[R]Results of missing death
Jaak Suurpere
The first time Death was absent was in Mort. And Alberto said it was
the first over 2000 years.
What happened was that the knots might be left unattended. Fortunately
Ysabell knew how to do it.
The second time was in Reaper Man. Death was deposed.
Notably, people still died, as the wizards stressed.A few became
undead. Most apperently died as normal.
However, there was a buildup of life force. Which caused a number of
weird results. But ultimately also the emergence of a new Death. Who
would presumably have ended the trouble.
The third time was in Soul Music. Due to presence of Death´s heiress,
there was no buildup of life force.
(She would have been living during Reaper Man, too. Or did Death´s
deposition disqualify her from inheriting as the new Death?)
What are the consequences of successful morticide?
Death suffered no trouble, perhaps because, as exDeath, he was
eligible to resume office despite deposition.
Had Adam insisted on morticide, would he have destroyed the world, or
merely caused temporary vital buildup followed by emergence of new
Death?
Marco Villalta
> What happens if there is no Death?
> The first time Death was absent was in Mort. And Alberto said it was
> the first over 2000 years.
> What happened was that the knots might be left unattended. Fortunately
> Ysabell knew how to do it.
> The second time was in Reaper Man. Death was deposed.
> Notably, people still died, as the wizards stressed.A few became
> undead. Most apperently died as normal.
> However, there was a buildup of life force. Which caused a number of
> weird results. But ultimately also the emergence of a new Death. Who
> would presumably have ended the trouble.
> The third time was in Soul Music. Due to presence of Death´s heiress,
> there was no buildup of life force.
> (She would have been living during Reaper Man, too. Or did Death´s
> deposition disqualify her from inheriting as the new Death?)
Susan was too young to step in as a Death in Reaper Man. This
was explained from context in Soul Music.
Corgi p/b edition, p. 84:
"[Albert:] '[...] Only he's... gone away. To think things over,
or something. What I reckon's happening is you're being sucked
in. It's in the bone. You're old enough now. There's a hole
and it thinks you're the right shape. [...]'"
And further, on p. 87-88:
"'Last time he went off, people stopped dyin',' said Albert.
'But they ain't stopped dyin' this time. And the horse went to
her. *She's* fillin' the hole.'"
And in between those pages we learn that the Sto Helit family
stopped visiting Death when Susan was four years old. In RM we
learn that Death has "lost contact with his daughter", and AFAICR
--can't find the page in SM now -- Susan was six or seven by
then.
If we're to get scientific about this, it seems that a relative
of Death's (Mortson? Nah...) has the powers from day one, but
they are dormant/latent and don't actually kick in until a
certain age.
--
Marco Villalta
This is a.f.p -- expect anything!
(Read the FAQs!)
Jaak Suurpere
<delete.all.befor...@cybermejl.com> =====
How was he affected by absence of death?
------------------------------------------------------------
Get your FREE web-based e-mail and newsgroup access at:
http://MailAndNews.com
Create a new mailbox, or access your existing IMAP4 or
POP3 mailbox from anywhere with just a web browser.
------------------------------------------------------------
Morpheus
news:3C24...@MailAndNews.com...
But Mort?
How was he affected by absence of death?
-Mort wasn't a relative (so to speak) but Ysabell should have been affected.
Unless her "Deathness" transferred itself to Susan when she was born.
Jaak Suurpere
But Mort was trained Death, which Ysabell wasn't. As was demonstrated
in the duel: Mort could use Death sword to fight Death, while Ysabell
couldn't.
Len Oil
> "Jaak Suurpere" <jaa...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
[Edit to clarifying the precedence and question]
> > But Mort?
> > How was he affected by absence of death [In RM]?
> -Mort wasn't a relative (so to speak) but Ysabell should have been
affected.
> Unless her "Deathness" transferred itself to Susan when she was born.
Two possible solutions:
A) It's holistic, and the "Deathness" became strong through dilution, as it
were...
B) Susan inherited part of her nature from Mort and part from Ysabell, Mort
being able to pass down aspects of "The Duty" and Ysabell the more permanent
aspects of "Being Death" which were probably mostly dormant without a
purpose to put them to.
--
Len Oil,
the man with no imaginative .sig yet.
Marco Villalta
Just passing in a few of my thoughts here, don't know if it's
really a reply to anyone.
As I have told before, my way into the Discworld was through the
animated Soul Music. There I picked up (made) my theory of how,
"scientifically" speaking, Death's family was "created", and I
like to stick to it, *even if* Pterry's official explanation is
"morphic resonance".
BTW, before I proceed, this theory *could* be interpreted as
"speculation", even if I for one think it's not. But the point
is that it won't matter, since Pterry has officially left a.f.p.
I think it's all in the slap. In _Mort_, when Death stroke Mort,
I've always believed that he in fact scratched or clawed him
(that's what it looked like on screen), and in that scraped off a
few "cells", such as he might have,[1] and the Deathly DNA[2] [3]
blended with Mort's. As such it would be Mort's part of Susan's
genome that's solely responsible for her Deathliness[4] -- after
all, Ysabell was "only" adopted.
As to why Mort wasn't "called" in RM, that's anyone's guess.[5]
But I think it's either because Mort so fiercely renounced the
Deathliness -- which we *know* he did -- or because the gene
hadn't kicked in yet. In other words, Mort *acquired* the gene,
put it wasn't until it was *passed on* that it started working --
though at first dormant, as I said before. Or a combination of
both the above.
There are probably as many theories as there are afpers, or even
more. This was my part.[6] Ta.
--------
[1] Death *is* an antropomorfic personification, and a
meticulous one at that. He seems to have studied humans quite
thoroughly, so why not have bone cells? After all, in SM Albert
does say about Susan's abilities that "it's in the bone"... Time
to get my coat yet?
[2] Morphic resonance is all very well, but morphic genetics
takes it one step further. :-)
[3] *Not* Douglas Adams. Deoxyribonucleic acid. So there.
[4] Which seems to imply the gene is dominant.
[5] Except for being an essential plot device, hrm.
[6] And Scully's.
--
Marco Villalta
"Crucifixion? Good..."
"Oh, God, he heard us..."
-- Terry Pratchett and a victim at the 2001 Aberdeen signing
Richard Eney
Marco Villalta <ma...@cybermejl.com> wrote:
>Len Oil <len...@lenoil.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> "Morpheus" <r...@eeeee.eee> wrote:
>> > "Jaak Suurpere" <jaa...@MailAndNews.com> wrote:
>> > > But Mort?
>> > > How was he affected by absence of death [In RM]?
>> > -Mort wasn't a relative (so to speak) but Ysabell should have been
>> Two possible solutions:
>> A) It's holistic, and the "Deathness" became strong through dilution,
>> as it were...
>> B) Susan inherited part of her nature from Mort and part from Ysabell
<snip>
>> which were probably mostly dormant without a purpose to put them to.
A third possibility:
Mort and Ysabell had died before the start of RM, but Susan wasn't old
enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8, and she
wasn't affected until age 16 (legally old enough to leave school, in
the UK).
<snip>
>BTW, before I proceed, this theory *could* be interpreted as
>"speculation", even if I for one think it's not. But the point
>is that it won't matter, since Pterry has officially left a.f.p.
>
>I think it's all in the slap. In _Mort_, when Death stroke Mort,
>I've always believed that he in fact scratched or clawed him
>(that's what it looked like on screen), and in that scraped off a
>few "cells", such as he might have,[1] and the Deathly DNA[2] [3]
>blended with Mort's. As such it would be Mort's part of Susan's
>genome that's solely responsible for her Deathliness[4] -- after
>all, Ysabell was "only" adopted.
<snip>
>[1] Death *is* an antropomorfic personification, and a
>meticulous one at that. He seems to have studied humans quite
>thoroughly, so why not have bone cells? After all, in SM Albert
>does say about Susan's abilities that "it's in the bone"... Time
>to get my coat yet?
I'm impressed. I don't necessarily agree, but I think that
a totally new theory appearing on afp is cause for celebration.
Please, somebody repost this theory on abp.
=Tamar
Morpheus
news:9vr7mp$ref$1...@saltmine.radix.net...
>
> Mort and Ysabell had died before the start of RM, but Susan wasn't old
> enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8, and she
> wasn't affected until age 16 (legally old enough to leave school, in
> the UK).
>
tense in RM and he would certainly know if she had died (he witnessed her
death after all) so Ysabell must have still been alive then.
Richard Eney
>> enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8, and she
>> wasn't affected until age 16 (legally old enough to leave school, in
>> the UK).
>>
>Except that Death (or Bill Door) referred to his daughter in the present
>tense in RM and he would certainly know if she had died (he witnessed her
>death after all) so Ysabell must have still been alive then.
You'd think so. OTOH, in SM Susan goes back to discuss some things and
sees the old, pre-RM version of Death at the site - at least he seems not
to have had the RM experiences yet in that scene. It's been a while since
I've reread RM and SM, did she go back in time yet again? When she first
takes over she notices the fields and wonders why he made them, but he
seems so much the older Duty-bound Death when she talks to him that he
seems almost untouched by the humanizing effects of RM.
It just occurred to me to wonder - were the fields in Death's realm the
spirits of the grain he mowed down during RM?
=Tamar
Beth Winter
> In article <HudU7.6146$Q06....@tor-nn1.netcom.ca>,
> Morpheus <car...@miskatonic.edu> wrote:
> >"Richard Eney" <dic...@Radix.Net> wrote in message
> >>
> >> Mort and Ysabell had died before the start of RM, but Susan wasn't old
> >> enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8, and she
> >> wasn't affected until age 16 (legally old enough to leave school, in
> >> the UK).
> >>
> >Except that Death (or Bill Door) referred to his daughter in the present
> >tense in RM and he would certainly know if she had died (he witnessed her
> >death after all) so Ysabell must have still been alive then.
>
> You'd think so. OTOH, in SM Susan goes back to discuss some things and
> sees the old, pre-RM version of Death at the site - at least he seems not
> to have had the RM experiences yet in that scene. It's been a while since
> I've reread RM and SM, did she go back in time yet again? When she first
> takes over she notices the fields and wonders why he made them, but he
> seems so much the older Duty-bound Death when she talks to him that he
> seems almost untouched by the humanizing effects of RM.
When she talks to him, it's the end of "Mort" - she watches his fight with Mort
and the lifetimer incident. I do believe Ysabell and Mort died at the beginning
of Soul Music, a few months before the main action starts - I don't recall any
clues that would point to their dying years before.
--
Beth Winter
The Discworld Compendium <http://go.to/thediscworldcompendium>
"To absent friends, lost loves, old gods and the season of mists."
-- Neil Gaiman
martin rz500
>
> Except that Death (or Bill Door) referred to his daughter in the present
> tense in RM and he would certainly know if she had died (he witnessed her
> death after all) so Ysabell must have still been alive then.
Somewhere in Soul Music (1) Death says something that he remembers
everything, including that which has yet to happen. The implication
is that even if Ysabell is alive 'now', Death remembers her dying.
Conversely, even if she is dead 'now', Death is still at that time
when she is alive.
My problem (2) is that its very hard to use past / present / future
tense when describing an entity that lives outside that frame of
reference.
(1) no idea what proper tags to use... I gave up TLA 101 the first
time I saw PCMCIA in print.
(2) in this specific case...
Richard Eney
Beth Winter <ren...@astercity.net> wrote:
>Richard Eney wrote:
>> >> Mort and Ysabell had died before the start of RM, but Susan wasn't old
>> >> enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8
>> in SM Susan goes back to discuss some things and
>> sees the old, pre-RM version of Death at the site - at least
>> he seems not to have had the RM experiences yet in that scene.
>When she talks to him, it's the end of "Mort" - she watches his fight
>with Mort and the lifetimer incident. I do believe Ysabell and Mort died
>at the beginning of Soul Music, a few months before the main action
>starts - I don't recall any clues that would point to their dying
>years before.
ISTR the message coming to the school when Susan was eight years old.
"The child aged eight" or something like that. The book is not handy
right now for me to check.
=Tamar
Beth Winter
Mine is. There's talk of an essay from when she was six, and a drawing from when
she was seven. No mention of how old she is at the time of her parents' death.
Tom Saul
news:dd89223f.01122...@posting.google.com...
<bigus snipus>
> (1) no idea what proper tags to use... I gave up TLA 101 the first
> time I saw PCMCIA in print.
Simple:
People Can't Memorise Computer Industry Acronyms.
Or IIRC:
Personal Computer Memory Card Interface Architecture.
But it could also be:
Puzzling and Confusing, Mightily Confounding Insane Acronym.
HTH,
Tom.
Marco Villalta
> A third possibility:
>
> Mort and Ysabell had died before the start of RM, but Susan wasn't old
> enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8, and she
> wasn't affected until age 16 (legally old enough to leave school, in
> the UK).
This has already been replied to, but I'll do it as well: No, I
don't think they died that much earlier. I got the feeling they
died the month, maybe only a couple of weeks, before the "main
action" in SM. Sorry, no refs, the book is currently 1800 km
away. Me, being stupid, didn't bring any Pterry books.
> <snip>
>
> Marco Villalta <ma...@cybermejl.com> wrote:
>
> >I think it's all in the slap. In _Mort_, when Death stroke Mort,
> >I've always believed that he in fact scratched or clawed him
> >(that's what it looked like on screen), and in that scraped off a
> >few "cells", such as he might have,[1] and the Deathly DNA[2] [3]
> >blended with Mort's. As such it would be Mort's part of Susan's
> >genome that's solely responsible for her Deathliness[4] -- after
> >all, Ysabell was "only" adopted.
>
> <snip>
>
> >[1] Death *is* an antropomorfic personification, and a
> >meticulous one at that. He seems to have studied humans quite
> >thoroughly, so why not have bone cells? After all, in SM Albert
> >does say about Susan's abilities that "it's in the bone"... Time
> >to get my coat yet?
>
> I'm impressed. I don't necessarily agree, but I think that
> a totally new theory appearing on afp is cause for celebration.
Now *I'm* boggled. At my own weirdness, and the fact that nobody
else has had the same theory before (or at least a *similar*).
Was it really that far-fetched? Or, not far-fetched, but... ah,
never mind.
> Please, somebody repost this theory on abp.
Quite a bit of time has passed since Tamar's post.[1] Did anyone
do this? If yes, how did it turn out? I don't subscribe to
a.b.p, so I don't know, but I certainly *would like* to know how
my own theory is holding up.
If no, then I volounteer [2] to do it. Cross-posted to a.f.p, of
course, so that I can follow the discussion.
--------
[1] At least by Usenet standards, or at least by a.f.p
standards, where everything older than a week or so is *ancient*!
[2] "You should never volounteer to anything..."
Donovan Porter
> I've always believed that he in fact scratched or clawed him
> (that's what it looked like on screen), and in that scraped off a
> few "cells", such as he might have,[1] and the Deathly DNA[2] [3]
> blended with Mort's. As such it would be Mort's part of Susan's
> genome that's solely responsible for her Deathliness[4] -- after
> all, Ysabell was "only" adopted.
>
Hhmmm...for Mort to be affected, the cause wouldn't have been
genetic...he might have needed something equivalent to an organ
transplant to get a constant dose of Deathness.
For Susan to be affected, the cause would have to have been
genetic...and then only if Mort got knackered in the gonads...hence
the Death DNA etc
Danny
the following stuff about Re: [R]Results of missing death:
>Richard Eney <dic...@Radix.Net> wrote:
>
>> A third possibility:
>>
>> Mort and Ysabell had died before the start of RM, but Susan wasn't old
>> enough yet to be affected. They seem to have die when she was 8, and she
>> wasn't affected until age 16 (legally old enough to leave school, in
>> the UK).
>
>This has already been replied to, but I'll do it as well: No, I
>don't think they died that much earlier. I got the feeling they
>died the month, maybe only a couple of weeks, before the "main
>action" in SM. Sorry, no refs, the book is currently 1800 km
>away. Me, being stupid, didn't bring any Pterry books.
I'll agree with you - we can assume with good certainty that Mort and Ysabell's
death didn't happen long before Susan filled in the role... because the reason
*why* Death went "away" and "wanted to forget" was because he was *sad* about
having to take Mort & Ysabell's life. He wanted to forget their death, and
thus left the duty....
... and so Susan was chosen to fill in.
Seeya. Danny.
--
E-Mail: Danny (at) scoutnet dot net dot au
Terry Pratchett
I've come in late to this and can't even be sure who wrote:
>> >I think it's all in the slap. In _Mort_, when Death stroke Mort,
>> >I've always believed that he in fact scratched or clawed him
>> >(that's what it looked like on screen), and in that scraped off a
>> >few "cells", such as he might have,[1] and the Deathly DNA[2] [3]
>> >blended with Mort's. As such it would be Mort's part of Susan's
>> >genome that's solely responsible for her Deathliness[4] -- after
>> >all, Ysabell was "only" adopted.
Discworld is a magical universe. Mort for a time *was* Death. Ysabell
'lived' in Death's house for, shall we say, a long time. On Discworld,
genetics isn't only a matter of DNA.
--
Terry Pratchett
Marco Villalta
> I've come in late to this and can't even be sure who wrote:
That would have been me.
[A few facts sink in.]
Hey, that's the first follow-up I've had from Pterry! Cool. Hot
damn! I can feel veneration creeping up on me.
<fx: spins around and stabs Veneration in the throat>
That's dealt with that...[1] So, lets see:
> >> >I think it's all in the slap. In _Mort_, when Death stroke Mort,
> >> >I've always believed that he in fact scratched or clawed him
> >> >(that's what it looked like on screen), and in that scraped off a
> >> >few "cells", such as he might have,[1] and the Deathly DNA[2] [3]
> >> >blended with Mort's. As such it would be Mort's part of Susan's
> >> >genome that's solely responsible for her Deathliness[4] -- after
> >> >all, Ysabell was "only" adopted.
>
> Discworld is a magical universe. Mort for a time *was* Death. Ysabell
> 'lived' in Death's house for, shall we say, a long time. On Discworld,
> genetics isn't only a matter of DNA.
Yeah, well. I know that, really. And I never claimed the theory
to be *correct*, did I? AIR,[2] I said that "There I picked up
(made) my theory [...] and I like to stick to it, *even if*
Pterry's official explanation is 'morphic resonance'." You can't
beat personal theories.[3]
Oh, hang on. I can't expect you to know that, because Tamar
snipped that part, and I didn't re-include it. And you can't be
expected to catch up that far back -- ISTR you had already left
us at that point. Stand by... <goes Googling>
OK, here's my ("mis"-quoted) post in full:
http://groups.google.it/groups?hl=it&selm=MPG.168b3ba870413b34989
727%40news.tiscali.se
... and here's the entire thread:
http://groups.google.it/groups?hl=it&threadm=tKEmyKA2pXR8EAl%2B%4
0unseen.demon.co.uk&prev=/groups%3Fnum%3D25%26hl%3Dit%26group%3Da
lt.fan.pratchett%26start%3D75%26group%3Dalt.fan.pratchett
Anyway, come to think of it, I think we all [4] know that on the
Disc, normal rules don't apply.[5] That's never stopped us from
making up our own theories, and discussing your books until they
disintegrate, has it? >;-)
Oh, and let me join the choir wishing you welcome back to a.f.p.
Welcome back. :-)
--------
[1] Sorry people, but when an idea gets into my head, it sits
there.
[2] And I know, pedanting Pterry is a Bad Idea. Unless you want
many many people giving you hard stares.
[3] And if Aquarion says "oh yes you can", I will hang him.
[4] For certain values of "we", and certain values of "all".
[5] Although finding any "normal rules" in my theory can be a
challenge...
--
Marco Villalta
The Patrician is my mentor.