> >And I did find myself thinking that we were watching >several Dzurlords going up against a Dragon. (*snip*) > >Of course, the multiple storylines made me think that the >*story* was being told by someone very like a Yendi, or >for that matter, our Historian of the House of the Hawk, >Paarfi of Roundwood. I agree that Broken Sword and Flying Snow were definitely Dzurlords, but not Nameless. A Dzurlord wouldn't be able to stand taking a crafty way into the castle when there was a perfectly good, nigh-invincible army to fight your way through. So what house is Nameless from? Yendi? He's certainly clever enough for it, but no Yendi would be self-sacrificing enough to give up his plot and his life (in that order) for a "greater good". Hawk? Maybe; he has great powers of observation and story telling ability, and we've never met a Hawk warrior so we don't know how one would fight. I think an argument could be made for Lyorn, pointing to Aerich's assumption of a different identity and patience in plotting his revenge while keeping to tradition. Of course, I have a hard time seeing a Lyorn tell a tale so craftily. So, Nameless is clever enough to craft a good story and think on his feet when his plan starts to unravel, has a care for honor and tradition and willing to sacrifice himself for an ideal, is good with a sword, but not foolhardy enough to take on an army single-handed and has strong powers of observation. I think there's only one choice: Tiassa >Didn't like the moral tone of the ending, but I doubt most >of the Western world would. . Actually I think you could draw parallels between the moral tone and the neocon agenda: forcing a political ideal on other peoples and choosing security over freedom, which a lot of Americans appear to go for. Mark