Taim.....

[hjustinpace]

I hadn't seen RJ directly address Be'lal. Didn't he say elsewhere that a very weak balefiring wouldn't prevent transmigration? I guess Moraine's was sufficient to do for Be'lal.

[FarShainMael]

Perhaps you can provide a comparable example from RJ? (Not Brandon, who is a very different beast.)

]

 

How about him saying he liked to watch people squirm?

 

Or this:

 

"Robert Jordan has spoken...

 

Did Ingtar free Padan Fain in The Great Hunt? Or was it someone else?

 

It was Ingtar. Didn’t expect a straight answer, did you?"

 

 

http://www.wotdb.com/interviews/question/238

[Neophyte]

And it's amazing how slippery RJ and BS can be with their answers..

 

The thing is, this isn't an example of RJ being "slippery," it's a case of ... amateur ... reporting in very clear context. The incomplete part is designated as another name, not another phrase.

 

 

I distrust any conclusions that are drawn from such incomplete information. As I tried to point out, that quote could have gone either way. We don't know. therefore, we can't say.

 

But the context is clear, and is really only tertiary to the evidence in the books themselves - the total absence of both Rahvin and Be'lal after their balefirings. If Taim were Be'lal transmigrated, why does he not show up at any of the Forsaken Tea Parties, like every single one of the other transmigrated folks do?

 

In context, the quote is clear. Half of the "slippery" answers given only appear "slippery" after the fans get their pet theory claws into them. Most of the answers were perfectly straightforward - people just choose to over-interpret them.

 

 

How about him saying he liked to watch people squirm?

 

Giving a perfectly straightforward answer that he knows (through experience) will bring all the crazies to the surface? That's a good way to watch people squirm. And it's extra entertaining because you know how silly it is - you just gave them the answer!

 

And Terez is right - Brandon is a completely different beast in this regard. Apparently half the time he doesn't even know the answer.

[FarShainMael]

But, as Osan'gar's Razor has pointed out, RJ did leave a loophole, in that a very weak balefiring would not prevent transmigration:

 

http://www.theoryland.com/intvmain.php?i=4#3

 

The window of opportunity for the Dark One to secure that soul for transmigration is gone before the Dark One can know that the soul must be secured unless the amount of balefire used is very small.

 

...

 

There are a few other limits and constraints, but I won't go into them here, since I may want to use them in the books, and I would rather they come as a surprise if I do.

 

For me, the question remains open.

 

Edited: I think I just invented a new word..

[dhammett11]

Something just jumped out at me about Taim. The first thing we hear about him after hearing that he's set himself up as a false dragon is in TDR,Ch12 where we learn he was captured after being thrown from his horse and being knocked unconscious. This results in a marvelous chain of events, ending with landing the job of Leader of Rand's Ashaman. Consider the following rhyme:

 

For Want of a Nail

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.

For want of a shoe the horse was lost.

For want of a horse the rider was lost.

For want of a rider the message was lost.

For want of a message the battle was lost.

For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.

And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

 

This essentially summarizes medieval thought on chaos theory, by pointing out the butterfly effect. It's famously referenced by Shakespeare in Richard III. In fact, I think there are intentional parallels in the WoT taken from Richard III (historical or Shakespeare) in connection to Taim, Logain, Demandred, the Battle for the Black Tower (Richard III, Richmond, Buckingham, The Battle of Bosworth Field).

 

... And so I guess the point of my steam-of-consciousness here is that Demandred strongly based on Henry Stafford (The Kingmaker), 2nd Duke of Buckingham. Maybe I should have posted this in a Demandred topic. Thoughts? Feedback?

[dhammett11]

double post, with apologies

[thisguy]

Something just jumped out at me about Taim. The first thing we hear about him after hearing that he's set himself up as a false dragon is in TDR,Ch12 where we learn he was captured after being thrown from his horse and being knocked unconscious. This results in a marvelous chain of events, ending with landing the job of Leader of Rand's Ashaman. Consider the following rhyme:

 

For Want of a Nail

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.

For want of a shoe the horse was lost.

For want of a horse the rider was lost.

For want of a rider the message was lost.

For want of a message the battle was lost.

For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.

And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

 

This essentially summarizes medieval thought on chaos theory, by pointing out the butterfly effect. It's famously referenced by Shakespeare in Richard III. In fact, I think there are intentional parallels in the WoT taken from Richard III (historical or Shakespeare) in connection to Taim, Logain, Demandred, the Battle for the Black Tower (Richard III, Richmond, Buckingham, The Battle of Bosworth Field).

 

... And so I guess the point of my steam-of-consciousness here is that Demandred strongly based on Henry Stafford (The Kingmaker), 2nd Duke of Buckingham. Maybe I should have posted this in a Demandred topic. Thoughts? Feedback?

 

Keep going. I love this sort of thing, and you have my attention.

[Suttree]

And it's amazing how slippery RJ and BS can be with their answers..

 

This with RJ at least is entirely over blown(it has almost become like an urban legend in certain sections of the fandom). He usually gave straight forward or RAFO answers, anything AS like was few and far between. Not to mention as pointed out there is nothing slippery about the pertinent quote.

[herid]

while Taim is not Be'lal and we now know for sure that he is not Moridin, I feel quite strongly that there is more to Taim that has been revealed so far. All the old arguments in favor of Taim=Moridin point to a very strong connection between Taim and Moridin (or at the very least with some Forsaken). He is clearly a protegee of Moridin and has been groomed by Moridin for a while. Taim is using Moridin's colors. He shares the Forsaken disdain for the Aiel. Someone taught him the Old Tongue, history, AOL heraldic, channeling (it's fairly clear that Taim knew how to make gateways before Rand showed him). Taim knows the antisweating trick and he teaches it to Rand. This is something that Taim had to be taught and could not discover by himself. Same with the test to detect the channeling ability. Absolutely no way he could have figured it out by himself. The test is very lengthy and subtle and the test subjects are very few. Clearly someone taught him. Right generous of them, isn't it. Hardly common behavior of a Forsaken towards a regular DF. All the Forsaken including Moridin treat them like dogs and don't teach them more than they must. Why would they teach Taim so much?

[hjustinpace]

while Taim is not Be'lal and we now know for sure that he is not Moridin, I feel quite strongly that there is more to Taim that has been revealed so far. All the old arguments in favor of Taim=Moridin point to a very strong connection between Taim and Moridin (or at the very least with some Forsaken). He is clearly a protegee of Moridin and has been groomed by Moridin for a while. Taim is using Moridin's colors. He shares the Forsaken disdain for the Aiel. Someone taught him the Old Tongue, history, AOL heraldic, channeling (it's fairly clear that Taim knew how to make gateways before Rand showed him). Taim knows the antisweating trick and he teaches it to Rand. This is something that Taim had to be taught and could not discover by himself. Same with the test to detect the channeling ability. Absolutely no way he could have figured it out by himself. The test is very lengthy and subtle and the test subjects are very few. Clearly someone taught him. Right generous of them, isn't it. Hardly common behavior of a Forsaken towards a regular DF. All the Forsaken including Moridin treat them like dogs and don't teach them more than they must. Why would they teach Taim so much?

 

Taim as special protege of Ishmael (the only Forsaken not threatened by new Forsaken because both he and the DO consider him clearly above the others) seems to be the most plausible theory by a longshot right now. Hopefully we'll learn more.

[Cybertrolloc]

We've seen the gauntlet + bolts at least one other place: it was a detail on Sammael's chair in TaR I think.

 

I have personality problems with Be'lal = Taim, especially LoC, Taim's curt and derisive of swords, Be'lal was the opposite (think there's a few other things even though we see like 5 pages total of Be'lal). Believe what's described of his body language/posture is similar to Dem in that book as well, but it's mostly Rand PoV which is mostly notice nothing around you and moon over Avi. Taim at Damai's Wells through Perrin was just plain weird...but probably won't be explained (and I'm sure people looked for similar Perrin sniff-o-vision description and come up empty).

[hjustinpace]

We've seen the gauntlet + bolts at least one other place: it was a detail on Sammael's chair in TaR I think.

 

I have personality problems with Be'lal = Taim, especially LoC, Taim's curt and derisive of swords, Be'lal was the opposite (think there's a few other things even though we see like 5 pages total of Be'lal). Believe what's described of his body language/posture is similar to Dem in that book as well, but it's mostly Rand PoV which is mostly notice nothing around you and moon over Avi. Taim at Damai's Wells through Perrin was just plain weird...but probably won't be explained (and I'm sure people looked for similar Perrin sniff-o-vision description and come up empty).

 

Good point on swords. And as far as "personality" goes, Be'lal screamed "I should be played by Anthony Hopkins in the movie" and Taim never gave me that impression at all.

[Barid Bel Medar]

Ha, I didn't mean to start up a whole thing about Be'lal.

 

I was joking when I mentioned him, Be'lal is gone, no way he is coming back.

[Neophyte]

Do you see where joking gets you, Barid Bel? DO YOU!!??

 

Back into the seals with you. And no playing with your "playthings!"

[FarShainMael]

Ha, I didn't mean to start up a whole thing about Be'lal.

 

I was joking when I mentioned him, Be'lal is gone, no way he is coming back.

 

Well, it passes the time until January.

[Barid Bel Medar]

Do you see where joking gets you, Barid Bel? DO YOU!!??

 

Back into the seals with you. And no playing with your "playthings!"

 

 

Well, it passes the time until January.

 

A whole new spin on the Chapter "For What has been Wrought"

 

There, holding to his greatest rival, Demandred began to weep.

 

The gathered Aes Sedai, Tariens and Aiel watched solemnly. None shuffled or turned away. Demandred squeezed his eyes shut. "I'm sorry Lews Therin," he whispered. Min could barely hear. "I'm so sorry."

 

"It's all right, Barid. It's all right."

 

"Be'lal... Taim.... I've done so much that is terrible."

 

[Terez]

And it's amazing how slippery RJ and BS can be with their answers..

 

The thing is, this isn't an example of RJ being "slippery," it's a case of ... amateur ... reporting in very clear context. The incomplete part is designated as another name, not another phrase.

 

What's amateur about it? By the way, Matt Hatch transcribed that one from a recording.

[Neophyte]

And it's amazing how slippery RJ and BS can be with their answers..

 

The thing is, this isn't an example of RJ being "slippery," it's a case of ... amateur ... reporting in very clear context. The incomplete part is designated as another name, not another phrase.

 

What's amateur about it? By the way, Matt Hatch transcribed that one from a recording.

 

Amateur, in contrast with professional.

 

1. From the standpoint of "professional" with the connotation of "skilled and thorough" it was not thorough, because we don't have the whole thing. The level of "skill" is debatable, since we don't know why the transcription was incomplete; the recording equipment could have been poorly placed, or there could be transcription error, we simply don't know. The reason we don't know is that it is incomplete. So, it was not done in a "skilled and thorough" way. I've done voice recording and transcription for both academic and judicial purposes, and incompleteness is unprofessional. Either the recording equipment was not set properly, or whoever did the transcription failed to be thorough. My guess is that the fault is in the quality of the recording, which is perfectly understandable - for an amateur recorder.

 

In addition, a "professional" reporter would have asked for some clarification of the pretty garbled syntax on RJ's part. His meaning is only clear because of external context.

 

2. From the standpoint of "professional" with the connotation of "credentialed and paid" I admit I just made an assumption. Were the people involved in this reporting paid and credentialed journalists?

 

As it is, I assume that those involved in this reporting are dedicated but amateur, and that is the reason for the missing information. If they are professional, then the reason for the missing information would be incompetence ...

[Terez]

Professional transcriptions are never perfect; not only do they often have [unintelligible] designations but I've caught mistakes in them several times.

[Neophyte]

Professional transcriptions are never perfect; not only do they often have [unintelligible] designations but I've caught mistakes in them several times.

 

There is a difference between the speaker being unintelligible and the recording being poor, or the transcriber making an error. If the speaker is genuinely unintelligible, then of course no one can do anything about it, professional or not. (Well, except ask the speaker to repeat or clarify his/her statement. If Jordan was unintelligible, someone could have asked for clarification. There is no record of such a request, though it would be expected of a professional reporter.)

 

But that is apparently not the case here. The transcription doesn't indicate that Jordan was unintelligible. It says he "(names someone else)". If Jordan was truly unintelligible, then how does the transcriber know that he "(names someone else)"? There is something missing - either the transcriber is giving a best-guess interpolation by saying that a name comes next, or he knows that a name comes next because he heard and understood it, and simply chose not to transcribe it for a reason which is not given. Either choice would be unacceptable if this were a professional endeavor.

 

But this is not a professional endeavor - it is, by definition, amateur. I'm not sure why you're apparently offended by my use of the word. Does anyone actually expect that fan reporting would be held to professional benchmarks and standards?

 

Calling this reporting "amateur" does not impugn the intent or dedication of those who did it. But it does mean that there is an element of unreliability in it. I don't see how that can be reasonably disputed given the way which the reported quote ends.

 

Edit to add: And yes, there are occasions when paid and credentialed professionals fail to uphold the quality standards which ought to be expected of them. In cases like that, they are giving an amateurish performance. In a paid professional, consistently amateurish performance is an indication of incompetence. If I turned in reports that ended the way this one did on a regular basis, my job would not be secure (or in the past, I would have gotten a bad grade).

[OptimusPrime]

I aint even read the damn prologue and I dont like it!

[Terez]

Professional transcriptions are never perfect; not only do they often have [unintelligible] designations but I've caught mistakes in them several times.

 

There is a difference between the speaker being unintelligible and the recording being poor, or the transcriber making an error.

 

The problem here is that you've made an assumption that it was either because of a poor recording or poor transcription. And fan Q&A sessions are not like interviews with reporters; asking for a clarification is not always an option. Either you're in a press-conference-type situation where you have to raise a hand and hope to be recognized, or you're at a signing table with limited time to ask questions.

[MasterAblar]

I aint even read the damn prologue and I dont like it!

 

Hmm, I can't imagine why...

[Neophyte]

Professional transcriptions are never perfect; not only do they often have [unintelligible] designations but I've caught mistakes in them several times.

 

There is a difference between the speaker being unintelligible and the recording being poor, or the transcriber making an error.

 

The problem here is that you've made an assumption that it was either because of a poor recording or poor transcription. And fan Q&A sessions are not like interviews with reporters; asking for a clarification is not always an option. Either you're in a press-conference-type situation where you have to raise a hand and hope to be recognized, or you're at a signing table with limited time to ask questions.

 

I understand the problems, but because of the fact and nature of the missing information, it has to be either an inadequate recording or poor transcription. And yes, booksigning Q&A's are not professional situations, so not getting professional results is perfectly understandable. It doesn't change the fact that they aren't professional results.

 

I am not attacking the reporter! I'm assessing the reliability of the information.

 

Edit to add: I chose the word "amateur" with deliberation, since it describes the situation accurately. If I meant to attack the reporter I would have said "incompetent" or "clumsy" or "inept." But I don't think an attack is warranted or desirable, and I don't think those descriptors are either appropriate or (more importantly) accurate.

[OptimusPrime]

I aint even read the damn prologue and I dont like it!

 

Hmm, I can't imagine why...

You're joking?