On Thu, Feb 20, 2003 at 11:25:31AM -0500, Warlord wrote:
> KG writes:
> > The vial itself only appears in _Taltos_, but it's discussed
> > in _Orca_, page 283:
> >
> > "And what was that whole business with the blood of the
> > goddess? Not that I haven't figured out who the goddess is."
> >
> > "I can't tell you that, Vlad. She said it was important for
> > you to have that vial, and that she, herself, didn't know
> > why."
> Now that I think back (rolls eyes for effect, see other thread),
> "blood of a goddess" is all that I remember mentioned. Naturally,
> the first assumtion is Verra, but do we have confirmation on
> that ? If not, well, Sethra was offered god-hood. Could the
> blood be hers ?
Since Sethra is not a god, I doubt her blood is that of a goddess.
My first rule in reading anything Sethra says is 'Sethra lies.'
Not always, and sometimes by omission or just to simplify a very
complex situtation -- but you pretty much need to take anything she
says with a grain of salt.
Consider the quote above. Vlad says 'not that I haven't figured
out who the goddess is,' He might be speaking ironicly, he might
be literal. Either way, Sethras response neither confirms nor
denies Vlads suspicions. But gives the *impression* that she is
confirming them without actually doing so.
If one assume that Sethra is telling a minimal truth in her reply,
all we've really found out is that whoever gave the vial to Sethra
(as Sethra? or as Kiera?) was female. We don't even know if the
giver of the vial was the donor of the blood. Given who Aliera
really is, it's quite possible that the blood is Alieras or Deveras.
There are other reasons to treat the exchange cautiously. Vlad
doesn't say who he thinks the goddess is. The reader may leap to
a given conclusion, but we've been fooled on that sort of thing
before. Vlad and Sethra/Kiera may have discussed it offstage, or
some to-be-written book may give us more information.
Brust may not know himself, or might be taking advantage of natural
dialog vs. expository text. The dialog is pretty realistic in that
most people use pronouns when they understand the subjects well.
This very slightly modified exchange:
"And what was that whole business with the blood of the
goddess? Not that I haven't figured out who the goddess is."
"I can't tell you that, Vlad. Verra said it was important for
you to have that vial, and that she, herself, didn't know
why."
doesn't read quite as smoothly, *still* doesn't say who's blood it
is, and only ties the author down. The original, with all its
ambiguities, gives him wiggle room for other stories. It may not
be in his best interest to define it too well at this point, but if
he decides to let the popular interpretation stand, there's no need
to backfill this particular bit of dialog.
Mind you, I'm betting that Verra gave her the blood and that it's
probably Verra's blood. But I'm not betting the farm on it.
Steve "Who, me, paranoid? What do you mean by that question?" Simmons