Noam Izenberg <noam.izenberg at jhuapl.edu> writes: > On Feb 26, 2004, at 3:00 PM, David Dyer-Bennet wrote: > >> Noam Izenberg <noam.izenberg at jhuapl.edu> writes: >> >>> The talk about what exactly does a Morganti weapon >>> (whether or not Blackwand is typical) >> >> (cutting your off in the middle of a sentence) >> >> Stop right there! To suggest that a *great weapon* is typical of >> Morganti weapons is *clearly wrong*. > > I fought my contrarian impulse, but lost; Y'all get to suffer. > > I have no argument that Blackwand is an ordinary Morganti blade. > However, there must be aspects of similarity between even that > Great Weapon and a 'normal' Morganti, or else, Blackwand would > not be _called_ Morganti. I therefore suggest that while Blackwand > may indeed be much more, it almost _must_ have some "typical" > Morganti features. We know they have in common the ability to destroy ("eat") a soul. Since that's *the* defining characteristic of Morganti blades, it seems to make sense to call Blackwand Morganti. And in fact we know, from the creation of Godslayer, that a Morganti blade *can be* upgraded to being a Great Weapon. So the connection may indeed be very close -- possibly *all* great weapons are upgraded Morganti weapons. I'm not sure we can project any *other* "typical Morganti features" onto Great Weapons, though; that one is such a big deal that it overshadows everything else, and is enough on its own to justify the connection. >>> In the specific metaphysics of this world, _are_ souls >>> destructible? Must there therefore also be a source of >>> souls? What are the 'laws' of soul birth, migration, and >>> (possible) death? >> >> Yes; ordinary morganti weapons destroy them. > > Says Vlad. Do we trust his perspective here? Morrolan's cut off > description of Blackwand could be read to imply otherwise. Here > is where the similarities and differeneces between Blackwand and > a typical Morganti migh be very important indeed. Most of what we see is from Vlad's perspective, but it seems to me that Morganti killings are particularly serious precisely because they destory the soul. That comes up often enough, and is important enough in different contexts, that it seems very unlikely that Vlad is completely mistaken about it. Note that I said "can" as the defining point. So far as Vlad knows, ordinary Morganti blades *always* destroy the soul. Blackwand can apparently hold itself in check if desired, though. >> Given that time isn't the same thing to the gods as it is to us, these >> questions may be meaningless in the frame in which souls are handled. > > If time is meaningless in that frame, then so is "destruction" of a > soul (and creation of one, I might add). That's a deus ex copout, > however, by which I mean "The Gods work in Mysterious Ways > Period" can be used to avoid answering the question. > Of course, an author's entitled to say that the metaphysics of his > world is beyond our ken. It wouldn't bother me _too_ much for > certain things, though it would for things upon which the plot or > major story elements relied. I don't see how that follows. The gods may see time as we see space -- a dimension they can move through at will. If so, they could perfectly well distinguish a soul which occupied all time from a soul which occupied only part of time (due to having been destroyed by a Morganti blade), just as we distinguish a carpet that covers the whole floor from one that covers only half the floor. But then, I never said *time* was meaningless; I merely said the gods saw it differently, making the *question* meaningless in their frame. And the idea of time being seen by the gods differently is quite clearly present in the Dragaera books, it's not something I'm trying to impose on them. -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b at dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>