Allam, and Communism

Wed Oct 19 13:53:45 PDT 2005

On Wed, 19 Oct 2005, Scott Schultz wrote:

> >We're talking about Sethra though.
> Sethra is many things, but she's not omnipotent. [...]

I doubt she would have set things up in a way that could go so wrong.

> >Well, exactly my point.  In the snippage we were discussing Blackwand.
> >M has his talents, but he's not a battalion-in-a-stick as it were.  My
> >earlier contention (which I repeat was not well-received by the Author)
> >was that M should have left B or been prevented from going.
> Firstly, you can't talk about about Blackwand without talking about
> Morollan. The two are "married" in a very real sense. Where one goes, the
> other goes. Barritt is the only person we've ever known to separate himself
> from a Great Weapon and we don't know the circumstances that led up his
> camoflage of Pathfinder and his subsequent death.

Who knows?  M doesn't wear B to bed or in the bath; Vlad and Loiosh aren't
tied at the hip.  Anyway, notice the "or" above - if M couldn't have gone
without B, then he shouldn't have gone, or so goes the thesis.

> To the left, you're putting a lot more emphasis on the Great Weapons than
> any of the "players" in the divine game are. [...]
> As for Sethra, as the Enchantress of Dzur Mountain and wielder of Iceflame
> she has a lot of responsibilities, but none of those are the sort that
> require her to be the caretaker of the Great Weapons.  [...]

I think the above is inconsistent with _Issola_, the chapter "The Shadow
of the Past" to be specific.

More generally, M apparently has some fate - he's not in fact easily
replaceable.  I don't see how Sethra or Verra can allow him to go around
just putting his body wherever it seemed like a good idea.  V at least
should be a jealous god in this respect.