Ask A Simple Question, Get a Simple Answer (No AMoL Spoilers)

[Luckers]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

 

Everyone has the ability to freely use compulsion. If they've the knowledge, skill and inclination, of course, and therein is your overall answer. You can speculate about anyone, and all it will bring you is nothing.

[thisguy]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

 

Everyone has the ability to freely use compulsion. If they've the knowledge, skill and inclination, of course, and therein is your overall answer. You can speculate about anyone, and all it will bring you is nothing.

An interesting little aside - rereading book 7 - Lan comes to his new AS. She tells him to come to her and he doesn't. She compels him through the bond but says that she needed to do it with a light touch or he might realize it. I wonder how often the AS do that with their warders. Reading the books as a kid, I thought being a warder would be cool. Realizing that the bonding is not totally benign now, I think I'd pass.

[Luckers]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

 

Everyone has the ability to freely use compulsion. If they've the knowledge, skill and inclination, of course, and therein is your overall answer. You can speculate about anyone, and all it will bring you is nothing.

An interesting little aside - rereading book 7 - Lan comes to his new AS. She tells him to come to her and he doesn't. She compels him through the bond but says that she needed to do it with a light touch or he might realize it. I wonder how often the AS do that with their warders. Reading the books as a kid, I thought being a warder would be cool. Realizing that the bonding is not totally benign now, I think I'd pass.

 

And are you aware that Aes Sedai can drain the strength of their gaiden to sustain their own strength... up to and including taking it all--i.e. killing the gaiden.

[thisguy]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

 

Everyone has the ability to freely use compulsion. If they've the knowledge, skill and inclination, of course, and therein is your overall answer. You can speculate about anyone, and all it will bring you is nothing.

An interesting little aside - rereading book 7 - Lan comes to his new AS. She tells him to come to her and he doesn't. She compels him through the bond but says that she needed to do it with a light touch or he might realize it. I wonder how often the AS do that with their warders. Reading the books as a kid, I thought being a warder would be cool. Realizing that the bonding is not totally benign now, I think I'd pass.

 

And are you aware that Aes Sedai can drain the strength of their gaiden to sustain their own strength... up to and including taking it all--i.e. killing the gaiden.

I knew they could use their strength, didn't realize that they could take it all and kill them. Seems like a raw deal to me.

[yoniy0]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

Hardly. Her methods require trust and vulnerability. She hasn't had that from many people, excepting perhaps Alanna after her Warder died (I strongly believe that she used it on Alanna after Rand had left them at that inn).

 

EDIT:

And are you aware that Aes Sedai can drain the strength of their gaiden to sustain their own strength... up to and including taking it all--i.e. killing the gaiden.

Seriously? Is that the BWB?

Edited August 30, 2012 by yoniy0

[Mulk]

yeah, I'd never seen that before either. I've read the BWB, but it's been at least five years and probably more since I did.

[Denn]

I did not realize that, thank you. If such physical action can be comanded without the victims knowledge of the invation, then what is stopping an unscrupalous channeler, or black sister, from wreaking havoc in the story.

[Vardar]

But even so, who wants to have cake

Well, it seems obvious to me that the point is you still get to eat it later on. Therefore, to eat a cake, but still get to have it (so it can be enjoyed all over again) is highly desirable (at least it is to me; I know not everyone makes a big to-do over food). Of course, the phrase was probably minted at a time when obesity and cholesterol weren't as big a concern as it is in modern times (i.e., eating cakes wasn't such an everyday occurrence).

 

So the saying is supposed to mean have some cake now, and then save some for later? But they'd still be eating it! I guess that makes more sense than just wanting to stare at a cake.

 

@ Sid, Lol. Sorry, seriously I've always hated that phrase, since I was a youngin, like 6 years old when my grandmother first said it to me. I'm pretty sure I got punished for getting smart back when I said what else would you do with cake besides eat it.

[driedraspberry]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

 

Everyone has the ability to freely use compulsion. If they've the knowledge, skill and inclination, of course, and therein is your overall answer. You can speculate about anyone, and all it will bring you is nothing.

An interesting little aside - rereading book 7 - Lan comes to his new AS. She tells him to come to her and he doesn't. She compels him through the bond but says that she needed to do it with a light touch or he might realize it. I wonder how often the AS do that with their warders. Reading the books as a kid, I thought being a warder would be cool. Realizing that the bonding is not totally benign now, I think I'd pass.

 

And are you aware that Aes Sedai can drain the strength of their gaiden to sustain their own strength... up to and including taking it all--i.e. killing the gaiden.

 

Damn, I want to see this one in action and not from a BA.

[Suttree]

With the admition of guilt from a certain brown, and her ability to freely use compulsion, is not everyone's actions (that she has been in contact with) speculate, from the beginning?

 

We also know Verin's version doesn't really work well on men...

 

tPoD

Of course the thing was not truly Compulsion as ancient texts described it. The weaving went with painful slowness, cobbled together as it was, and there was that need for a reason. It helped a great deal if the object of the weave was emotionally vulnerable, but trust was absolutely essential. Even catching someone by surprise did no good if they were suspicious. That fact cut down its usefulness with men considerably; veryfew men lacked suspicion around Aes Sedai.

Distrust aside, men were very bad subjects, unfortunately. She could not understand why. Most of those girls’ weaves had been intended for their fathers or other men. Any strong personality might begin to question his own actions – or even forget doing them, which led to another set of problems – but all things being equal, men were much more likely to. Much more likely. Perhaps it was the suspicion again. Why, once a man had even remembered the weaves being woven on him, if not the instructions she had given him. Such a lot of bother thatcaused! Not something she would risk again.

[yoniy0]

So the saying is supposed to mean have some cake now, and then save some for later?

No, I don't think that's what it's about. The very phrase 'have some cake' implies that eating a cake is as simple as going down to a bakery. Obviously, that's not how things used to be. You'd be lucky to get a cake once in, like, ever (a saying by Louis XVI's wife comes to mind). So, assuming you do have one, being able to eat it and still have some cake around must've been very cool. Regardless, what do I know. I've never studied English in any serious manner.

[thisguy]

You can look it up on wiki. For some reason, my work computer won't allow me to paste it here, but the answer is there - or an answer is there. It is wiki.

[FarShainMael]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/language/theenglishwespeak/2012/02/120221_tews_59_have_your_cake_page.shtml

 

 

 

.........what was that about the inter-book void.......

[thisguy]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...cake_page.shtml

 

 

 

.........what was that about the inter-book void.......

 

I actually love this kind of stuff - sayings and traditions, where they come from and how they change. It's actually another reason why I like RJ's work. When I first read how the Aiel got around the whole never touching a sword thing - taking it literally - i thought it was absolutely brilliant, and so true to what people do.

[Vardar]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...cake_page.shtml

 

 

 

.........what was that about the inter-book void.......

 

But that just goes to prove my point. I understand what the saying is supposed to mean, but I'm say it's a silly saying. There's only one purpose for cake, to eat it! Yoni, I guess I understand what you're implying, cake was a status symbol. To show off to your friends, like "Hey look, I'm cool cause I have cake" and if you ate the aforementioned cake you couldn't show it off. My counter is, did people really show off cake back then? Was cake a status symbol? IF so, what a scary world in which we live.

[Vardar]

Ok, I just read the Wiki about it. It explained NOTHING! It just says where it came from, it does nothing to explain how stupid the saying is. However it did provide other sayings form other countries which made a lot more sense than our saying:

 

Various expressions are used to convey similar idioms in other languages:

• Bulgarian: И вълкът сит, и агнето цяло - Both the wolf is full, and the lamb is whole.
  
• Czech: Aby se vlk nažral a koza zůstala celá - The wolf is full and the goat stayed whole.
  
• Chinese: 又要马儿跑，又要马儿不吃草 (pinyin: Yòu yào mǎ'er pǎo, yòu yào mǎ'er bu chī cǎo.) - To want a horse that both runs fast and consumes no feed; or 魚與熊掌不可兼得 from Mencius - You cannot have both the fish and the bear's paw (as a rare delicacy) at the same time.
  
• Danish: Man kan ikke både blæse og have mel i munden - You cannot both blow and have flour in your mouth.
  
• Dutch: Je moet kiezen of delen - is based on card games such as Bridge or Whist] where one can either pass or choose a game. In case you're the last, you have to choose a game or the cards are discarded and redealt. In case your hand is just not good enough, you have to choose to play a game and potentially lose it, or discard a potentially winning hand. Both are impossible, you can't have it both ways.
  
• French: Vouloir le beurre et l'argent du beurre - to want the butter and the money from (selling) the butter. The idiom can be emphasized by adding et le sourire de la crémière (and the smile of the female buttermaker).
  
• German:, 'wasch' mich, aber mach mich nicht naß! - please wash me, but don't get me wet!.
  
  • Switzerland: Du chasch nit dr Füfer und s Weggli ha - you can't have the five cent coin and a Swiss bread roll.
    

  [*]Greek: Κaι την πίτa ολόκληρη κaι τον σκύλο χορτάτο - you want the entire pie and the dog full.

  [*]Hebrew: אי אפשר לאכול את העוגה ולהשאיר אותה שלמה - you can't eat the cake and keep it whole

  [*]Italian: Avere la botte piena e la moglie ubriaca - to have the barrel full and the wife drunk.

  [*]Nepal: dubai haat ma laddu, which means having laddu (a sweet candy) in both your hands.

  [*]Papiamentu: Skohe of lag'i skohe - choose or let choose

  [*]Persian: هم خر را خواستن و هم خرما را - wanting both the donkey and the (sugar)dates

  [*]Polish: Wilk syty i owca cała - The wolf is full, and the lamb - whole.

  [*]Portuguese: Querer ter sol na eira e chuva no nabal - wanting the sun shine on the threshing floor, while it rains on the turnip field.

  [*]Russian: Тяжело усидеть на двух стульях - it's hard to have a seat on two chairs at once.

  [*]Serbian: Не можеш да имаш и јаре и паре - You can't have both goatling and money.

  [*]Spanish: Querer estar en misa y en procesión - wishing to be both at Mass and in the procession and nadar y guardar la ropa - swimming and keeping an eye on the removed clothes).

  • Argentina: la chancha y los veinte - the pig and the twenties. It comes from the old piggybanks for children that used to contain coins of 20 cents. The only way to get the coins was to break the piggybank open -- hence the phrase. This can be emphasized by adding y la máquina de hacer chorizos - and the machine to make sausage.
    

We fail! Lol.

[XoMeltdownoX]

So the saying is supposed to mean have some cake now, and then save some for later?

No, I don't think that's what it's about. The very phrase 'have some cake' implies that eating a cake is as simple as going down to a bakery. Obviously, that's not how things used to be. You'd be lucky to get a cake once in, like, ever (a saying by Louis XVI's wife comes to mind). So, assuming you do have one, being able to eat it and still have some cake around must've been very cool. Regardless, what do I know. I've never studied English in any serious manner.

Marie Antoinette never said "let them eat cake."

Another misquote of history.

 

The saying means you can't have it both ways. You cannot eat your cake (now) and have it too (keep the lovely cake for later).

[yoniy0]

I especially like the one about flour. As anyone who ever seen wet flour would know, that's patently wrong

(I do doubt whether you'd be able to blow in the first place, after having filled your mouth with flour, though)

 

EDIT:

Meltdown, that's okay. My argument in no way leaned on her actually having said that.

Edited August 30, 2012 by yoniy0

[Vardar]

So the saying is supposed to mean have some cake now, and then save some for later?

No, I don't think that's what it's about. The very phrase 'have some cake' implies that eating a cake is as simple as going down to a bakery. Obviously, that's not how things used to be. You'd be lucky to get a cake once in, like, ever (a saying by Louis XVI's wife comes to mind). So, assuming you do have one, being able to eat it and still have some cake around must've been very cool. Regardless, what do I know. I've never studied English in any serious manner.

Marie Antoinette never said "let them eat cake."

Another misquote of history.

 

The saying means you can't have it both ways. You cannot eat your cake (now) and have it too (keep the lovely cake for later).

 

We're debating why you would want to save cake? The only thing you can do it eat it. Unless the message is, eat your cake now, and eat some later, which would make more sense I suppose. But you only have cake to eat it, so why would you want to eat it and have it?

 

I especially like the one about flour. As anyone who ever seen wet flour would know, that's patently wrong

(I do doubt whether you'd be able to blow in the first place, after having filled your mouth with flour, though)

 

EDIT:

Meltdown, that's okay. My argument in no way leaned on her actually having said that.

 

What's the flour one?

[XoMeltdownoX]

Yon: I know. I did not mean to sound that way:)

 

Vard: if I understand you, it is the opposite. You cannot eat it now (the whole thing) and keep it for later to eat it. Maybe I just misunderstood you.

[Vardar]

Yon: I know. I did not mean to sound that way:)

 

Vard: if I understand you, it is the opposite. You cannot eat it now (the whole thing) and keep it for later to eat it. Maybe I just misunderstood you.

 

Oh no you got me right. I just wonder who wants to have cake if you're not going to eat it. However if the saying is supposed to imply have your cake now, and eat it later, it would make more sense, although it's still a bad saying to use to imply people are being greedy.

"You can't have your cake and eat it too"

Well what else would I do with cake that I had? Eat it right? Or share it with others who eat it. To say I can't have my cake and eat it too implies I want to do something else with the cake besides eat it right? (The context of the sentence), Thus my question is, what the heck else would you do with a cake? Look at it? Teast people with it? It's going to go bad soon, so you may as well eat it or give it away.

[yoniy0]

Ah, I see the source of your confusion now. It's because Anglophones are silly (). The original was "eat it and have it too", which (unlike the reverse) isn't chronologically possible.

[Vardar]

Ah, I see the source of your confusion now. It's because Anglophones are silly ( ). The original was "eat it and have it too", which (unlike the reverse) isn't chronologically possible.

 

It still doesn't explain why you want to just "Have cake."

[Pinzarn]

Now I am hungry for some cake.

[yoniy0]

Yes, we have gone round the bend here, haven't we? Again, Vardamus, I find it only natural -- having eaten a cake -- to find yourself wishing you still had it. Especially if your prospects of seeing another in the near future are slim.