What Do YOU Think Are The Most MISunderstood Concepts In The Series By Readers?

[Mr Ares]

Going insane from the taint inevitably does

In your opinion.

[Thorn]

Going insane from the taint inevitably does

In your opinion.

 

Actually I think I recall reading somewhere in some RJ interview that the taint's insanity was necessarily violent. I can't for the life of me remember where, though, so it could be anything from a random RJ interview to a random third ager's uninformed opinion.

[Blackhoof]

The taint madness is necessarily violent. Your right that not all madness' are hoprribly violent, but the taint madness is.

[Rocky_Outcrop]

There is nothing to suggest that Rand is mad in any way.

 

P.S Before you jump down my throat at that I would defy anyone to show me a quotation or reference a scene where Rand acts mad from the taint in a typical mad from the taint way which could not easily be explained in another way.

 

Take LTT out of the equation and Rand is pretty normal, just reactive to stressers in his environment. Put LTT in there and he looks mad. But LTT is Rand and the way Rand acts is no more mad than the existence of Bridge-it (sp - I can't spell her name and that's now I read it)

[Mr Ares]

Going insane from the taint inevitably does

In your opinion.

Actually I think I recall reading somewhere in some RJ interview that the taint's insanity was necessarily violent. I can't for the life of me remember where, though, so it could be anything from a random RJ interview to a random third ager's uninformed opinion.

I've never seen any such RJ interview. Of course, I've not seen them all, but I've seen a fair few.

 

The taint madness is necessarily violent.

There is nothing to support that. The taint madness is not any specific form of madness, no specific set of sypmtoms.

 

There is nothing to suggest that Rand is mad in any way.

 

P.S Before you jump down my throat at that I would defy anyone to show me a quotation or reference a scene where Rand acts mad from the taint in a typical mad from the taint way which could not easily be explained in another way.

What about any scene where he talks to that voice in his head?

 

Take LTT out of the equation and Rand is pretty normal, just reactive to stressers in his environment. Put LTT in there and he looks mad. But LTT is Rand and the way Rand acts is no more mad than the existence of Bridge-it (sp - I can't spell her name and that's now I read it)

But why should we take LTT out of the equation? This is not normal. Birgitte doesn't have the voices of previous Birgittes in her head. In fact, her memories fade over time, showing that memories of previous lives are not a normal part of being a Hero. So why does Rand have them? Insanity is the only answer we have. LTT's memories, his personality, his talking to Rand, these are signs of Rand's madness. And stresses in your environment can cause madness.

[OptimusPrime]

Before you jump down my throat at that I would defy anyone to show me a quotation or reference a scene where Rand acts mad from the taint in a typical mad from the taint way which could not easily be explained in another way.

 

The time he used Callandor against the Seanchan.

[Blackhoof]

Does anyone agree with Ares' ridiculous notion that the Taint does not drive men violently and horribly insane?

[OptimusPrime]

It doesnt JUST do that. Look at the guy who went back to kid mentality. That doesnt mean hes violently and horribly insane, it means he is a child that can channel. The outcome is the same but not in the way you think Blackhoof. The outcome is still destruction, but you seem to think every single taintmad guy ONLY randomly destroys stuff without knowing it.

[Mr Ares]

Does anyone agree with Ares' ridiculous notion that the Taint does not drive men violently and horribly insane?

That's not what I said. It drives people insane, and some of them would certainly be violently so, but there is nothing to say that the taint needs to inspire "violent and horrible" madness, as opposed to just madness. That's your opinion, not facts from the book.

[Beren]

Does anyone agree with Ares' ridiculous notion that the Taint does not drive men violently and horribly insane?

That's not what I said. It drives people insane, and some of them would certainly be violently so, but there is nothing to say that the taint needs to inspire "violent and horrible" madness, as opposed to just madness. That's your opinion, not facts from the book.

 

I happen to agree with Ares on this one. (I hope the world doesn't end because I said that.) There are examples of both destruction and other madness.

 

(And no just so Mr Ares can disagree with me...)

Though, in the end, I think the taint would have driven those who were not violently insane to be violent, but I don't think that violence is a part of the taint itself. The taint is the madness and the violence just comes out of the person who has been tainted. Think of it like being turned forcibly to the DO through the 13/13. RJ said that it brings out every evil thing in the person and the person they were is pushed to the back. This connects very well with the taint which is also caused by the DO. It is not to the same extent as being turned, but similar in ways. I hope all this made sense.