Gaertk at aol.com writes: > In a message dated Tue, 9 Jul 2002 3:24:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, Thomas Yan <tyan at twcny.rr.com> writes: > > >Gaertk at aol.com writes: > >> [page 112-113] > >> > >> The comment spanning these pages sounds wrong coming from > >> Tazendra rather than Khaavren. > > > > Why do you say that? Because she does know some sorcery? > > My interpretation is that, along with the rest of her > > comments on p113, she is trying to contribute to the > > conversation. In this case, she is mostly repeating > > Khaavren's analysis/explanation of why this was a good > > time for him to join the Phoenix guards. I do admit that > > her adding the bit about "Athyra Guard = want sorceror, > > Phoenix = don't care" is a bit of surprise. > > My problem with this is that Khaavren is explaining why he > joined the guards, and then Tazendra interrupts with *his* > reason, which doesn't apply to her. > > > Perhaps this is to show that Tazendra is reasonably smart, > > it's just that she lacks the training / frame of mind to > > be more perceptive and analytical. > > Except Paarfi goes out of his way later to make her seem > simpleminded. So much the better: Tazendra is trying to show she knows stuff, and leaps in with Khaavren's reason, which she fails to notice in the rush does not apply to her. > >> [page 115] > >> > >> They had revivification pre-Interregnum, or Paarfi messed > >> up. > > > > I think I've managed to explain the discrepancy in my > > notes. I'll be curious to see if you buy it. > > You're saying that revivification wasn't possible > pre-Interregnum, right? And we're just misinterpretting > these passages? Right. > I still like my explanation (Paarfi messed up). That was my previous feeling, too, perhaps from being so accustomed to revivification *now*, but so far during this re-read, it looks like it is possible that that was a mis-interpretation. - tky