Did Verin Lie?

[solarz]

25 minutes ago, Wulf said:

 

The oaths themselves must be up for interpretation otherwise you could spot an Aes Sedai by her being the only one in the room going "True?  True true.  Truetrue true true, true."

 

I'm sure somebody could use mental gymnastics to render all 3 (and maybe the lesser discussed 4th) of the oaths powerless, since they're only enforced by the belief of the person speaking them in the first place.

 

I highly doubt it. Remember that the oath rods were used in the Age of Legends to bind the worst criminals, some of whom were highly intelligent and amoral (aka Semiraghe). If "mental gymnastics" were all that was necessary to defeat it, then it would not have been a very effective tool.

 

Remember how Verin defeated the oath to the Dark One: she had to drink poison. She did not have the liberty to reinterpret "until the hour of my death" as anything other than her actual death.

[Wulf]

In its original usage they'd probably read a contract instead of a few ceremonial feel-good lines.

 

I'm posting from a disadvantage here as I'm in the middle of a re-read with my last one having been done about 10 years ago so I can't comment on the last book or two, but the series is full of wiggling around the oaths.

 

Quote

Never to use the One Power as a weapon except against Darkfriends or Shadowspawn, or in the last extreme defense of her life, the life of her Warder, or another Aes Sedai

 

"The last extreme defense of her life" should mean that she can't use it until she's tried and failed to defend her life with her bare fists, or biting the attacker if her arms have been cut off.  Obviously it's ridiculous to take any of the oaths to their extreme literal meaning.

 

The amount of leeway is purely in the mind of the oath taker.

 

A hypothetical Child of the Light, somehow gifted with the ability to channel and bound by the Oath Rod, could use the power freely against nearly everybody, secure in the knowledge that his targets were all Darkfriends and Shadowspawn.

 

That same Child of the Light could make all manner of accusation if he believed hard enough, speaking no word that he believed untrue.  The accusation would merely require belief, and not evidence.

 

Obviously a bound, channeling Child of the Light wouldn't happen in the series, but it would be the best in-series example of what I'm suggesting.

 

Do you doubt that a Child of the Light's version of upholding the oaths would be quite different than anybody else's interpretation?

 

Wouldn't it stand to reason then that a dedicated mind could further twist their meaning beyond all recognition?

 

The Chosen weren't lawyers and were never bound by the rod.

 

They never had reason to look into the mechanics of it.  The Aes Sedai that 'were' bound by it did so, willingly at first.  Through tradition, after.  None had a reason to want to undercut the oaths, except for those who replaced them with others.  Undercutting 'that' oath would have long-term consequences if a way were found.

Edited May 2, 2018 by Wulf

[Sabio]

2 hours ago, solarz said:

 

In a book, the information the author supplies is precisely the information they want the reader to know, nothing more, nothing less. Had RJ wanted to show how AS can twist the truth, he would have made Verin say something different that would have achieved the same effect (i.e. get Ingtar to accept her company). The fact that RJ made Verin say those exact words, and then have Moiraine specifically repudiate them is intended to be a clue.

 

Now, I understand why people didn't want to believe Verin was BA, as she did not behave like any of the other black AS. What I found amazing were the excuses people came up with to justify that belief. A good example is what you just said. In a book, only what is written happened. What is not written is never relevant. RJ did not write anything about Moiraine saying something Verin could have used to justify her claim, therefore it did not happen.

Verin being BA wasn't a huge shock, after all she used compulsion on people and was about to murder Casudane.  The point is simply since Aes Sedai can twist what you hear in many ways, one can't always assume what they said is what you think they say.  A lot happens in the series off screen.  Taim being freed, who ordered trollocs to attack the manor, Dem taking over Shara etc.. All of that happened off screen but is relevant.  The reason for verin deciding to go after Rand happened off screen.  At the time though it made sense people could suspect it was Aes Sedai playing with words.

 

The companion states "binders" were used to bind people who were incorrigibly violent, because of personality flaws or madness.  It was used only as a last resort.  To bind someone not only to not commit their crime again but to spend the rest of their lives, if necessary, making restitution.  The older one was when bound, the more it restricted.  

 

So back in the AOL it would of been harder to get past the oath because it would of been very specific.  For Semi it says the Hall of Servants discovered that she gave her sadism free reign.  So a binding for her probably would of been like an oath preventing her from using the power to inflict pain on her patients.  It would not of been the easily manipulated oaths the Aes Sedai in Rand's time took.

Edited May 2, 2018 by Sabio

[solarz]

16 hours ago, Sabio said:

Verin being BA wasn't a huge shock, after all she used compulsion on people and was about to murder Casudane.  The point is simply since Aes Sedai can twist what you hear in many ways, one can't always assume what they said is what you think they say.  A lot happens in the series off screen.  Taim being freed, who ordered trollocs to attack the manor, Dem taking over Shara etc.. All of that happened off screen but is relevant.  The reason for verin deciding to go after Rand happened off screen.  At the time though it made sense people could suspect it was Aes Sedai playing with words.

 

The companion states "binders" were used to bind people who were incorrigibly violent, because of personality flaws or madness.  It was used only as a last resort.  To bind someone not only to not commit their crime again but to spend the rest of their lives, if necessary, making restitution.  The older one was when bound, the more it restricted.  

 

So back in the AOL it would of been harder to get past the oath because it would of been very specific.  For Semi it says the Hall of Servants discovered that she gave her sadism free reign.  So a binding for her probably would of been like an oath preventing her from using the power to inflict pain on her patients.  It would not of been the easily manipulated oaths the Aes Sedai in Rand's time took.

 

Something happening off-screen is not the same as not being written. RJ wrote about Taim being freed, so it happened. BS wrote about Demandred leading a Sharan army (*not* taking over Shara).

 

We don't know who ordered the trollocs to attack the manor, all we know is that the trollocs did attack. If we were to guess, however, we would be guessing from clues written in the book. I could say it was Asmodean, but there would be nothing in the books that supports such a claim, just as there's nothing in the books that supports the claim Verin somehow interpreted something Moiraine said into "sending her after Rand".

[Sabio]

The point though is a lot of stuff does happen off screen that isn't in the book.  So we can't say if it not in the book then it never happened.  We do know Siuan. Verin. and Moiraine had a conversation after Rand left the room that wasn't in the book.  We know Verin lied, but at the time one couldn't rule out Aes Sedai word twisting.  

[TheSociopath]

as to the attack on the manor, that seemed to be fairly clearly Aran'gar to me.