination in The Warrior leads me to believe that the Dresdenverses’ TWG does not include predestination, and the choosing of Harry as custodian is a calculated effort which predicts a likely end and maximum amount of good.
If Harry were to ‘surprise’ Heaven by choosing something different and unexpected, assuming that such a thing is possible, I think that TWG could easily decide that he is no longer fit to hold the swords. However, if such a thing were to happen I would not expect Uriel or Gabriel or Michael (the angelic one) to suddenly show up to take the sword away; these are beings whose stated primary objective is to preserve the freedom of choice among mortals. Rather, it seems logical that they would influence other outside forces which might have the effect of bringing other mortals into the mix, who would make their own choices to take the swords from that person.
…. Which is, in effect, exactly what does happen in Cold Days. So in retrospect, I can’t really say whether it is within TWG’s will or not for the swords to remain with Harry; Murph’s presence and choice overrides that. Nor can I say that if Murph was subtly influenced to be present and in the mindset to appoint herself custodian of the swords, that it was because Harry would have put them in danger. It may have been as part of an elaborate set of circumstances in order to make sure that Butters was appointed by Harry as knight. But yes, I will concede that just because it is TWG’s will for Harry to be custodian of the swords through the books, it does not necessarily follow that TWG could not change his mind.
Fair. If people can change, then their fitness as a custodian can change. Assuming predestination isn't in play, I'd say keeping the Swords from Harry is less he "would" have put them in danger and more he "could" have. Always in motion, the future is -- but Harry himself has noted that the Swords and their bearers are less invincible when they're off mission, and given his comments later in the book, Harry clearly wanted to use the Swords in Cold Days.
However, it does not follow that ‘possible’ goes straight into ‘likely’. Uriel is with Dresden through almost every step of his change into Winter Knight – from when his back’s broken, to the guidance he gives before his resurrection, to his actions in Skin Game. It’s clear from Uriel’s interactions at the end of Ghost Story that Harry acted exactly as Uriel had hoped, and Uriel’s chosen seven words of truth to offset the seven words of lies are angled specifically to give Harry hope and to encourage him to stand strong against the darkness and to not give himself up to the temptations he is about to endure. It’s no secret what the Winter Mantle does to a person; Lloyd Slate was no different from the myriad of Winter Knights who came before him. Do you think that Uriel would be surprised at Dresden’s actions in Cold Days? Does any of those violent outbursts look like an act of conscious choice to act against the probable flow of events?
Surprised? No; as you say, he has all the information necessary to predict how Dresden would react to the Mantle; or rather, to predict the myriad ways he could have reacted to it.
The surface acts aren't the kind of choice that make Harry suitable or now, however -- it's the choice in how he deals with the Mantle over the long term. Uriel may well be expecting Harry to overcome the Mantle's baser instincts in the long run, just as you'd expect a drunk to sober up over the course of a few hours. But until that happened, he also apparently did not object to someone keeping the dangerous pointy things out of the drunk's hands. And, given how much Murphy talks about Faith, I would not be at all surprised to learn that one of TWG's agents had a hand in that.
No accidents, after all. Uriel plays the long game. Let's consider what might have happened if Cold Days had gone differently and Harry had the Swords going into Skin Game. In spoilers cuz it's kind of a long digression.
Harry begins Skin Game with the Swords in his possession; the short answer here is that since Mab doesn't tell him they're going to see Nicodemus, Harry wouldn't think to bring the Swords off the island, which screws everybody.
So let's say Harry did bring the Swords, so that when he knows the Denarians are involved, he offers Fidelacchius to Murphy, as he's done a few times before. If she doesn't accept, then she doesn't have the Sword to pull as a trump card after Butters mucks things up and she and Harry probably die. Maybe Michael, too, if he still tries to sacrifice himself; depends on what Harry did with Amoracchius after making the offer to Murphy, but we know that Harry does not want to involve Michael's family any more than absolutely necessary, so it's unlikely he'd stash it there.
If Murphy does take the Sword, then Nicodemus knows about it, and can plan for it. As we see in the book itself, he does a pretty bang up job of breaking the Sword in Murphy's hands when he's all but improvising. If he knows it's coming and can plan for it, I don't see him not succeeding at a time and place more to his choosing.
So, at least to my reckoning, Harry having the Swords in Cold Days into Skin Game tends to end worse for everyone involved. Murphy,
consciously or not, ended up putting the Swords where they needed to be to do the greatest good.
Consider this: we see evidence that Harry is already influenced by the mantle, though not so strongly, in Changes. The Winter Knight chose Karrin and Susan to wield the swords in Chichen Itza, to positive result. A knight of the cross came by afterwards and appointed the Winter Knight again to be the custodian of the swords. Is it likely at all that Uriel and Sanya are somehow confused or mislead as to what the mantle does to a person? Could you see Uriel watching Harry in the fight with Andi, saying “Oh crap – I didn’t realize that was what the Mantle did. OK, better call Murphy over to babysit the swords for a while.”?
Harry received
Power for the task in Changes, but he doesn't get the
Mantle until after.
“I will,” I said. “With a condition.”
“Speak it.”
“That before my service begins, you restore my body to health.
That you grant me time enough to rescue my daughter and take
her to safety, and strength and knowledge enough to succeed.
And you give me your word that you will never command me to lift
my hand against those I love.”
...
You must understand, wizard. Once you are my
Knight, once this last quest of yours is complete, you are mine
...
“You made a deal,” Murphy said.
“Yeah, I did. For Maggie, I did.” I looked around the room. “I’m
me until this is all over. That was part of the deal.
What we see in Changes is the down-payment Mab makes
before Harry's service as Winter Knight starts. Both of them make clear that Harry will complete this last task and
then his tenure as Winter Knight proper begins.
I can’t. It just doesn’t seem likely. It’s clear from Ghost Story that Harry acted just as Uriel expected him to, and the only improbable act of choice that Dresden exerts in Cold Days and beyond is the choice to fight the mantle – also something that Uriel’s banking on. I think that Murphy’s guilty of doing the same thing that Father Douglas attempted to do in The Warrior – stripped the chosen custodian of the swords because they trusted the judgment of their own eyes above the judgment of beings who can see far better and anticipate all eventualities.
Father Douglas tried to take the Swords through murder, hostages, tazing and threatening to blow up an innocent teenage girl.
Murphy already had the Swords (most likely because Harry outright entrusted them to her), and in that scene, she is definitely not the one threatening rage and violence.
Rage and violence are against what the Swords are about. That's always been the case. If one side is preaching faith, patience and prudence, and the other is on the verge of murder, I know what side I want the Swords on.
They are on equal footing, and it has nothing to do with literal prayer. It has everything to do with how a person makes their choice.
Human beings are fallible beings. Michael acknowledges this and looks for guidance before making a decision if he can. Sanya follows given commands and assumes that an angel will speak up if he goes wrong. That’s dangerous when we’re talking about beings who don’t act to contradict the expressed choice of an individual. Uriel literally can’t step in when a mortal makes a choice. That’s why he had to transubstantiate himself in Skin Game; that’s why the angel of death in Ghost Story couldn’t intervene when Forthill lay dying.
The Knights work differently than others. They do have a direct line; whether they pray or just think about what they do, that guidance is there.
Butters doesn't pray, but he gets direct guidance on what to do and who to help via a
video game trope for goodness' sake. For all we know, Sanya finds his divine messages in his vodka.
Point is, however the Knight feels, believes and operates, TWG speaks to them, personally, to guide them.
Besides, let’s take this argument in a different way. You state that Sanya’s stated opinion on a person’s certainty of being able to be a custodian of the Swords should be taken as a literal truth, and if a person is certain that they should be the custodian, then they definitely should not be one. By your logic, then, Harry should not have given the swords to Karrin and Susan in Changes.
Murphy and Sanya question whether Dresden can just dole out the swords to people without calling them to be knights, and Dresden is dead certain that he can. If being certain that one is right in their ability to choose means that one cannot therefore be a chooser, then that would also be stating that Dresden was wrong to choose Karrin at Chichen Itza – something which you yourself have acknowledged was not the case. It just seems very likely that Sanya’s statement of “If you were sure you should have this choice, that would convince me you shouldn’t have it” (paraphrased) is more a state of his personal belief, rather than an ironclad rule
The issue isn't about "being certain that one is right in their ability to choose," it's being certain that they are entitled to have the Swords. They're not talking about certainty in what Harry does, but certainty in what Harry is.
It's about seeing the Swords as a possession, (They're mine, I am supposed to have them!) vs. knowing and respecting the weight of the responsibility of holding them (I'm not sure I should have these; but now that I have them, I'm going to take this responsibility seriously).
Harry had reservations about being custodian, but he accepts the responsibility (albeit not without some grumbling). Now that he's accepted he's custodian, he also accepts that it is his decision on how to dole out the Swords to the best of his ability.
It is actually a nice piece of foreshadowing especially if you combine it with Harry's reaction in Skin Game when Michael gives Harry the sword.
Agreed. We have two scenes of Harry accepting the Sword when it's offered to him and having deep reservations about it; each time, those reservations reinforce that he's the right person for the job because he understands the weight of that responsibility.
Contrast that to the scene in Cold Days, where Harry is angrily demanding them back because they're his. There is a total change in mindset there. It's
Harry that's acting like Father Douglas there, not Murphy.
