Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Who Forasaken are masquerading as. Level 11 Spoilers


Asgard Thorin

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 374
  • Created
  • Last Reply

What did you think of my inflection idea? We may disagree, but i like your thoughts.

 

That inflection idea is so flawed that I tried hard to ignore it.  After 3 more pages of discussion, I find that I just can't.

 

Translation from an inflected language only works as an argument if the information was translated.  It wasn't.  It was provided in a PoV of Demandred.  In otherwords, we were sitting exactly were Demandred was, and hearing and understanding exactly what Demandred did.  No translation involved so no potential for mistaken inflection, tense or anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be'lal tricks Rand into drawing Callandor so he can steal it.  Taim tricks Rand into assigning him leader of the BT, so he can seize the power of the AM.  These are similar tactics.

 

Why? Because they both have the word trick in it? In order to trick Rand Be'lal liased with Mesanna to lure the Wonder Girls to Tear using hints that Liandrin's Thirteen had gone there, then went on the subtly manipulating Rand's dreams using the newly captured Wonder Girl's as bait and dangling Callandor as a method of saving them.

 

But Taim did what... rocked up?

 

There's no correlation between method or intent, and not just in this--the entire theory is a mismatched pasting of blanket comments followed by wild conjecture.

 

A deft social manipulator?  He wormed his way into the command of the most destructive and fragile of the Light's forces.  You are basing your profile of Be'lal on very little evidence - an old nickname and a couple of stories.

 

And you know, the stated profile in the BWB. "Whilst Rhavin preferred manipulation, the Forsaken known as Be'lal was a master of it."

 

I'm sorry bud, pointless reaching is one thing, but going on to deny facts set out in the book are something completely different.

 

Also, side question, but since when was Tear the 'most destructive and fragile of the Light's forces'. Tear was one of the strongest nations in Randland, equaled only by Illian and Cairhain, and exceeded only by Andor.

 

The difference between Be'lal and Taim is uncertian because we haven't seen enough of Be'lal to know how he would act in most situations.  Taim has not done anything that Be'lal would never have done (actually his reaction to swords is suspicious, but still inconclusive - maybe he doesn't want to reveal his prowess).

 

The difference between Taim and Be'lal is certain. We know Be'lal's methodology, and we've even seen its convaluted machinisations in play. This is fact. And from that, yes, Taim has done things Be'lal would never have done--indeed, pretty much everything he has done is something Be'lal would not have done. The Grey Man in LoC, the attack on Demira, the attack on the Sun Palace, the attack on the manor in Tear, the open gathering of darkfriends within the Tower, the ostentatious saldaean palace.

 

These are all things we know Be'lal wouldn't have done--not because he might not have wanted to achieve the same goal, but because he wouldn't have used those methods to do it. Thats what everyone is trying to tell you--Taim and Be'lal may well have similar goals, but they have completely different ways of attaining them, and Be'lal would not--probably could not--so completely change himself as to adopt Taims blunt methods.

 

Quote

This is not one man playing at the mannerisms of another. The variences are too profound and too subtle for that--up to an including things Be'lal would never need to hide.

Profound AND subtle?  I don't know about that.  I can't think of any examples to back up your statement except maybe for the thing with swords, which, as I demonstrated above, is not conclusive.

 

Yes, profound and subtle. Profound in the dramatic differences in the two personalities, subtle in the nature of those personality traits. Taim is blunt, physical--even brutal at times. His preferred method of attack is to throw force at it. When he wanted to ingratiate himself with Rand, he did it by 'saving' him from a Grey Man. When he wanted Rand dead he simply thre four Asha'men into the Sun Palace. Even when he is trying to be subtle, as with the suggested Demira attacks, it is still blunt--he attacked an Aes Sedai trying to make it look like Rand in order that the Aes Sedai break with Rand.

 

There is none of Be'lal's subtlety in that. None of the careful laying out of hints, as with baiting Rand in the third book. No efforts to control by influencing Rand or his associates... indeed Taim's profound bluntness actually alienates mostly everyone around him.

 

Their differences are profound--for two men with similar goals you could not find two different ways of achieving them that are more profoundly different. And those inbuilt methods of reactions, the way we plan and act, they are too subtle, to intrinsically built into us, to be so easily mimiced for any great length of time.

 

And even if such were possibility, and the Be'lal would for some reason WANT to alter himself in that way, how then would such a consumate actor have so screwed up on such obvious breaks in character as displaying his rage at Rand, or speaking of the dai'shain.

 

Quote

if Be'lal was such a master actor as to be able to so alter even his most basic inclinations and methods from the subtle planner to the blunt bully at EVERY single moment or described action we have of him, then honestly how could he fall victim to such obvious breaks in character as to reference the dai'shain?

When does Taim act like a blunt bully?  When he rescues Rand?  Just because he's the "netweaver" doesn't mean Be'lal won't take strategic military action when necessary.  Remember how the AM kicked ass at the wells?  Taim knew that he would win before going in, he wasn't being blunt, he was being strategic.

 

No, not at the wells, that was blunt but battle usually is, irrespective of the subtlety of the generals involved. Everywhere else. The Grey Man, Demira, The set up of his darkfriend associates, his antagonisation of everyone around him--including Rand, the attack on the sun palace, the orders given to Kisman, the attack on the manor at Tear.

 

None of them matches the actions of a master manipulator... and nothing in Taim's demenour does either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, side question, but since when was Tear the 'most destructive and fragile of the Light's forces'. Tear was one of the strongest nations in Randland, equaled only by Illian and Cairhain, and exceeded only by Andor.

 

Actually, by my computations - all of those are exceeded by the WT and the BT.  But I believe it was the BT that was being refered to.    Not Tear and nor Andor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The difference between Taim and Be'lal is certain. We know Be'lal's methodology, and we've even seen its convaluted machinisations in play. This is fact. And from that, yes, Taim has done things Be'lal would never have done--indeed, pretty much everything he has done is something Be'lal would not have done. The Grey Man in LoC, the attack on Demira, the attack on the Sun Palace, the attack on the manor in Tear, the open gathering of darkfriends within the Tower, the ostentatious saldaean palace.

 

I disagree.  As said by the previous poster - we only have a few glempses of Be'lal's character.    A glimpse does not tell all.    Most people that I know behave in vastly different ways under different circunstances.    A person is not one dementional and being killed could significantly change a persons personality.    Look at Dashiva/Hemilia/Mordin to see significant examples of this.

 

Beyond that I can easily see even the old Be'lal as Taim setting up:

 

1.  the attack on Demira,    Oh yes!    There was no way to trace that back to him and it was almost certian to create a rif between Rand and the AS.    Yep!  Be'lal would do that!

 

2.  the open gathering of darkfriends within the Tower,        Yes again!    We never saw Be'lal in charge of dozens of powerful channeling cronies.    It is easy to believe that, given the same opportunity where he felt extreemly secure Be'lal could do the same.

 

2.  the ostentatious saldaean palace          Same as two.      Yep!  Be'lal Might do that!

 

 

 

Not sure what you are talking about here ***  the attack on the manor in Tear,***      Who said taim did that.    I don't think that it has been confirmed.      ***    That said - Sure Be'lal Might do that while using a Samuel disguise.

 

 

 

Beyond that - for the most part I think that you have a good argument.

 

From what little we have seen of Taim he seems to be more blunt - direct than what we saw and heard of Be'lal.

 

 

 

But with so little to go on and with the changes that we saw in the other "rebuilt" Forsaken, I can not completely rule it out.

 

That said, I do not put a lot of stock in Taim/Be'lal either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a long post but had to reboot and wvlr beat me to it and said most of what I was thinking.

 

I won't argue that Taim and Be'lal have identical personalities, but they are not so obviously different that it rules out the possibility of them being the same guy in different circumstances.

 

I'm sorry bud, pointless reaching is one thing, but going on to deny facts set out in the book are something completely different.

Of course this is pointless, what of it?  I have not denied any facts set out in the books.

 

The chances of Taim being Be'lal are similar to the chances of the Giants beating the Patriots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did you think of my inflection idea? We may disagree, but i like your thoughts.

 

That inflection idea is so flawed that I tried hard to ignore it.  After 3 more pages of discussion, I find that I just can't.

 

Translation from an inflected language only works as an argument if the information was translated.  It wasn't.  It was provided in a PoV of Demandred.  In otherwords, we were sitting exactly were Demandred was, and hearing and understanding exactly what Demandred did.  No translation involved so no potential for mistaken inflection, tense or anything.

When you get a handle, a very good handle, on more than one language, you can think in both or all with equal facility. When I am speaking Spanish to within my skill level, I don't think in English. I think in Spanish. Just because it's happening in D's head is not evidence against it; I say it is evidence for it.

Perhaps my explanation of the inflection idea was insufficient. With a heavily inflected language it is possible for a whole and complete thought to be interrupted by another whole and complete thought: EVEN I CANNOT SAVE HIM FROM BALEFIRE-EVEN I CANNOT STEP OUT OF TIME-DONE BY MY ANCIENT ENEMY THE ONE CALLED DRAGON. As I understand it, this is one of the chief problems in translating Beowulf.

I am sure Majsju, when speaking Majsju's native tongue thinks in that tongue. When speaking English, then English. The native tongue would be the default, of course, for whomever we speak, but RJ could not fill three to five pages with script his readers would not understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Majsju, context is all could go to either side of the knife. Love the way you spell favorite, by the way

 

No, it can not. Look at what RJ is saying here, he is talking about the effects of balefire, uses Rahvin as a specific example, than adds Be'lal as another example. Had he wanted to leave a door open for the possibility of Be'lal being possible to recycle, it would have been something along the lines of "Be'lal, on the other hand.... But it doesn't, all we have is Be'lals name thrown out together with rahvins. Ie, what is being said about Rahvin concerns Be'lal as well.

 

As for how I spell favourite, that is the correct spelling in the country where the english language was invented ;).

What was the whole quote? If nothing else, I was speaking in general. And has anyone found where Sammael supposedly had a similar sigil. I challenge! TRial by stone! Trial by stone....

 

And strictly speaking, English was invented in Germany ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cw, as I said earlier, there is a metric upload of evidence-you just interpret it differently than I do. You have that right-but so do I. Please do not say I "should be grateful". The argument comes down to this: Did RJ change his mind about Taim/Bel'al? And if he did, did he change his mind again? Wvlr, thank you for your thoughtful perspective.

 

Another circumstantial fact for the theory is that this way, we would get to know all the Forsaken. Otherwise Bel'al(and Rahvin) were just the guys who baited Rand, trapped him perfectly-and then got killed by the girls(by proxy, at least). We get to know every other Forsaken, including Ravhin. Bel'al though, would just be some insignificant hurdle, less than Couladin or the Darkfriends Rand and Mat defeated in book 1.

 

What does anyone think of Mesa'ana being Javinhdra(msp?) And what other Forsaken do we need theories for? I think Demandred is in the Land of Madmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument does not come down to the question of RJ changing his mind--the evidence for this suggestion is virtually non-existant, and the actual possibility of it itself is in question since the loophole of weak balefire probably doesn't apply to a channeler as strong as Moiraine--who despite not being Forsaken level strength is far from being weak.

 

To even suggest such a thing would require some incredibly compelling evidence that was suddenly voided, and such a thing is completely and utterly absent. Taim being Demandred could stand up to the idea that RJ meant that to happen then changed his mind, Taim being Be'lal... it's not impossible--though its damn close--but to say that it must have been the case before RJ changed his mind is the height of arrogance.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is an agree to disagree moment.

I guess.  At least, it seems that all discussion is opinionated at this point.

 

I can't wait to read that chapter in aMoL when Taim/Be'lal is revealed!

 

About the inflection thing, I always noticed that the old tongue has a different feel from the regular speech in the book, as if it were translated from an old language.  I love that effect.  I think that the DO's statement should be read "I can't save him from the Dragon's balefire because I can't go back in time".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did you think of my inflection idea? We may disagree, but i like your thoughts.

 

That inflection idea is so flawed that I tried hard to ignore it.  After 3 more pages of discussion, I find that I just can't.

 

Translation from an inflected language only works as an argument if the information was translated.  It wasn't.  It was provided in a PoV of Demandred.  In otherwords, we were sitting exactly were Demandred was, and hearing and understanding exactly what Demandred did.  No translation involved so no potential for mistaken inflection, tense or anything.

When you get a handle, a very good handle, on more than one language, you can think in both or all with equal facility. When I am speaking Spanish to within my skill level, I don't think in English. I think in Spanish. Just because it's happening in D's head is not evidence against it; I say it is evidence for it.

Perhaps my explanation of the inflection idea was insufficient. With a heavily inflected language it is possible for a whole and complete thought to be interrupted by another whole and complete thought: EVEN I CANNOT SAVE HIM FROM BALEFIRE-EVEN I CANNOT STEP OUT OF TIME-DONE BY MY ANCIENT ENEMY THE ONE CALLED DRAGON. As I understand it, this is one of the chief problems in translating Beowulf.

I am sure Majsju, when speaking Majsju's native tongue thinks in that tongue. When speaking English, then English. The native tongue would be the default, of course, for whomever we speak, but RJ could not fill three to five pages with script his readers would not understand.

 

I'm not sure if you missed the point or got it and just didn't understand what I was saying.

 

An argument for variances in translation from an inflected language, like the Old Tongue, doesn't apply when talking about a PoV from Demandred.  For all intents and purposes, when reading such a PoV we are fluent in the Old Tongue.  For that passage, the reader, like Demandred, is a native speaker of the Old Tongue.  It is the same as with a movies when they don't want to subtitle long sections of dialog.  The characters begin speaking in the language of the viewer even though we "know" it is really a foreign language.  Any room for error in interpretation is completely eliminated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And has anyone found where Sammael supposedly had a similar sigil. I challenge! TRial by stone! Trial by stone....
I found it, and posted it. As you apparently missed it, I will post it again, but this time in really big letters:The Fires of Heaven, chapter 34, on the back of Sammael's chair in T'A'R. Useful link: http://encyclopaedia-wot.org:8008/books/tfoh/ch34.html#footnote2

 

Cw, as I said earlier, there is a metric upload of evidence-you just interpret it differently than I do. You have that right-but so do I. Please do not say I "should be grateful". The argument comes down to this: Did RJ change his mind about Taim/Bel'al? And if he did, did he change his mind again? Wvlr, thank you for your thoughtful perspective.
Is "metric upload" young people speak for sod all?
What does anyone think of Mesa'ana being Javinhdra(msp?) And what other Forsaken do we need theories for? I think Demandred is in the Land of Madmen.
Why do you suspect Javindhra? EVIDENCE, man. How many times do you want me to ask? And why do you think Demandred is in the Land of Madmen? Again, evidence. And I think you can guess what my reaction to your "inflection theory is...yes, EVIDENCE PLEASE!!! I also think it is generally a bad idea to throw out what is written in the books in order to support a pet theory.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And has anyone found where Sammael supposedly had a similar sigil. I challenge! TRial by stone! Trial by stone....
I found it, and posted it. As you apparently missed it, I will post it again, but this time in really big letters:The Fires of Heaven, chapter 34, on the back of Sammael's chair in T'A'R. Useful link: http://encyclopaedia-wot.org:8008/books/tfoh/ch34.html#footnote2

 

Cw, as I said earlier, there is a metric upload of evidence-you just interpret it differently than I do. You have that right-but so do I. Please do not say I "should be grateful". The argument comes down to this: Did RJ change his mind about Taim/Bel'al? And if he did, did he change his mind again? Wvlr, thank you for your thoughtful perspective.
Is "metric upload" young people speak for sod all?
What does anyone think of Mesa'ana being Javinhdra(msp?) And what other Forsaken do we need theories for? I think Demandred is in the Land of Madmen.
Why do you suspect Javindhra? EVIDENCE, man. How many times do you want me to ask? And why do you think Demandred is in the Land of Madmen? Again, evidence. And I think you can guess what my reaction to your "inflection theory is...yes, EVIDENCE PLEASE!!! I also think it is generally a bad idea to throw out what is written in the books in order to support a pet theory.

I will try to avoid multiposting this time.

Luckers, please don't call me arrogant just because you disagree with me. I didn't call you arrogant, even though I am right ;).

Mr. Ares, thanks for posting that for the FIRST TIME ;). As for evidence, why should I present that? You completely ignored the evidence for Bel'al Taim!  :)Just kidding. It was a gut-feeling, if thou wouldst truly like to know, based on the fact that Javindhra is having a hard time hiding her smile, when Tsutuma(msp?) decides that Thou, Red, Shall Bond! 'Sides, studying this, I've learned that RJ seemed to like putting the Forsaken disguises in as cameo's e.g. Anath looking at Mat, book 8. (Sod-all? What the cotton-pickin' heck does sod-all mean? And while we're at it what the ha-ellk does Tonks mean whenever she says 'Wotcher, Harry!' Watch her do what?)

As for Demandred, that was another gut feeling, based solely on Sammael's statement about Demandred being responsible for "that mess down south".(book 6 or 7) The only thing south of Illian, if that was the context of the statement, is the Land of Madmen. Flimsy, I know, but some of the trails RJ left us were pretty thin, i.e./e.g. the ident' o' the Asmo-Bane, which undoubtedly will now never be confirmed, though last I knew, Graendal seemed to have the largest consensus.

And thank you for pointing out that my explanation of the inflection idea was still insufficient. Let me see if I can just say it. My thought was that RJ might have deliberately done this to throw the reader slightly, again for any and all the reasons stated in this thread, and any we may not have thought of. Demandred, thinking in the Old Tongue, may have understood the context, probably did, but RJ wrote it for us. Again, there would be no point for him to write the conversation in the Old Tongue. That would defeat the purpose.

Luckers, also thank you for pointing out that I left a lot unsaid in my change-his-mind speech. What I presumed everyone would understand is that it would be a really cool idea that he seems, to me, to have wanted to pull off. If he abandoned it, as I still say if, he abandoned it for one simple reason. The series got out of control. To quote GRRM's quote of JRRT "'The tale grew in the telling'". I believe we all know that The Wheel of Time was not expected to be twelve books, and the author certainly did not want to pass-on finishing it. (Here I re-express my compassion for Mrs. Rigney) This series is RJ's masterpiece. If the idea of bringing that twist about could not be done adequately (meaning not further angering an already disgruntling fan base) he might have abandoned it, even if it were cherished, rather than spoil the craftmanship. He is an excellent writer, the fact that he has moved on notwithstanding, and would make hard decisions, if necessary to finish the task. This is most certainly evidenced by his telling his Brothercuz' the ending, just in case. I consider his making sure the series was finished an act of courage, and honor.

That, all that, was what I meant with the three words 'changed his mind'. I am not arrogant, but since I only have my own point of view it is easy, very easy for me to forget that others' povs can be drastically different, and so much of what I think everyone will understand is not understood. I will battle this for the remainder of my days, methinks. "You fool! You've made one of the classic blunders! The most famous..."

As for metric upload, I wanted to avoid infantry-speak which is "just as eloquent, if far coarser." I thought out-and-out swear words would be frowned upon.

Majsju, why Danelle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luckers, please don't call me arrogant just because you disagree with me. I didn't call you arrogant, even though I am right

 

I'm sorry bud, but my naming you arrogant has nothing to do with your disagreement with me, or mine with you. I thrive on such, and love the discussion of it.

 

My statement, which I stand by having read your last post, is that just because you are captivated with your theory doesn't make the claim that if it turns out not to be true then it had to be because the author changed his mind anyhing but arrogant. And completely tacky besides.

 

Seriously dude... its arrogant and tacky when people say that about the Taim and Demandred theory... but the Taim and Be'lal?

 

Have your theory, but my friendly piece of advice for the day is confine yourself to suggesting it--stating it as fact that the author later altered is grandiose and boring.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Thin Inn Keeper

What the cotton-pickin' heck does sod-all mean? And while we're at it what the ha-ellk does Tonks mean whenever she says 'Wotcher, Harry!' Watch her do what?)

 

"Sod all" -- means "nothing". It's a slang term. Sod means a lump of earth.

 

"Wotcher" -- Comes from, I think, "what are you doing?" It's often written as wotcha or wot'cha. These days it means "hello". It's a friendly slang term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Thin Inn Keeper

Majsju, why Danelle?

 

The FAQ makes a decently strong case against her.

http://www.darkfriends.net/wheel/1_dark/1.1_forsaken1/1.1.2_mesaana.html

 

I don't buy the discounting of Danelle.

 

It seems to me that the articles main point is that Danelle's stock is falling and therefore runs against the idea that the Forsaken take over a background figure and then promote themselves.

 

However, given what we know of Messana, wouldn't it fit if she was content to lurk around and influence things from the corners? Added to that, she has the Black Ajah to do her dirty work for her.

 

I'm not saying I think she is Danelle, but it seems a little premature to discount her using the points in the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Majsju, why Danelle?

 

The FAQ makes a decently strong case against her.

http://www.darkfriends.net/wheel/1_dark/1.1_forsaken1/1.1.2_mesaana.html

 

I don't buy the discounting of Danelle.

 

It seems to me that the articles main point is that Danelle's stock is falling and therefore runs against the idea that the Forsaken take over a background figure and then promote themselves.

 

However, given what we know of Messana, wouldn't it fit if she was content to lurk around and influence things from the corners? Added to that, she has the Black Ajah to do her dirty work for her.

 

I'm not saying I think she is Danelle, but it seems a little premature to discount her using the points in the article.

 

Oops.

Given my previous post, it should be obvious that 'against' was a typo from my side ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest The Thin Inn Keeper

 

Oops.

Given my previous post, it should be obvious that 'against' was a typo from my side ;D

 

Yes ... I see that now. Should have engaged my brain before typing.  ::)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Ares, thanks for posting that for the FIRST TIME ;).
Thank you for the belated thanks for my posting (reply 36 of the thread) where I said:
Mr. Ares, where was that Sammael segment? I haven't been able to find it.
Mr Ares, if you please, I expect people to punctuate my name as I wish it, not as they would. And you are looking for TFOH 34, where the Four meet in T'A'R, and Sammael's chair displays a fist clutching lightning bolts exactly like Samon's and, later, Taim's.
Maybe you should have paid attention to that, as you still persist in mispunctuating my name (for which the penalty is death).
It was a gut-feeling, if thou wouldst truly like to know, based on the fact that Javindhra is having a hard time hiding her smile, when Tsutuma(msp?) decides that Thou, Red, Shall Bond! 'Sides, studying this, I've learned that RJ seemed to like putting the Forsaken disguises in as cameo's e.g. Anath looking at Mat, book 8. (Sod-all? What the cotton-pickin' heck does sod-all mean? And while we're at it what the ha-ellk does Tonks mean whenever she says 'Wotcher, Harry!' Watch her do what?)
Well, the Thin Inn Keeper has explained sod all (and wotcher), but generally a bit more than just a gut feeling is asked for. The case for Danelle is better.

As for Demandred, that was another gut feeling, based solely on Sammael's statement about Demandred being responsible for "that mess down south".(book 6 or 7) The only thing south of Illian, if that was the context of the statement, is the Land of Madmen. Flimsy, I know, but some of the trails RJ left us were pretty thin, i.e./e.g. the ident' o' the Asmo-Bane, which undoubtedly will now never be confirmed, though last I knew, Graendal seemed to have the largest consensus.
Graendal does indeed have the most support, but we have been told we will have the solution in AMOL. Now, as to that Sammael quote, firstly he is meeting Graendal at the time, so it is more likely south of Arad Doman than Illian. Also, we are told that the Land of Madmen is full of crazy channelers, and is still in the process of Breaking. Therefore, it is unlikely that the Chosen would venture there unless the rumours about the place are a smokescreen (for a secret Chosen lair - possibly hidden in a volcano for maximum bad guy points) or unless they have strong evidence that there is something very useful to them there (like a super strong sa'angreal). Further, Sammael comments that Demandred is in the habit of using proxies, and therefore does not necessarily have a base at all, let alone one near where he is spreading chaos. Which uncivilised and/or crazy people he is using as proxies in the Land of Madmen...well, your guess is as good as mine.

And thank you for pointing out that my explanation of the inflection idea was still insufficient. Let me see if I can just say it. My thought was that RJ might have deliberately done this to throw the reader slightly, again for any and all the reasons stated in this thread, and any we may not have thought of. Demandred, thinking in the Old Tongue, may have understood the context, probably did, but RJ wrote it for us. Again, there would be no point for him to write the conversation in the Old Tongue. That would defeat the purpose.
And it still requires us to ignore what was written in the book in favour of a pet theory with no support. Therefore, it is almost certainly wrong.

Luckers, also thank you for pointing out that I left a lot unsaid in my change-his-mind speech. What I presumed everyone would understand is that it would be a really cool idea that he seems, to me, to have wanted to pull off. If he abandoned it, as I still say if, he abandoned it for one simple reason. The series got out of control. To quote GRRM's quote of JRRT "'The tale grew in the telling'". I believe we all know that The Wheel of Time was not expected to be twelve books, and the author certainly did not want to pass on finishing it. (Here I publicly express my compassion for Mrs. Rigney) This series is RJ's masterpiece. If the idea of bringing that twist about could not be done adequately (meaning not further angering an already disgruntling fan base) he might have abandoned it, even if it were cherished, rather than spoil the craftmanship. He is an excellent writer, the fact that he has moved on notwithstanding, and would make hard decisions, if necessary to finish the task. This is most certainly evidenced by his telling his Brothercuz' the ending, just in case. I consider his making sure the series was finished an act of courage, and honor.

That, all that, was what I meant with the three words 'changed his mind'. I am not arrogant, but since I only have my own point of view it is easy, very easy for me to forget that others' povs can be drastically different, and so much of what I think everyone will understand is not understood. I will battle this for the remainder of my days, methinks. "You fool! You've made one of the classic blunders! The most famous..."

The central problem, as I see it, is that we have no idea that this idea was ever even considered, no evidence that it was ever intended, no evidence that any attempt was ever made to implement it, no evidence that even if RJ had seen it he would have thought it a good idea, etc. All the evidence we have indicates that Be'lal was dead and gone and never to return after his death in TDR. All the evidence supports that this was always the case. I don't doubt that RJ would have abandoned a plotline he didn't feel was working in favour of one that would (even if he liked it) I don't think he did, and see no reason to think otherwise, even after reviewing the laughable points you bring out as evidence. To give but one example, you point out that Taim's Sword and Dragon pins are not seen again after Rand gives them to him. You say that a Chosen wouldn't keep them but a non-Chosen may, which is basically saying nothing. Maybe he thought they  clashed with his coat, maybe he isn't into jewellery, maybe he didn't like being subservient to Rand and got rid of an indication that he was. It is meaningless; it adds nothing to your theory. To me, it seems like you have fallen in love with this theory and refuse to let it go regardless of how many holes it has.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Graendal does indeed have the most support, but we have been told we will have the solution in AMOL. Now, as to that Sammael quote, firstly he is meeting Graendal at the time, so it is more likely south of Arad Doman than Illian. Also, we are told that the Land of Madmen is full of crazy channelers, and is still in the process of Breaking. Therefore, it is unlikely that the Chosen would venture there unless the rumours about the place are a smokescreen (for a secret Chosen lair - possibly hidden in a volcano for maximum bad guy points) or unless they have strong evidence that there is something very useful to them there (like a super strong sa'angreal). Further, Sammael comments that Demandred is in the habit of using proxies, and therefore does not necessarily have a base at all, let alone one near where he is spreading chaos. Which uncivilised and/or crazy people he is using as proxies in the Land of Madmen...well, your guess is as good as mine.

 

You can also add that in the same paragraph that Sammael comments about events to the south, hemakes a comment about Demandred and hir friends interfering with his plans, which places the south somewhere close to Illian. Ie quite far from the Land of madmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luckers, please don't call me arrogant just because you disagree with me. I didn't call you arrogant, even though I am right

 

I'm sorry bud, but my naming you arrogant has nothing to do with your disagreement with me, or mine with you. I thrive on such, and love the discussion of it.

 

My statement, which I stand by having read your last post, is that just because you are captivated with your theory doesn't make the claim that if it turns out not to be true then it had to be because the author changed his mind anyhing but arrogant. And completely tacky besides.

 

Seriously dude... its arrogant and tacky when people say that about the Taim and Demandred theory... but the Taim and Be'lal?

 

Have your theory, but my friendly piece of advice for the day is confine yourself to suggesting it--stating it as fact that the author later altered is grandiose and boring.

 

Luckers, I believe I can safely say that you are not as defensive as I am. Still, you have no right to call me arrogant, and to call me arrogant is arrogant in itself. You do not know me. You disagree with me. You may be right. But to start using terms like height of arrogance is not called for. Perhaps you did not mean to offend. Perhaps you had not even considered that it might be offensive, even mildly. But to state your opinion as fact, i.e. calling me arrogant without even knowing me, well let us say it was not very nice. I would be arrogant if I said something along the lines of "I could write the Hobbit better than the guy who did it". That would be arrogant. Stand by your posts if you must. Stick to your own point of view. Disagree with me passionately, but please try to keep the passion from insult. As far as I know, nothing I've put in this thread has been directly offensive to anyone. Calling me arrogant simply because you disagree with me? (The smileys I put in the last post were meant to show I was joking, in case anyone missed that, or if I have offended anyone, it was unintentional). I don't know how else I can explain my rationales for my theory. I believe the explanation I put in my last post explained my logic. If that is not sufficient....

Luckers, the Taimandred theory is directly contradicted by the books. Demandred did not recognize Flinn in With the Choedan Kal, book 9. To my knowledge, nothing in the books other than the characters pov's eliminates the BelTaim theory, so on that point I must politely disagree.

 

I have thought of another difference between Rahvin's death and Bel'al's. Rahvin was killed in Tel'aran'rhiod. Though he was in the flesh, I think that could add a far greater permanence. I.e. his soul was dead along with his thread and his flesh. Reference to Perrin talking to Hopper(book three, methinks) "Hopper, what happens if you die here?"

 

Mr Ares, sorry about the name thing. I tend to do things properly, that is to how I was taught, not remembering that grammar rules are different on-line, and people spell things pretty much how they darn please. To my mind Mr should always be followed by a period(fullstop, I believe is the British term), but it is your name, and I will try to remember. I guess you missed my joke, or decided to ignore it; when I said FOR THE FIRST TIME, I was hinting that you had not actually posted it earlier. I was sure you had, but...Sheesh! jokes are a lot funnier in person. Easier to tell, too. Sometimes it's confusing how some people post their posts, and my browser is in need of update. That's why I missed it, I'm sure.

I'm glad you understood my logic, but you seem to think there is no evidence; I have pretty much presented all the evidence I can. You disagree with mine interpretation....I guess we'll have to wait until RJ's birthday after next.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dreadlord

QUOTE

some of the trails RJ left us were pretty thin, i.e./e.g. the ident' o' the Asmo-Bane, which undoubtedly will now never be confirmed

UNQUOTE

 

AHA! Never fear! Brandon Sanderson did say he and Harriet have found a place where they can say who did it! Check the link below-Sanderson says outright that hes going to tell us.

 

 

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.written.robert-jordan/browse_thread/thread/4667fd0d775cb72f

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...