On Wed, 12 May 2004, John Klein wrote: > On Wed, 12 May 2004, Philip Hart wrote: > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > doo dee doo > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > > @> > @> Aerich just wouldn't chase a Teckla or fire off lightning bolts. > > Whether he'd fire lightning bolts is a tricky question. Right now, we > don't think he's a sorceror, but that's only because Paarfi said he > wasn't, and would have no reason to lie about it > and we know Paarfi is a liar. Do we? There's one mix-up in _TPG_ which I blame on Someone Else, and some angry academics, but anything solid? > Post-interregnum, it seems as if virtually everyone has picked up some > number of tricks, and it wouldn't be at all surprising if Aerich had > learned some of the basics. And since he didn't survive to the present > day, it might not be common knowledge that he'd done so. Remember, this is a few years after the New Orb, and Aerich is not a man to cut his coat to fit the fashion of the day. > He'd chase a Teckla if the Teckla tried to harm him and then ran away. > After all, he couldn't just let a commoner get away with something like > that. "That peasant! How dare he strike me!" It would be beneath his dignity. He might ask another Teckla to bring him a knave. But he wouldn't allow a Teckla to hit him. > > That said, might Paresh have exaggerated a little bit or (more likely) > have been temporarily blinded by fear? Maybe. But I'm going to assume the > truth is a /lot/ closer to his version than Paarfi's, which just made > absolutely no sense at all. I don't see this. Aerich shows up, Paresh is insolent but Aerich can't be bothered to thrash him. > @> > On the other hand, we have Paresh, who certainly did not give me any > @> > such impression in Teckla. > @> > @> And you would have gotten such an impression from a few pages of reported > @> dialogue how? > > I read it and the impression was imprinted on my brain. Paresh says the Duke is his age. Just wrong. Plus he'd have to know who the Duke was. > Seriously, Paresh is a heavy presence throughout the book. He doesn't have > that much dialogue, but he doesn't need it, really. And even Vlad admits, > eventually, that he's not a coward. Paresh is a stand-in for all the > Teckla supporters of the revolution (since the rest of the folks that Vlad > interacts with are human). And Paresh is rather knee-jerk in judging Vlad. I don't find him a dispassionate reporter. > > @> Actually, I seem to recall speculation here that Paresh had met Aerich's > @> heir, because the story we extrapolated (and have seen verified) made > @> little sense otherwise. > > Yep. > > @> > And, in fact, Paarfi's version simply does not square with the character > @> > that Vlad met, who was not particularly cowardly or deferent in any way. > @> > @> Sure it squares. Just imagine Paresh making up the chasing bit. > > Well, this is the part I can't imagine. And, particularly, I find it much > easier to imagine that Paarfi just made everything up. I don't think this is a good line of argument. Paresh has a lot to gain by telling people he stood up to a noble. He's got a high self-regard and had to scratch a living by his wits. > @> > Furthermore, Vlad is working from a primary source (albeit one with a > @> > specific agenda), whereas Paarfi is, as has been pointed out, either > @> > getting his information from Paresh and manipulating it to his own ends, > @> > or dealing with a secondary source (that is, someone who heard Aerich or > @> > Paresh's account of what happened and then made their own story). > @> > @> Alexx suggests a letter from Aerich. That seems a rather more reliable > @> source of info than Paresh. Another possibility - Paarfi exaggerating A's > @> death - perhaps he received a lingering wound from which he succumbed > @> in a few weeks after recounting his story to Khaavren. Piro is another > @> possible source of transmission. > > Piro wasn't present at the time of the encounter. As for the rest, if > you're relying on Paarfi's unreliability to explain how Aerich could have > transmitted the story, what makes you think the story itself, which also > comes from Paarfi, is reliable? Because it's simpler and more reasonable and less motivated. And I think there's a big difference between giving A a nice death scene and papering over an ambush, which would be of interest in making that chapter more exciting. > > @> > As Paarfi's character, he embodies the virtues of the Dragaeran > @> > nobility, but those virtues are not necessarily the virtues of > @> > present-day Americans. > @> > @> Oh, I thought SKZB wanted us to admire the bloodthirstiness of Vlad's > @> noble friends. > @> > @> Seriously, one of Vlad's main functions is to provide an viewpoint > @> half-way outside noble Dragaeran society; he can thus comment on > @> Morrolan's willingness to torture his guests when they insult Adron > @> or mock the Dzur liability to blackmail. > > Which is one reason the Paarfi books aren't always going to match up with > the Vlad books, because they lack that counterbalancing viewpoint. And, > frankly, I trust Vlad more than Paarfi, too. Or, at least, I expect him to > lie about different things. As I averred elsewhere in this thread, Paarfi is not in sympathy with central ideas of the nobility - he's explicitly anti-House.