Main Character Dark Friends

[Suttree]

should read my post fully. I don't think he is a dark friend, I simply think he can't be written off simply for wanting to deny it till death. I think most dark friends would feel the same way before having to face the real situation.

 

I did actually and its funny you would say the above given I answered that point in my first post.

 

If you take that quote in context and add it up with all his other povs it actually does prove it.

 

One have to view that quote in context. You are taking it as a stand alone thought.

 

Further in the post above you went so far as to offer why he would be a good DF above and beyond "not being able to write him off"

[kasheem]

the list given was one that said these people were definitively not dark friends. That person chose to use a weak argument for Galad. I personally agree there is a lot of proof he isn't, but I read that and instantly had my devil's advocate side laugh at how many holes were in that supposedly definitive argument. I stand by what I said, when seeing such a weak argument under a definitively this or that topic it invalidates the rest of them.

[Suttree]

the list given was one that said these people were definitively not dark friends. That person chose to use a weak argument for Galad. I personally agree there is a lot of proof he isn't, but I read that and instantly had my devil's advocate side laugh at how many holes were in that supposedly definitive argument. I stand by what I said, when seeing such a weak argument under a definitively this or that topic it invalidates the rest of them.

 

Go back and read the scene again. Linda's arguments are for the most part anything but weak. She is assuming people will take it in context not as a stand alone sentence .

[kasheem]

I will go to my grave saying I invented the internet. guess its DEFINITIVELY true now.

[Suttree]

I will go to my grave saying I invented the internet. guess its DEFINITIVELY true now.

 

Now you're just being silly, you read my point above and then answer with a "stand alone sentence"? As I said read the scene, it's quite obvious when you do. Have a good one mate.

[kasheem]

I read what she put there, she found it sufficient for a, and i quote, "definitive" decision on him. It isn't, maybe the rest of the scene is but she didn't use the rest of the scene. when dealing with, and i quote, "definitive" having that kind of oversight invalidates the rest imo.

[Suttree]

I read what she put there, she found it sufficient for a, and i quote, "definitive" decision on him. It isn't, maybe the rest of the scene is but she didn't use the rest of the scene. when dealing with, and i quote, "definitive" having that kind of oversight invalidates the rest imo.

 

Which of course is extremely faulty logic. Even if she was wrong about Galad(which she's not as she's assuming quite rightly that no one reading would look at the sentence in a vacuum) it says nothing about her points relating to other characters.

[yoniy0]

kasheem, she doesn't have all the space in the world. That quote is the crux of things, but of course it should be taken in context of who he is and what he wants to do with the WC.

[kasheem]

There have been high ranking people in the WC that were darkfriends so that doesn't make him automatically not. There were probably many dark friends who died denying it, that was what she chose to use. A simple sentence of him saying he would never ever say he was one. I am not here arguing that he is one, for in my opinion he is not. I am simply saying that is not 100% proof, and therefore not conclusive.

 

now please, let's drop this debate since you are clearly only here to say he is not a dark friend and that isn't even what I am arguing about. this isn't a topic about galad in any way shape or form.

[yoniy0]

He wasn't saying it to anyone. He was thinking it. Regardless, you've completely misrepresented what I said.

[kasheem]

I haven't it, drop it. You are saying use full context, she gave what she gave and said that was enough for definitive. It is 99% likely that Galad is not a dark friend, that is not definitive and the part she chose for "proof" doesn't even come close to reaching that 99% that is out there, not half of it.

[Suttree]

I haven't it, drop it. You are saying use full context, she gave what she gave and said that was enough for definitive. It is 99% likely that Galad is not a dark friend, that is not definitive and the part she chose for "proof" doesn't even come close to reaching that 99% that is out there, not half of it.

 

We all of course know this was just a list not a post on Galad and she is using quick hit, topline points that are supposed to be taken in context. Linda is a respected member of this community and for you to state a fallacy in that her point concerning Galad invalidates the rest of the list is absurd. If you would like to see what her full posts look like check this one on Cadsuane.

 

http://13depository....-about.html?m=1

 

Is that enough support for you?

[kasheem]

if a person has a list of hundreds of things that are 100% this or that and one is insufficient or incomplete it brings down the rest. You are taking the term invalidate to harshly and literally. I never meant it made them all false, i meant it brings the rest of the list into question and therefore doesn't matter to me (on the basis that the first one i read was insufficient, not the 10th or 100th but the very first). I noticed at least one person in the comment list found the same problem with other people she declared 100% not a dark friend. She is probably right on Galad, she used insufficient evidence in that place. IDC if she is highly respected, that doesn't make her never wrong or insufficient.

 

now drop it.

[Suttree]

if a person has a list of hundreds of things that are 100% this or that and one is insufficient or incomplete it brings down the rest. You are taking the term invalidate to harshly and literally. I never meant it made them all false, i meant it brings the rest of the list into question and therefore doesn't matter to me (on the basis that the first one i read was insufficient, not the 10th or 100th but the very first). I noticed at least one person in the comment list found the same problem with other people she declared 100% not a dark friend. She is probably right on Galad, she used insufficient evidence in that place. IDC if she is highly respected, that doesn't make her never wrong or insufficient.

 

now drop it.

 

Not as long as you continiously misrepresent what is being said. No need to really debate at this stage however, your posts are proving our point quiet nicely.

[kasheem]

How have i misrepresented what is being said. She used 2 sentences which can be summed up as he will deny being a dark friend till death. Yes, there is a bigger scene there but it wasn't pointed to. What's there is there and she incorrectly deemed it enough for a 100% conclusion. I'm not even debating the 100% right part here (which it isn't, there is a minimal chance for any character to turn to the shadow in the final book), I am debating what she put there and it is insufficient. Maybe she put it there assuming we would all take into account everything else with galad, I am not that person. I took her blog at face value, she said she would give a reason as to why all these people are, and i quote again, "definitevly" not and failed to do so in Galad's section. That is not enough to 100% write off the possibilty of the shadow affecting him. It was insufficient.

 

now drop it. this is my topic and i severly wish for you to stop this nonsense.

[Suttree]

now drop it. this is my topic and i severly wish for you to stop this nonsense.

 

Ok shall we discuss the topic? As I said earlier it is a very strange poll, as evidenced by 48 people saying none of the above. Care to state what from the text has led you to "decide to believe" that one of the characters is a DF. Proper support mind.

[kasheem]

90% what i call shyamalanism, I expect a major twist. A large part of my prerequisite for it to constitue that is it has to come from an original member, not just here but in movies and television and all medias. From there I looked at the originals and eliminated who was least likely in my eyes and was left with Moiraine and Egwene. What lead me to Moiraine was here disappearance at the beginning of the second book, just after the dark friend social. I understand most have come to accept that the two Aes Sedai indicated there were Verin and Liandrin, but I have always found that scene very powerful and felt more would come from it. That was the major piece.

 

as for this being a strange topic I have already admitted this might have been asked far too late in the game, but I recall the first time I came here (IDK when that was, but it was prior to my catching up on the series) I looked into a few theory threads and quite a few of those were about mat and all the strange things around him. I realize most of that was cleared up in the Tower of Ghenjei, but I still assumed some people would cling to their original theories prevailing in the end.

 

and thank you for returning to the topic.

[yoniy0]

The good thing about Linda's article is that she explains each entry. She doesn't bother with the youngsters (and rightly so), but her points regarding Moiraine, Lan and Thom should suffice.

[kasheem]

if your position is "it's clearly no one and this thread is stupid" I just don't get why you are here posting. The poll is making that point for you. By coming here and trying to prove that no one can be all you are doing is killing any possible fun or discussion that may have had a place of happening. I just don't get it....

[yoniy0]

kasheem, I've started off posting everything that I had to say about the issue, to complement my vote, including referencing a relevant article. The validity of what I said was questioned, so I hanged in trying to support it (first via explanation of why the measure you were using to judge Linda's article was in my opinion erroneous, then moving on to touch on the actual characters you've suggested). Yes, my position is that it's none of them, but I think I've been polite about this and clearly explained my reasoning. If you're not interested in responses not pointing at one of these characters, then I don't mind letting it drop.

[Clouded]

I believe your Shyamalan plot twist was satisfied with Verin in TGS. I wouldn't expect another one. I believe aMoL will be more about tying up those final plot lines and marching Rand to his death.

 

As for the complaints about "None of the Above"-ers ruining this thread, I believe people are just trying to challenge you to defend your theory. Playful speculation and hope is fun, but can only go so far. The real fun begins when you must defend your point with evidence :D.

[Thrasymachus]

I wanna jump in here and point out that that Galad quote, which is from his internal POV is definitive proof that he's not a Darkfriend. Being a Darkfriend is not about being an evil dude who hinders the forces of the Light. It is an overt, intentional choice, and you don't forget or suppress the fact that you made it, because you could be called upon to act on it at any given time. Perfect example here: Masema, the Prophet of the Dragon. Dude was evil, and was so harmful to the forces of the Light that Rand sent Perrin off to collect him as one of the first things he did after he fully established himself in the wetlands as the Dragon Reborn. But he was not a Darkfriend. He thought the sun shone out of Rand's backside, he was equal to the Creator in Masema's eyes, no way would he have even considered choosing the Dark One over Rand. Manipulated by Forsaken? sure, but so have a lot of other good guys, Noal for one, and arguably all the main characters have danced to the Forsaken's tune at various points. So Galad's internal POV where he's not even speaking, but thinking to himself about how his being a Darkfriend is a lie does in fact constitute definitive proof. If he were a Darkfriend, he wouldn't think the claim that he was one would be a lie, but a dangerous truth.

[Hagazussa]

Here is the thing with plot twists, they have to make sense, they have to make you go ah well off course but I never saw that coming, then it is a good lot twist, but to just make a plot twist just to have one when it do not make sense that is another thing. Now take the first book of Sword of Truth my second favorite fantasy series the end of the book have several huge plot twists but they make sense, you go ahh well of course that is how it fit together and when looking at the material again you will clearly see how the plot is coherent, Hell for that matter in Star Wars when Dart Vader tuns out to be Luke's father that is a great plot twist and it makes sense. However plot twists just for the sake of plot twists is not good and I do not think the authors of Wheel of Time will go there. I do not see how or why one of the main characters would be a darkfriend, there is no indication at all and it would not make sense. I am sure there will be plot twists at the end like I said but I think they will be twists that makes sense.

 

Now the characters who have pulled a surprise I am a Darkfriend they have all showed signs of it, sure it have been a plot twist when they eventually turn on the other characters but there have been hints. This is like a good detective book, you do not want everyone to guess who the killer is, but there have to be a chance to guess it, there have to be enough signs to make the reader think and wonder and the original eight main characters show no indication.

 

I also agree with the poster above that if a character think I am not a Darkfriend then that is pretty good evidence that they are not, at least not at that time. What a character say can be a lie, but they generally do not go lying to themselves about such a thing and they would be fully aware off it. If a character was accused of being a Darkfriend they would think about ways to lie to cover up and convince everyone it is not true, they would see it as a dangerous truth they did not want exposed, they would not think that is a lie I am not a Darkfriend, that would make no sense.