Cadsuane, Nynaeve and Min. (Full Book Spoilers)

[Diederichos]

Why are you guys talking about Gawyn on a Cad/Min/Nyn thread? :D

[thewalrus777]

Why are you guys talking about Gawyn on a Cad/Min/Nyn thread? :D

 

people just really hate Gawyn. Even if his name is slightly mentioned, it boils the blood.

[Diederichos]

Then he will be He Who Will Not Be Named or HWWNBN or pronounced Phlegmwhahnabona for short.

[Nethran Thaimal]

I've talked about this on a different thread in a completely different section...  But I think Gawyn is better than Lan with a sword.  I mean Sleete bested Lan twice in seven rounds dueling and is renouned among Warders for his skill.  Gawyn beat him AND Marlesh together, and Marlesh ain't too shabby with a sword himself.  And he'd done it before.  I know Lan might have gotten better since then, but he might not have improved that much, either.  Gawyn just might be the best.  Might be better than Rand was with two hands.  I don't know for certain, but you can't say outright that Rand would demolish him in a duel sans saidin. I know Galad was better than him at one point, but honestly I think Gawyn is the best swordsman in Randland at present.

[OptimusPrime]

I've talked about this on a different thread in a completely different section...  But I think Gawyn is better than Lan with a sword.  I mean Sleete bested Lan twice in seven rounds dueling and is renouned among Warders for his skill.  Gawyn beat him AND Marlesh together, and Marlesh ain't too shabby with a sword himself.  And he'd done it before.  I know Lan might have gotten better since then, but he might not have improved that much, either.  Gawyn just might be the best.  Might be better than Rand was with two hands.  I don't know for certain, but you can't say outright that Rand would demolish him in a duel sans saidin. I know Galad was better than him at one point, but honestly I think Gawyn is the best swordsman in Randland at present.

 

Just remember that Gawyn had time to go over Sleetes history in his head during that spar. Sleete and that other guy would have killed Gawyn if it was a real fight I reckon. Jasons review said Gawyn does some cool sword stuff. When was that then

[Noname]

I dont think Cadsuane was out of character, we need to remember that RJ did write alot of these plots, so why would Brandon leave to far from the path when these pivotal scenes were already there for him, i dont think it would make much sense. though i must admit i did enjoy when Tam put her in her place as it were.

 

Nyn i really enjoyed in TGS, shes always come across as a know-it-all and bully towards most (all men as well) while i believe she has matured very nicely to a point where she contributes alot more then some surrounding Rand.

 

I Look forward to seeing these three interact after finding out about Rand and definately when Moraine returns back on the scene after such a long absence!

[SHMEV]

Cadsuane is a LIAR!!!

 

That get your attention? Good! I refer you to TGS Ch. 31 p. 472

 

"There are Aiel in the city, Lady," Quillin said, scrubbing at an invisible spot on the tabletop.

 

She gave him a flat stare. "I hadn't noticed."

 

He chuckled. "Yes, yes obvious, I suppose."

 

LIAR!!! She did too notice!!

 

ok So sarcasm is not the best lie to be caught in but nonetheless still a lie. The way i see it, one of three things could be going on here.

 

1) Cadsuane has had the oaths removed and lied.

 

2) When using sarcasm you tell the truth by implication and thus it is not really a lie. Cadsuane has used logic to get out of the oaths at least to use sarcasm.

 

3) It's a typo and RJ/BS did not mean for it to be there.

 

 

[Sharaman]

AS can use sarcasm, hyperbole, metaphor and other forms of speech without apparent problem.

Siuan frequently says things that involve fishy metaphors, for instance.

Others make horrible threats "Have your guts for garters, make you squeal like a pig" that can't be taken literally.

In this instance, Cadsuane, quite apart from the sarcasm clause, could argue around the statement in that she hadn't "noticed", she knew there were Aiel in the city.

It's like saying you don't believe in the existence of salt-water because you know oceans exist.

 

[SHMEV]

The difference is that Sarcasm is a lie by definition. When we look at the ability to lie or not to lie and start drawing lines down it by saying that metaphor or sarcasm dont count because of this or that. It goes to show that in order to get around the oaths all one has to do is convince themselves that it does not count for some reason. If I can lie in the case of sarcasm or to a lesser extent in metaphor, because it is understood by context, intonation, or culture as a lie then it dont count, then why can i not say green is red. Everyone knows that it is not true and therefore by context I am still telling the truth. Now I know someone is going to have to point out some line between sarcasm and obvious lie like saying Green is Red, and i dont care about that. I simply felt that pointing out an instance where Cadsuane told an obvious lie, albeit through sarcasm, would be good for the general discussion. It seems that the oaths have held fairly strong, as in the case of the inability to say Red is Green, and sarcasm is just one step in logic away from rationalizing a stronger lie. Thus, worth pointing out.     

[Casabamelon]

The difference is that Sarcasm is a lie by definition. When we look at the ability to lie or not to lie and start drawing lines down it by saying that metaphor or sarcasm dont count because of this or that. It goes to show that in order to get around the oaths all one has to do is convince themselves that it does not count for some reason. If I can lie in the case of sarcasm or to a lesser extent in metaphor, because it is understood by context, intonation, or culture as a lie then it dont count, then why can i not say green is red. Everyone knows that it is not true and therefore by context I am still telling the truth. Now I know someone is going to have to point out some line between sarcasm and obvious lie like saying Green is Red, and i dont care about that. I simply felt that pointing out an instance where Cadsuane told an obvious lie, albeit through sarcasm, would be good for the general discussion. It seems that the oaths have held fairly strong, as in the case of the inability to say Red is Green, and sarcasm is just one step in logic away from rationalizing a stronger lie. Thus, worth pointing out.       

 

It is worth pointing out. That being said, we know that the oaths come down to BELIEF. If she honstely believes that the person she's talking to understands that she MEANS "No s--- Sherlock! Of COURSE I've seen the Aiel!", the she's NOT telling a lie, she's making a mutually understood observation. The real question is what happens if she makes a sarcastic remark to a naive person who believes it? Does she have to correct and explain herself, or does her head explode?

[Sharaman]

Well, maybe she hadn't really noticed the Aiel because she knew they were there, so her eye slid over them in passing. So no, the head doesn't explode - pity :)

[feliasgrimm]

I've been saying caddy is black for a while, so you won't see any argument from me on that.

 

BUT:

 

It's been stated on numerous occasions that speaking no word that is untrue also means that you can't swear oaths you don't mean to follow through with, and it was stated SOMEWHERE that ANY oath was sufficient (was someone's thoughts during someone else's swearing under the light and rebirth and blah blah blah was overkill). Therefore:

Either allegory is allowed OR Siuan (in particular, but she's probably not the only example) is black - even when bound by the oaths she'd said 'if you don't ..., I'm gonna "string you up for fishbait"'. She obviously has not intention of doing that in any sort of literal sense, she's just using an expression. But I'd still see it as an "oath" so I think euphamisms and sarcasm and the like would be allowable.

 

Judging by the way the others have circumvented power as a weapon (deliberately putting themselves in a position to "feel threatened" so that they could raise some hell, and smacking people around with air "switches"), there's SOME degree of leeway and they seem to count "degree of harm" to some degree. Someone even commented that sinking Egwene's boat - despite the fact that it COULD have killed her - didn't count as a weapon because they obviously didn't INTEND to kill her. Whilst if they'd INTENDED to kill her, sinking the boat would have been not a bad place to start.

 

Saying "the sky is green" rather than blue is obviously a factual lie, and there's no way around that really (although I could make some arguments for orange if we want to get into light spectrum theory). But I think that if you walked up to an aes sedai and said "the sky is green", they could say something like "yeah, the sky is green, uh huh" because their intent isn't to state the lie.

 

Also, her "I hadn't noticed" comment could also be literal truth - Noticing implies not being aware of something until it is observed. If she KNEW the aiel were there prior to seeing them, she wouldn't "notice" them. She'd know. My cousin bought a red car and told me about it over the phone. The first time I saw it, I didn't think of it as "noticing" it was red. On the other hand when you see a car speeding, you "notice" the color of it. Had she said something like "Really? I didn't know that" or "Really? I hadn't seen one", THAT would be an outright lie, although if my sarcasm theory is correct then it'd still have been allowable.

 

Yes, I'm arguing semantics, but that's kinda what Aes Sedai are KNOWN for arguing with regards to the first oath.

 

But I'm fairly sure that Intent is the majority of the oaths... if it was truly literal then they would logically also be unable to make statements that were untrue but that they did believe (which a number of aes sedai have done. There's a specific example where they {I don't recall who "they" was but I'm thinking it was some of the BA hunters in Pevara's crew} said elaida must be black because she DID lie, but since she believed it true at the time it didn't count).

 

Although then that takes some of the "proof" out of how egwene caught sheriam in the lie, since sheriam was obviously not intending to lie in that situation (she was tricked into the lie, so the intent to lie wasn't there). Then again, we don't have any scenes that would show how a non-BA would have reacted to that same series of questions if tricked into lying in the same manner. Even if not proof by itself, it'd have been enough to generate the suspicion required to make her reswear the oaths and say she wasn't a darkfriend straight out, which obviously she was unable to do.

[randfandom]

Gawyn just might be the best.  Might be better than Rand was with two hands.  I don't know for certain, but you can't say outright that Rand would demolish him in a duel sans saidin. I know Galad was better than him at one point, but honestly I think Gawyn is the best swordsman in Randland at present.

 

In my opinion, Rand in his present physical state doesn't stand a chance against Gawyn, unless he uses Saidin. I am not sure if he would have been able to beat him even before losing his hand. I don't understand how people can seriously think that a one handed man, hampered by extremely painful and bleeding wounds in his side, poor eyesight and so many responsibilities that he barely finds time to eat and sleep, nevermind do sword practice - could defeat a man of same age, strength and height, in perfect health, who has shown himself to be a true blademaster and tops at hand on hand combat, and who spends all his time sharpening these skills.

 

Rand can't defeat Gawyn without using the Power. Even using the Power he faces problems - considering the difficulty he has seizing Saidin (nausea, vomiting, dizziness), he can only defeat Gawyn if he is already holding the Power when Gawyn attacks him.

 

[Luckers]

RJ stated that the Oaths allow sarcasm. It all depends on a) the Aes Sedai's intention. b) the Aes Sedai's perception of whether they will be taken seriously.

 

His specific example was an Aes Sedai could sarcastically say a white cloth was black, but not if, say, she were talking to a blind person who might take the words at face value.

 

As long as Cadsuane were intending to convey her disdain for the obvious statement of the Aiel being in the city, and not her genuine failure to notice--and as long as she knew that dry tone would convey that it was sarcasm--she was fine.

 

I've been saying caddy is black for a while, so you won't see any argument from me on that.

 

In [WH; 10, Wonderful News] Cadsuane thinks to herself that her greatest failure other than learning what Moiraine was up to in New Spring was her failure to uproot the Black Ajah.

 

She is not black.

[Dakota]

RJ stated that the Oaths allow sarcasm. It all depends on a) the Aes Sedai's intention. b) the Aes Sedai's perception of whether they will be taken seriously.

 

His specific example was an Aes Sedai could sarcastically say a white cloth was black, but not if, say, she were talking to a blind person who might take the words at face value.

 

As long as Cadsuane were intending to convey her disdain for the obvious statement of the Aiel being in the city, and not her genuine failure to notice--and as long as she knew that dry tone would convey that it was sarcasm--she was fine.

/quote]

 

Well, using this cloth color example, earlier when the group of sitters in the Tower were beginning their hunt to find the black ajah and tested the oath rod by removing their oaths, one of them specifically mentioned how amused they were to be able to say that a red dress was green or something like that.  There were two of them by themselves, an even knowing that the other would not take it seriously and at face value, they still weren't able to say such things until after the oath had been removed.  It's not sarcasm, true, but it does go a bit against the example that RJ gave.

[Agitel]

Well, using this cloth color example, earlier when the group of sitters in the Tower were beginning their hunt to find the black ajah and tested the oath rod by removing their oaths, one of them specifically mentioned how amused they were to be able to say that a red dress was green or something like that.  There were two of them by themselves, an even knowing that the other would not take it seriously and at face value, they still weren't able to say such things until after the oath had been removed.  It's not sarcasm, true, but it does go a bit against the example that RJ gave.

 

I disagree. Sarcasm is typically intentional. That's not to say it isn't reflexive at times, but if you're using sarcasm, whether you're consciously aware of it or not, you're intentionally putting it in your voice. It's certainly possible to lie without being sarcastic.

[Luckers]

Well, using this cloth color example, earlier when the group of sitters in the Tower were beginning their hunt to find the black ajah and tested the oath rod by removing their oaths, one of them specifically mentioned how amused they were to be able to say that a red dress was green or something like that.  There were two of them by themselves, an even knowing that the other would not take it seriously and at face value, they still weren't able to say such things until after the oath had been removed.  It's not sarcasm, true, but it does go a bit against the example that RJ gave.

 

Once again its all about intention and perception. Cadsuane's intention was to convey her disdain for the woman making such an obvious statement. Seaine's intention was to say a red dress was green.

 

By the same note Cadsuane knew her comment wouldn't be taken at face value--her tone expressed that. Had she attempted to say the exact same thing in tones of genuine surprise she would have been forestalled. Perception and intention.