> -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Simmons [mailto:scs at lokkur.dexter.mi.us] > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2003 12:07 > To: Warlord > Cc: dragaera at dragaera.info > Subject: Re: Speaking of Vlad and Kiera > > > 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 > I had not considered Aleira. Interesting thought; however, being the offspring of a god(dess) does not necessarily make one a god. Let's face it. We've gotten to the point where if the answer is straightforward, it is almost automatically discounted. I'm there. W