In a message dated 7/19/2002 3:10:43 PM Mountain Daylight Time, mneme at io.com writes: > However, symbols -also- matter -- the whole point of Jack having > wrong wand was that -despite- his intentions, by the rules of the game > (the rules being a big ugly symbol), he was on the opening side > because he was holding the opening wand. Not necessarily. I don't think that simply by holding the wrong instrument, one's side in the battle changes - unless one KNOWS one is holding the right instrument. The opening side was winning because Jack's willpower was being fed into the opening wand - but he didn't realize he was pouring energy into the wrong focus - he thought he was closing the gate, not opening it. I don't think one changes from open to close just based on what tool you happen to have in your hand. > > The key question is whether the "death of the losing side" is based on > the symbolic (technical actions matter) level, or on the subtext > (intention and forshadowing matters) level -- I -think- it's clear > that it's only on the symbolic level that "loser's death" is > required...which means that since Jill was holding the closer's wand, > she was, de facto, a closer. I still don't agree with your theory that simply be holding one tool over another, a person's side in the battle changes. It's not the TOOL that's doing the work - it's the WILLPOWER of the person. > > The second question is why Jack survives -- I'd say that rather than > this being because he dropped the opener's wand, it's because he's > unkillable -- he doesn't expect to die if he loses to begin with, and > his (known) survival makes it clear that he's an exception to this > "rule". > Again, not necessarily. Maybe he's survived this long because whenever he's managed to make it to one of these little shin-digs, the closers always win. He seems pretty powerful and his presence could keep things in the closers' favor. Stacy