Why do the Aiel hate the Aes Sedai?
Tetsuo
I'm hoping someone out there can help me, a friend lent me the first 6 books
of WoT (i went and bought seven and eight) and so I can't exactly check for
myself:)
I was just wondering why the Aiel hate the Aes Sedai...I remember they served
them before the Breaking following the Way of the Leaf or whatever...then they
were exiled to the Three Fold Land...then they came back and you would think
they would view Aes Sedai again with the same reverence but instead they claim
the Aes Sedai failed them???
Sorry if this is in the FAQ, I wouldn't know where that is either:(
Tetsuo
John S. Novak, III
>I was just wondering why the Aiel hate the Aes Sedai...I remember they served
>them before the Breaking following the Way of the Leaf or whatever...then they
>were exiled to the Three Fold Land...then they came back and you would think
>they would view Aes Sedai again with the same reverence but instead they claim
>the Aes Sedai failed them???
Generally speaking, because the Aiel are twits.
Recall that the Aiel believe they were sent into the desert as a
punishment for some crime (which is wrong) and that they were the
servants of the Aes Sedai (true). The logical conclusion is that they
sinned, somehow, against the Aes Sedai.
What the Wise Ones (moreso than the Clan Chiefs, really, and much
moreso than the typical Aiel warrior) have done with this interesting
little mix of historical contrivance, is build the Aes Sedai up into a
remote pantheon of perfect, crystal goddesses. "The Aes Sedai are
perfect, the Aes Sedai will know what to do, we will serve the Aes
Sedai faithfully and they shall, in their perfection, live up to all
our expectations and save us all."
Sadly for the Aiel, the Aes Sedai are no more and no less human than
the rest of us. That the Aes Sedai had forgotten almost as much of
the past as the Aiel (and different parts, no less, so that the Aiel
just automatically assume they are right and the Aes Sedai are wrong)
was a terrible blow. The idea that the Aes Sedai had political
factions, rather than being perfectly united in their goal was another
blow-- a logical consequence of perfection is infallibility. Faction
politics implies very strongly that someone ain't perfect.
The killing blow was when the Aes Sedai made the horrible
transgression of not only not living up to perfection, but of not
subscribing to the same rigid and absurd form of cultural honor
(ji'e'toh) as the Aiel. The Aiel at large figuring out that the Black
Ajah is real would probably be even worse.
This ignores, of course, the fact that the Aiel themselves are rife
with members who don't even begin to live up to ji'e'toh. The entire
mass following Couladin and Sevanna blew that out of the water.
The simple answer is, the Aes Sedai are not what the Aiel had been
promising themselves that the Aes Sedai would be. They're fallen
idols. Human nature reserves a particular kind of loathing for fallen
idols.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
The Humblest Man on the Net
DriztDo
>served
>>them before the Breaking following the Way of the Leaf or whatever...then
>they
>>were exiled to the Three Fold Land...then they came back and you would think
>
>>they would view Aes Sedai again with the same reverence but instead they
>claim
>>the Aes Sedai failed them???
>Recall that the Aiel believe they were sent into the desert as a
>punishment for some crime (which is wrong)
Well, they weren't sent out to the desert as a punishment, but they were cast
out of the Jenn Aiel becuase they killed.
-------------------
Matt McKenzie
Dri...@aol.com
"If it wasn't for my horse, I wouldn't have ever spent that year in college."
-girl at IHOP
Raknar44
these are not true aes sedai. The true aes sedai that they did honor and serve
no longer exist, but they dont know that.over three thousand years of exile
they had an image handed down generation to generation.Whereas the aes sedai
because they had to deal with everyday society changed with the times to what
we see in the books as haughty , arrogant ,in your face people that are used
to having people cringe at the mention of there name.thus the aiel hold them in
contempt because in there societyno one is above any one else
my opinion
raknar
John S. Novak, III
<ser...@mail2.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>: What the Wise Ones (moreso than the Clan Chiefs, really, and much
>: moreso than the typical Aiel warrior) have done with this interesting
>: little mix of historical contrivance, is build the Aes Sedai up into a
>: remote pantheon of perfect, crystal goddesses. "The Aes Sedai are
>: perfect, the Aes Sedai will know what to do, we will serve the Aes
>: Sedai faithfully and they shall, in their perfection, live up to all
>: our expectations and save us all."
>You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Aiel Chiefs and Wise Ones have the
>most accurate knowledge of the character of the Age of Legends Aes Sedai
>through the Rhuidein ter'angreal. They are able to view the Aes Sedai
>throw their ancestors eyes.
The problem though, is that while this information may be "the most
accurate" of all the information available to the Aiel, that doesn't
say a lot in real terms. Let's look at Rand's visions, and assume
they are typical: We see two scenes, if I recall, with actual Aes
Sedai playing major parts-- one when they send the Aiel off to gaurd
the relics, and one during the founding of Rhuidean. Neither of these
really give a whole lot of detail and insight into the Aes Sedai.
The Aiel have defied the Aes Sedai all on their own, by treating heir
snippets and bits of vision as Gospel and very selectively
interpretting them. Granted, there are good psychological reasons for
the way they've interpretted these things. If, after all, they have
been exiled, and if, after all, they pride themselves on honor as a
people, then it only makes sense that someone with the authority to
set them on a three thousand year penance in the desert is going to be
conflated up to the level of god.
>Thus, they are not building up some impossible
>ideal and getting upset when it is shattered, they are comparing the AS
>now with what they were then and feeling betrayed by people who not only
>don't measure up to what they could be, but actually have less moral
>integrity than people who used to serve and revere them.
Sorry, but I just flatly disbelieve that a society with a use for
something like an Oath Rod or a Binding Chair, or the crystal throne
ter'angreal of the Seanchan is even remotely as happy-happy and
goody-goody as anyone is likely to believe.
By the same token, I refuse to believe that the Aes Sedai of that
period were any more noble than the average human being of today, or
the average Aes Sedai of Rand's time.
>The fact that the Aes Sedai are no better than the rest of the poeple
>around them is a good reason to feel comptempt for them. They are a
>group of people who: live longer, have more resources, and better access
>to knowledge than everyone else, as well as magical powers, and are
>supposedly dedicated to the preservation of good.
You say this like it's any gaurantee of wisdom or nobility.
It's not, because none of it changes human nature even in the
slightest.
You think those of us who are smarter than average are automatically
good and noble? Read history. You think those of us who are stronger
than average are automatically good and noble? Read history. You
think those of us born to lead nations or command armies are
automatically good and noble? Read history. You think those of us
who are older than others are automatically good and noble? Read
history.
Furthermore, it applies just as much to the Aiel, in the persons of
the Wise Ones, and even moreso in some places-- they may not be as
uniformly strong as the Aes Sedai, but some of them aer stronger.
They have gifts the Aes Sedai have not, such as dreamwalking. They
live even _longer_ than the Aes Sedai, and have a similar advantage in
knowledge (at least, cultural knowledge) over their common Aiel.
And yet a goodly number of them have been wrapped right around
Sevanna's little finger, and another goodly number of them have
expressed their inner nobility and wisdom through the physical and
psychological torture of certain Aes Sedai.
The Aiel Wise Ones are every bit as bad as the Aes Sedai.
Worse in some areas, better in others, but on the whole,
reprehensible.
>The Aiel's sense of honor is one of the main things that has allowed them
>to survive in an enviroment that would quickly kill pretty much anyone
>else in Randland.
Their elaborate sense of honor is flat stupid.
It fails the test of reality in the same way that all rigid, explicit
structures of honor fail-- it fails to adapt, and allows for easy
manipulation. The whole Aiel mindset is so brittle that it invites
stupidity like the Bleakness.
>Also, the Aiel never attempted to apply ji'e'toh to the Aes Sedai, or, in
>fact any one outside of themselves. The contempt for the Aes Sedai is
>not based in the majority of the Aiel population, but instead the Wise
>Ones, and their reasons are not mainly grounded in Ji'e'toh. Instead,
>there is a growing realization on the part of the Wise Ones that the Aes
>Sedai, far from being the wise, benevolent protectors that they
>acestrally remember, are arrogant, incompetant, and willing to twist
>anything to get what they want.
Differing precisely _how_ from the Wise Ones?
Differing precisely _how_ from the Maidens of the Spear who beat the
living shit out of Rand for daring not to bring them along on a
military expedition they felt like joining?
The Aiel are no different.
> The Aes Sedai regard the Aiel much as
>you do, calling them savages and disregarding anything the Aiel tell
>them.
I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
because that is precisely what they are.
The Aes Sedai are far from perfect, but so are the Aiel.
>intent, if not through words. The Aes Sedai are pretty much Bill
>Clinton. They also see the Aes Sedai come under a flag of truce and then
>kidnap the person they are meeting with. This is a big no-no under
>almost all forms of morality.
So is beating up your leader because you think he slighted you.
>P.S. I was a little drunk when I wrote this, so please forgive any errors.
No.
Alistair J. R. Young
Raknar44 <rakn...@aol.com> (== jeff)
praised Shub-Internet thus:
> to having people cringe at the mention of there name.thus the aiel hold them in
> contempt because in there societyno one is above any one else
Apart from clan chiefs, Wise Ones, roofmistresses...
--
Computational Thaumaturge -- Sysimperator, dominus retis deusque machinarum.
e-mail: avata...@arkane.demon.co.uk WWW: http://www.arkane.demon.co.uk/
Wanted: Interested parties to join development of a free, non-Unixalike OO
operating system. Email <laura-...@arkane.demon.co.uk>.
"Lasciate ogni speranza, voi ch'intrate." -- 'Inferno', Dante Aligheri
Stephen J Erdman
: On Fri, 01 Jan 1999 11:16:11 GMT, Tetsuo <tet...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
: >I was just wondering why the Aiel hate the Aes Sedai...I remember they served
: >them before the Breaking following the Way of the Leaf or whatever...then they
: >were exiled to the Three Fold Land...then they came back and you would think
: >they would view Aes Sedai again with the same reverence but instead they claim
: >the Aes Sedai failed them???
: Recall that the Aiel believe they were sent into the desert as a
: punishment for some crime (which is wrong) and that they were the
: servants of the Aes Sedai (true). The logical conclusion is that they
: sinned, somehow, against the Aes Sedai.
: What the Wise Ones (moreso than the Clan Chiefs, really, and much
: moreso than the typical Aiel warrior) have done with this interesting
: little mix of historical contrivance, is build the Aes Sedai up into a
: remote pantheon of perfect, crystal goddesses. "The Aes Sedai are
: perfect, the Aes Sedai will know what to do, we will serve the Aes
: Sedai faithfully and they shall, in their perfection, live up to all
: our expectations and save us all."
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Aiel Chiefs and Wise Ones have the
most accurate knowledge of the character of the Age of Legends Aes Sedai
through the Rhuidein ter'angreal. They are able to view the Aes Sedai
throw their ancestors eyes. Thus, they are not building up some impossible
ideal and getting upset when it is shattered, they are comparing the AS
now with what they were then and feeling betrayed by people who not only
don't measure up to what they could be, but actually have less moral
integrity than people who used to serve and revere them.
: Sadly for the Aiel, the Aes Sedai are no more and no less human than
: the rest of us. That the Aes Sedai had forgotten almost as much of
: the past as the Aiel (and different parts, no less, so that the Aiel
: just automatically assume they are right and the Aes Sedai are wrong)
: was a terrible blow. The idea that the Aes Sedai had political
: factions, rather than being perfectly united in their goal was another
: blow-- a logical consequence of perfection is infallibility. Faction
: politics implies very strongly that someone ain't perfect.
The fact that the Aes Sedai are no better than the rest of the poeple
around them is a good reason to feel comptempt for them. They are a
group of people who: live longer, have more resources, and better access
to knowledge than everyone else, as well as magical powers, and are
supposedly dedicated to the preservation of good. Despite these tremendous
advantages, they, as individuals, often behave in a morally reprehensible
fashion, and, as a group, have rules and views that are both
counterproductive and morally deficient. For example, they have arrayed
themselves in a heirarchy based mainly on magic strength that gives
little regard to actual correctness or knowledge, thus propogating the
idea that might makes right. Others abound, but I'm sure you get the
point. They are as bad as people around them. Since they are powerful,
this makes them worse than other people in the same way that a mad (or
evil) king is worse than a peasant similarly afflicted.
: The killing blow was when the Aes Sedai made the horrible
: transgression of not only not living up to perfection, but of not
: subscribing to the same rigid and absurd form of cultural honor
: (ji'e'toh) as the Aiel. The Aiel at large figuring out that the Black
: Ajah is real would probably be even worse.
The Aiel's sense of honor is one of the main things that has allowed them
to survive in an enviroment that would quickly kill pretty much anyone
else in Randland. It has forged them into a people who can pretty much
kick the ass of anyone else in the world. It has also resulted in a
people who stormed over the Dragonwall and wailed on the combined might
of the nations there, but didn't stay for conquest, but instead left
after they'd righted what they felt was wrong. It has also given a
people who are relatively merciful with the lands and peoples that they
capture. Compared to the High Lords in Tear, or the sneaky, twisting,
arrogant incompetancies of the White Tower, or the confused babble that
is so many other nations, I don't find the Aiel's ji'e'toh so absurd. Of
course, maybe you find the workings of the rest of Randland superior, but
then you'd be an idiot.
Also, the Aiel never attempted to apply ji'e'toh to the Aes Sedai, or, in
fact any one outside of themselves. The contempt for the Aes Sedai is
not based in the majority of the Aiel population, but instead the Wise
Ones, and their reasons are not mainly grounded in Ji'e'toh. Instead,
there is a growing realization on the part of the Wise Ones that the Aes
Sedai, far from being the wise, benevolent protectors that they
acestrally remember, are arrogant, incompetant, and willing to twist
anything to get what they want. The Aes Sedai regard the Aiel much as
you do, calling them savages and disregarding anything the Aiel tell
them. A large part of the Salidar power structure nearly dies in the
world of dreams (can't remember the spelling) because they won't listen
to the Aiel dreamwalkers or Egwene or Elayne. The Aes Sedai try to twist
any promise they make so that the letter of it completely different than
the spirit. They want to sweep up all the Aiel channelers and feed them
into their inefficient system and are mystified that the Wise Ones system
is based on merit rather than strength(i.e. Sorilea can't channel at all,
but knows her shit and is a tough leader, thus she leads). The areas
which touch on ji'e'toh touch not on the laws of this itself, but instead
on the total concept of honor. The Aiel see the Aes Sedai get caught
doing things which are wrong and then refusing to take the consequences, but
instead trying to wriggle out of it. They see Aes Sedai lie through
intent, if not through words. The Aes Sedai are pretty much Bill
Clinton. They also see the Aes Sedai come under a flag of truce and then
kidnap the person they are meeting with. This is a big no-no under
almost all forms of morality. In short, the Aiel see that the Aes Sedai
have no honor or personal integrity. The things they do would make most
people look down on them. I do, and I'm not following ji'e'toh. If you
have an explanation that makes these acts honorable, I'd like to hear it.
Otherwise, it seems justified to view the Aes Sedai who do them as akin
to the prototypical laywer, and nobody likes them.
Steve Erdman
Stephen J Erdman
: <ser...@mail2.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
: >: What the Wise Ones (moreso than the Clan Chiefs, really, and much
: >: moreso than the typical Aiel warrior) have done with this interesting
: >: little mix of historical contrivance, is build the Aes Sedai up into a
: >: remote pantheon of perfect, crystal goddesses. "The Aes Sedai are
: >: perfect, the Aes Sedai will know what to do, we will serve the Aes
: >: Sedai faithfully and they shall, in their perfection, live up to all
: >: our expectations and save us all."
: >You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Aiel Chiefs and Wise Ones have the
: >most accurate knowledge of the character of the Age of Legends Aes Sedai
: >through the Rhuidein ter'angreal. They are able to view the Aes Sedai
: >throw their ancestors eyes.
: The problem though, is that while this information may be "the most
: accurate" of all the information available to the Aiel, that doesn't
: say a lot in real terms. Let's look at Rand's visions, and assume
: they are typical: We see two scenes, if I recall, with actual Aes
: Sedai playing major parts-- one when they send the Aiel off to gaurd
: the relics, and one during the founding of Rhuidean. Neither of these
: really give a whole lot of detail and insight into the Aes Sedai.
I think you're misinterpreting the extent of the visions from this trip.
Rand didn't pop in and say "oh wow look at this neat movie that's going on
here"; he _was_ the person he popped into. For a brief time, he was
privy to the inner emotions and knowledge of his ?medium? Since these
Aiel were the closest to Aes Sedai you could be without being Aes Sedai,
it seems like their impressions would be very accurate. The current Aiel
expected the Aes Sedai to be worthy of reverence because their ancestors
did. They know because they were their ancestors.
If you want to argue that the ancient Aes Sedai could deceive the Aiel,
you might have a very weakly tenable theory, but saying that the Aiel
don't have any insight is just wrong, and is proved so in the text.
: Sorry, but I just flatly disbelieve that a society with a use for
: something like an Oath Rod or a Binding Chair, or the crystal throne
: ter'angreal of the Seanchan is even remotely as happy-happy and
: goody-goody as anyone is likely to believe.
Do you have any proof that binding chairs or the Seanchan crystal throne
have any connection to the AOL Aes Sedai? No? I didn't think so. Try
sticking to things you can back up.
The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
humane punishment I can think of.
: By the same token, I refuse to believe that the Aes Sedai of that
: period were any more noble than the average human being of today, or
: the average Aes Sedai of Rand's time.
Any basis for this, or do you just know? If we look at Rand's visions,
it seems like the Aes Sedai were held in extremely high regard - and not
just by the Aiel, but the entire population of Randland at that time.
The man who knocks (forgot the Aiel's name) down is generally upset that
he might have hurt the Aiel, showing a great deal of respect for a
servent of the Aes Sedai. This man also has his hair cut in imitation of
the Aiel, which we learn is very common. This is clear mark of extreme
respect. If this respect is given to the servant's, what respect must
the master (bad terminology, but oh well) get. Also extremely telling is
the fact that the Aes Sedai's closet servants (the Aiel) are sworn to the Way
of the Leaf. Do you think these things are marks of the petty, grasping
society that you seem to envision?
: >The fact that the Aes Sedai are no better than the rest of the poeple
: >around them is a good reason to feel comptempt for them. They are a
: >group of people who: live longer, have more resources, and better access
: >to knowledge than everyone else, as well as magical powers, and are
: >supposedly dedicated to the preservation of good.
: You say this like it's any gaurantee of wisdom or nobility.
: It's not, because none of it changes human nature even in the
: slightest.
: You think those of us who are smarter than average are automatically
: good and noble? Read history. You think those of us who are stronger
: than average are automatically good and noble? Read history. You
: think those of us born to lead nations or command armies are
: automatically good and noble? Read history. You think those of us
: who are older than others are automatically good and noble? Read
: history.
History is almost completely irrelevant to this discussion. Past
leaders in our world not being models of good behavior has little
applicability to this situation. We are discussing a very different
enviroment and times, and we are also talking about the heights that
people can attain, not the depths to which they can sink.
In fact, reading history supports the Aiel's view of the Aes Sedai. We
judge leaders who were morally weak or bad as much worse than the
commons around them. We judge educated people who make seemingly stupid
conclusions as worse than the ignorant people around them. Church leader
are catigated for things that were commonplace during their day. With
power and educatrion comes the responsibility to use that power as well
as possible. The Aes Sedai generally don't do this, either individually or
collectively.
: Furthermore, it applies just as much to the Aiel, in the persons of
: the Wise Ones, and even moreso in some places-- they may not be as
: uniformly strong as the Aes Sedai, but some of them aer stronger.
: They have gifts the Aes Sedai have not, such as dreamwalking. They
: live even _longer_ than the Aes Sedai, and have a similar advantage in
: knowledge (at least, cultural knowledge) over their common Aiel.
Live longer? Where'd you get that idea? I got got the opposite impression.
: The Aiel Wise Ones are every bit as bad as the Aes Sedai.
: Worse in some areas, better in others, but on the whole,
: reprehensible.
The Aiel Wise Ones are in a much harsher enviroment than the Aes Sedai.
They need to use their power and wisdom to help their people survive.
They don't have a sect that is completely devoted to logical
contemplation of problems. Instead, they look for water. Slight
difference in priorities, wouldn't you say? Also, the Wise Ones do
follow a strict moral code, much of which is admirable even to us today.
They are bound by conscience and admit wrong due not to threat of
punishment but instead because they think it's right. In fact, if they
don't admit to wrong doing, they spare themselves punishment. Compare
this to the Aes Sedai, who will do anything they are not explicitly
prohibited from doing and will go to great lengths to spare even the
small punishment of appologizing for a wrong. Who comes out on top?
: >The Aiel's sense of honor is one of the main things that has allowed them
: >to survive in an enviroment that would quickly kill pretty much anyone
: >else in Randland.
: Their elaborate sense of honor is flat stupid.
: It fails the test of reality in the same way that all rigid, explicit
: structures of honor fail-- it fails to adapt, and allows for easy
: manipulation. The whole Aiel mindset is so brittle that it invites
: stupidity like the Bleakness.
Which Randland society would you compare the Aiel to, to show how stupid
and disadvantageous the Aiel code is? The average Aiel is much more
concerned with moral matters and responsibility than the Randland
commoner. Their leaders are concerned with the well-being of their
people and not their own personal glory or power. Power and influence
has no effect at shielding them from doing something wrong. Shadowsworn
are killed no matter what position they hold. Sulin, a leader, does
penance for an offense given to the lowest of their society. Add in the
fact that the Aiel can kick the shit out of any other nation and maybe
you'll understand that their honor is not as stupid as you think. I'd
say it passes the reality test pretty well, acutally.
: Differing precisely _how_ from the Maidens of the Spear who beat the
: living shit out of Rand for daring not to bring them along on a
: military expedition they felt like joining?
Refresh my memory, when did this happen?
: > The Aes Sedai regard the Aiel much as
: >you do, calling them savages and disregarding anything the Aiel tell
: >them.
: I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
: average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
: because that is precisely what they are.
Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
Steve Erdman
Matt Fletcher
> : something like an Oath Rod or a Binding Chair, or the crystal throne
> : ter'angreal of the Seanchan is even remotely as happy-happy and
> : goody-goody as anyone is likely to believe.
> The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
> suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
> Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
> was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
> criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
> humane punishment I can think of.
>
is that there were still individuals who were greedy and small-minded in
the AoL. Some of these people would seem to have been AS
(Mierin/Lanfear, Semirhage).
In addition, there is strong evidence that the Oath Rod reduces life
span. Note that the Kin, Aiel WO (Sorilea), and Cadsuane (and possibly
Verin) apparently never used the oath road and all are notable for their
long life compared to modern day AS (who usually do).
[context Aiel WOs vs. AS]
> Live longer? Where'd you get that idea? I got got the opposite impression.
[snip]
Sorilea is as old as Cadsuane who is _extraordinarily_ old for a modern
day AS. As argued above, this seems to be due to not using the Oath
Rod.
> : Differing precisely _how_ from the Maidens of the Spear who beat the
> : living shit out of Rand for daring not to bring them along on a
> : military expedition they felt like joining?
>
> Refresh my memory, when did this happen?
[snip to end]
When he gets back from Ebou Dar in POD (sorry, no book here, so no page
#s). He takes care of a couple visitors, then the Maidens come in while
he is alone with Min.
Fletch
Arman
Erdman) wrote:
In PoD when Rand was going to attack the Sanchean,, he left the
Maidens of the Spear behind as a way to protect them,,
>
>: > The Aes Sedai regard the Aiel much as
>: >you do, calling them savages and disregarding anything the Aiel tell
>: >them.
>
>: I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
>: average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
>: because that is precisely what they are.
>
>Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
>non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
>Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
>Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
>
>Steve Erdman
// ar...@swipnet.se
----------------------------------------------
Member of The Dragon's Asha'man Society
Member of The Council of Lord of Morning
The Lord Dragon's right hand
----------------------------------------------
Richard M. Boye'
> (snippity doo-dah)
>
> The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
> suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
> Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
> was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
> criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
> humane punishment I can think of.
It would, but for the fact that it stigmatizes the pentitent. I cannot
understand what purposes the AL would have (assuming it is _not_ an
unavoidable side-effect). If the purpose of the oath binding is render
the person being punished safe and no longer a threat, what reason could
they have to mark their faces up so that they stand out in a crowd? To
warn people off? From someone who is no longer a threat? That doesn't
make sense. It would, however, creating a lasting stigma upon the
pentitent, essentially the same as if they had branded their foreheads
"Thief!!"
And the other thing is the truncation of lifespan. Being bound on the
rod robs these people of _centuries_ of life. In Semirhage's case, I'm
not sure her sicko crimes would warrant her forfeiting a half a
millennia of life. I don't blame her for fleeing, personally. Lock her
up in a ward somehere for a determined sentence and then let her go
free. This buisness of intentionally shortening life smacks of capital
punishment (which I'm not sure was warranted. She was a sick woman, not
a murderer.)
On closer inspection, the Oath Rad is far less humane than it seems.
>
> : I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
> : average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
> : because that is precisely what they are.
>
> Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
> non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
> Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
> Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
Nice job. (And people accuse _me_ of pushing emotional buttons)
Savage as in leadership contests like Nadera's and Sulin's are resolved
by one beating the shit out of the other one. Savage in that weddings
involve a kidnapping, where the bride's family and the groom's family
try to beat the shit out of each other. Savage in that they reduce those
prisoners who have given their parole to them into menials and servants.
Savage in that they practice human rights, brainwashing and corporal
punishment abuses upon captives. Savage in that sister-wives assist each
other in disciplining their husband by stabbing him.
The Aiel do have some laudable practices, such as the directive that
noncombants are not to be fucked with, but they are a very butal people.
--
Richard M. Boye' * wa...@webspan.net
http://www.webspan.net/~waldo/ UIN:9021244
"Some men lead lives of quiet desperation.
My desperation makes a pathetic whining sound."
A N Yanez
> Stephen J Erdman wrote:
>
> > (snippity doo-dah)
>
> >
> > The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
> > suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
> > Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
> > was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
> > criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
> > humane punishment I can think of.
>
> It would, but for the fact that it stigmatizes the pentitent. I cannot
> understand what purposes the AL would have (assuming it is _not_ an
> unavoidable side-effect). If the purpose of the oath binding is render
> the person being punished safe and no longer a threat, what reason could
> they have to mark their faces up so that they stand out in a crowd? To
> warn people off? From someone who is no longer a threat? That doesn't
> make sense. It would, however, creating a lasting stigma upon the
> pentitent, essentially the same as if they had branded their foreheads
> "Thief!!"
See, the thing is that they *weren't* penitent. They were simply caught.
The society was such that you had few choices if you were a channeler
caught in wrongdoing: "therapy" (where you were Healed out of your
deviance or criminality), severing, or binding. No one (including the
criminal) saw an alternative (until you start getting cases like
Semirhage). It seems that channelers were held to a higher standard of
accountability than the rest of the population, which makes sense--more
privilege, more responsibility, more chance to fuck up, and higher price
for when you do.
As for the Ageless Look, I don't understand the reasoning of that, either,
unless it was meant to serve as a warning to others and thereby as a
deterrent, and/or a form of public shaming that was deemed to be an
important part of the sentence. The latter makes sense as we know that
public/personal honor and prestige are paramount in the AoL; money and
birth-station don't matter--getting the distinction on a third name, on
the other hand....
> And the other thing is the truncation of lifespan. Being bound on the
> rod robs these people of _centuries_ of life. In Semirhage's case, I'm
> not sure her sicko crimes would warrant her forfeiting a half a
> millennia of life. I don't blame her for fleeing, personally. Lock her
> up in a ward somehere for a determined sentence and then let her go
> free. This buisness of intentionally shortening life smacks of capital
> punishment (which I'm not sure was warranted. She was a sick woman, not
> a murderer.)
Actually, she *was* a murderer. She started out by causing extra pain in
her patients but ended out killing those whom she deemed to be 'unworthy'
of her talents. If binding was only used in cases of a capital nature,
then it becomes a more humane alternative to summary execution--you're
giving the bound the opportunity to make amends and rehabilitate, with the
possibility of reversing the binding.
> On closer inspection, the Oath Rad is far less humane than it seems.
Yes, the Oath Rod is less humane than on first glance--if the intention
was not to allow for rehabilitation.
> > : I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
> > : average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
> > : because that is precisely what they are.
> >
> > Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
> > non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
> > Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
> > Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
>
> Nice job. (And people accuse _me_ of pushing emotional buttons)
It is a nice job, and a perfectly valid point.
> Savage as in leadership contests like Nadera's and Sulin's are resolved
> by one beating the shit out of the other one.
Except that establishes who the better warrior is, gets the tension out
into the open and resolves things rather effectively in such a society.
It works pretty well for most social species on the planet.
Savage in that weddings
> involve a kidnapping, where the bride's family and the groom's family
> try to beat the shit out of each other.
Proving that both conjugants are highly valued--enough to fight for. A
high compliment/endorsement in a warrior culture. And while the fighting
is real, it is ceremonialized
Savage in that they reduce those
> prisoners who have given their parole to them into menials and servants.
For a specific term, during which they are protected by an almost
inviolable code that protects their own sense of dignity and self-worth.
> Savage in that they practice human rights, brainwashing and corporal
> punishment abuses upon captives.
How so? The human rights and brainwashing, I mean?
Savage in that sister-wives assist each
> other in disciplining their husband by stabbing him.
But only in non-vital areas, ensuring that he learns a pointed--but
non-lethal--lesson.
> The Aiel do have some laudable practices, such as the directive that
> noncombants are not to be fucked with, but they are a very butal people.
Of course they are. You don't survive in that kind of environment by
being nice. No extreme-environment culture that I'm aware of has been
what one would necessarily call "nice." Some are more or less hospitable
to outsiders, with differing reactions to people based on family,
clan/tribe, society, nation, and race.
ObSaying: Pissing into the ocean 'cause every little bit helps,
Alberto
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"A true friend stabs you in the front." --Oscar Wilde
Richard M. Boye'
>
> On Tue, 5 Jan 1999, Richard M. Boye' wrote:
>
> > Stephen J Erdman wrote:
> >
> > > (snippity doo-dah)
> >
> > >
> > > The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
> > > suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
> > > Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
> > > was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
> > > criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
> > > humane punishment I can think of.
> >
> > It would, but for the fact that it stigmatizes the pentitent. I cannot
> > understand what purposes the AL would have (assuming it is _not_ an
> > unavoidable side-effect). If the purpose of the oath binding is render
> > the person being punished safe and no longer a threat, what reason could
> > they have to mark their faces up so that they stand out in a crowd? To
> > warn people off? From someone who is no longer a threat? That doesn't
> > make sense. It would, however, creating a lasting stigma upon the
> > pentitent, essentially the same as if they had branded their foreheads
> > "Thief!!"
>
> See, the thing is that they *weren't* penitent. They were simply caught.
They had a choice, IIRC. Accept binding and the ensuing lifespan
truncation, or severing. I suppose penintency is a bit too strong a
word, but by selecting the binding, they were apparantly willing to
continue as "servants" and take as "branded" servants at that.
That implies a level of acknowledgement of culpability rather than
screaming "Fuck you copper!" as they haul you off to the severing pit.
Your cooperation is certainly required to speak the binding oaths.
> As for the Ageless Look, I don't understand the reasoning of that, either,
> unless it was meant to serve as a warning to others and thereby as a
> deterrent, and/or a form of public shaming that was deemed to be an
> important part of the sentence.
Shamed forever? They couldn't decide that the person has suffered
enough, been shunedd enough and liberate them from the AL, because that
would also liberate them from the oath.
> > And the other thing is the truncation of lifespan. Being bound on the
> > rod robs these people of _centuries_ of life. In Semirhage's case, I'm
> > not sure her sicko crimes would warrant her forfeiting a half a
> > millennia of life. I don't blame her for fleeing, personally. Lock her
> > up in a ward somehere for a determined sentence and then let her go
> > free. This buisness of intentionally shortening life smacks of capital
> > punishment (which I'm not sure was warranted. She was a sick woman, not
> > a murderer.)
>
> Actually, she *was* a murderer. She started out by causing extra pain in
> her patients but ended out killing those whom she deemed to be 'unworthy'
> of her talents.
Where are you getting that from? Didn't she sell her soul to the DO
because they wanted to bind her for extracting that extra "something"
from her patients? Ant atrocities committed after that point are not
relevant in determiong the original punishment. Sure she deserves a nice
quick hanging, _now_, but not for the original set of transgressions.
> If binding was only used in cases of a capital nature,
> then it becomes a more humane alternative to summary execution--you're
> giving the bound the opportunity to make amends and rehabilitate, with the
> possibility of reversing the binding.
I don't see that option from the context.
> > > : I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
> > > : average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
> > > : because that is precisely what they are.
> > >
> > > Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
> > > non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
> > > Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
> > > Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
> >
> > Nice job. (And people accuse _me_ of pushing emotional buttons)
>
> It is a nice job, and a perfectly valid point.
> > Savage as in leadership contests like Nadera's and Sulin's are resolved
> > by one beating the shit out of the other one.
>
> Except that establishes who the better warrior is, gets the tension out
> into the open and resolves things rather effectively in such a society.
> It works pretty well for most social species on the planet.
So why don't command struggles in a modern army get resolved by the
officers beating each other up?
Because it's _barbaric_?
Primitives often had justifications for human sacrifice, widow
incineration and head-hunting also. Doesn't make it any less barabric.
> Savage in that weddings
> > involve a kidnapping, where the bride's family and the groom's family
> > try to beat the shit out of each other.
>
> Proving that both conjugants are highly valued--enough to fight for. A
> high compliment/endorsement in a warrior culture. And while the fighting
> is real, it is ceremonialized
Is it?
> Savage in that they reduce those
> > prisoners who have given their parole to them into menials and servants.
>
> For a specific term, during which they are protected by an almost
> inviolable code that protects their own sense of dignity and self-worth.
uh-huh.
They were given the parole of the Aes Sedai. In the context in which it
was used by Rand, that means that they are to be treated with dignity
and comity. Rand also paroled Annoura into Berelain's hands, and he did
_not_ mean for Berelain to have her advisor act as a scullery, and
that's not what he meant when he gave the forced oathsworn over to the
Aiel.
> > Savage in that they practice human rights, brainwashing and corporal
> > punishment abuses upon captives.
>
> How so? The human rights and brainwashing, I mean?
Check out the treatment of the captive Aes Sedai in the prologue.
Forcing a captive to do the impossible, then beat her for failing to do
the impossible, all the while yelling at her that it's her fault and to
move faster. That's a textbook brainwashing technique. Also forcing
people to dig holes deep enough to stand in, with their bare hands,
while naked in the sun is despicable conduct, regardless of the
transgressions, as is forcing elderly captives to drag piles of stone
around on a scrap of leather while flogging them.
> Savage in that sister-wives assist each
> > other in disciplining their husband by stabbing him.
>
> But only in non-vital areas, ensuring that he learns a pointed--but
> non-lethal--lesson.
Are you _kidding_? Are you justifying that?
> > The Aiel do have some laudable practices, such as the directive that
> > noncombants are not to be fucked with, but they are a very brutal people.
>
> Of course they are. You don't survive in that kind of environment by
> being nice. No extreme-environment culture that I'm aware of has been
> what one would necessarily call "nice." Some are more or less hospitable
> to outsiders, with differing reactions to people based on family,
> clan/tribe, society, nation, and race.
Well, I would still call them savages. If it's their evironment that
resulted in them being savages, so be it. At the end of the day, they're
still savages.
A N Yanez
You mean they were willing to live a few hundred more years--as fully
capable channelers--instead of pining away in a few years after being
severed.
> That implies a level of acknowledgement of culpability rather than
> screaming "Fuck you copper!" as they haul you off to the severing pit.
> Your cooperation is certainly required to speak the binding oaths.
To paraphrase Asmodean, a person will grasp at anything to avoid certain
death. It wouldn't be a tenable choice for most people.
> > As for the Ageless Look, I don't understand the reasoning of that, either,
> > unless it was meant to serve as a warning to others and thereby as a
> > deterrent, and/or a form of public shaming that was deemed to be an
> > important part of the sentence.
>
> Shamed forever? They couldn't decide that the person has suffered
> enough, been shunedd enough and liberate them from the AL, because that
> would also liberate them from the oath.
We don't have enough information to be able to say if rehabilitation was a
goal/practice or not. It would make the practice of binding much more
humane, however.
> > > rod robs these people of _centuries_ of life. In Semirhage's case, I'm
> > > not sure her sicko crimes would warrant her forfeiting a half a
> > > millennia of life. I don't blame her for fleeing, personally. Lock her
> > > up in a ward somehere for a determined sentence and then let her go
> > > free. This buisness of intentionally shortening life smacks of capital
> > > punishment (which I'm not sure was warranted. She was a sick woman, not
> > > a murderer.)
> >
> > Actually, she *was* a murderer. She started out by causing extra pain in
> > her patients but ended out killing those whom she deemed to be 'unworthy'
> > of her talents.
>
> Where are you getting that from?
The Guide, actually (God help me). From the little bio it's got on her.
This is IIRC, of course.
Didn't she sell her soul to the DO
> because they wanted to bind her for extracting that extra "something"
> from her patients? Ant atrocities committed after that point are not
> relevant in determiong the original punishment. Sure she deserves a nice
> quick hanging, _now_, but not for the original set of transgressions.
Yes, they wanted to punish for making people suffer unnecessarily--but
also because she killed a few, too.
> > If binding was only used in cases of a capital nature,
> > then it becomes a more humane alternative to summary execution--you're
> > giving the bound the opportunity to make amends and rehabilitate, with the
> > possibility of reversing the binding.
>
> I don't see that option from the context.
As I said, we don't have enough information; it's merely an explanation
that makes the use of binding more humane.
> > > > : I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
> > > > : average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
> > > > : because that is precisely what they are.
> > > >
> > > > Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
> > > > non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
> > > > Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
> > > > Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
> > >
> > > Nice job. (And people accuse _me_ of pushing emotional buttons)
> >
> > It is a nice job, and a perfectly valid point.
>
> > > Savage as in leadership contests like Nadera's and Sulin's are resolved
> > > by one beating the shit out of the other one.
> >
> > Except that establishes who the better warrior is, gets the tension out
> > into the open and resolves things rather effectively in such a society.
> > It works pretty well for most social species on the planet.
>
> So why don't command struggles in a modern army get resolved by the
> officers beating each other up?
Because modern armies are predicated on clear-cut lines-of-authority and
chains-of-command. Their effectiveness is based on the depersonalization
of the soldiers--each one is a member of something much larger and little
or nothing in and of his/herself.
The Aiel aren't soldiers--they're warriors, and that is an important
distinction. Warrior societies are based on personal achievement and
"glory," and the fighters are highly individualized compared to soldiers.
> Because it's _barbaric_?
And depersonalizing one's troops and then building them up as killing
machines isn't? Puh-leaze.
> Primitives often had justifications for human sacrifice, widow
> incineration and head-hunting also. Doesn't make it any less barabric.
"Modern" culture has its own barbarisms, they're just at a remove. Can we
say the atomic bomb, napalm, federal subsidies for not farming, and
countless others? And there are justifications for all those, too. And
for all their modernity, they are just as barbaric as anything you
mentioned, if not more so.
> > Savage in that weddings
> > > involve a kidnapping, where the bride's family and the groom's family
> > > try to beat the shit out of each other.
> >
> > Proving that both conjugants are highly valued--enough to fight for. A
> > high compliment/endorsement in a warrior culture. And while the fighting
> > is real, it is ceremonialized
>
> Is it?
You tell me: it's part of the wedding tradition, fully expected and
endorsed by the community, complete with requisite attendents.
> > Savage in that they reduce those
> > > prisoners who have given their parole to them into menials and servants.
> >
> > For a specific term, during which they are protected by an almost
> > inviolable code that protects their own sense of dignity and self-worth.
>
> uh-huh.
>
> They were given the parole of the Aes Sedai. In the context in which it
> was used by Rand, that means that they are to be treated with dignity
> and comity. Rand also paroled Annoura into Berelain's hands, and he did
> _not_ mean for Berelain to have her advisor act as a scullery, and
> that's not what he meant when he gave the forced oathsworn over to the
> Aiel.
I'm speaking here of the gaishan, not the Aes Sedai. I'm dealing within
the parameters of Aiel culture, not its interaction with the rest of
Randland.
> > > Savage in that they practice human rights, brainwashing and corporal
> > > punishment abuses upon captives.
> >
> > How so? The human rights and brainwashing, I mean?
>
> Check out the treatment of the captive Aes Sedai in the prologue.
> Forcing a captive to do the impossible, then beat her for failing to do
> the impossible, all the while yelling at her that it's her fault and to
> move faster. That's a textbook brainwashing technique. Also forcing
> people to dig holes deep enough to stand in, with their bare hands,
> while naked in the sun is despicable conduct, regardless of the
> transgressions, as is forcing elderly captives to drag piles of stone
> around on a scrap of leather while flogging them.
Here you'll get no argument from me. I would only caution you that the
situation is an unprecedented one, and is rife with the particular
passions enflamed by the failure of one's idols to live up to the
(impossible) expectations one sets for them coupled with the fact that
they had just kidnapped the Car'a'carn--moreover, from the Maidens'
and Wise One's perspectives they had just kidnapped their
son/brother/father.
> > Savage in that sister-wives assist each
> > > other in disciplining their husband by stabbing him.
> >
> > But only in non-vital areas, ensuring that he learns a pointed--but
> > non-lethal--lesson.
>
> Are you _kidding_? Are you justifying that?
ROTFL. I thought it obvious that I was joking--the rather bad pun about a
"pointed" lesson made it clear, I thought.
> > > The Aiel do have some laudable practices, such as the directive that
> > > noncombants are not to be fucked with, but they are a very brutal people.
> >
> > Of course they are. You don't survive in that kind of environment by
> > being nice. No extreme-environment culture that I'm aware of has been
> > what one would necessarily call "nice." Some are more or less hospitable
> > to outsiders, with differing reactions to people based on family,
> > clan/tribe, society, nation, and race.
>
> Well, I would still call them savages. If it's their evironment that
> resulted in them being savages, so be it. At the end of the day, they're
> still savages.
Fine. But admit that we're no better and that for all our much-vaunted
"civilization" we're only about two meals and a night's sleep away from
barbarism.
Alberto
ObQuote (from a friend's .sig):
Reporter: So what do you think of Western Civilization, Mr. Gandhi?
Gandhi: I think it would be a good idea.
Mooselord Volus
>: living shit out of Rand for daring not to bring them along on a
>: military expedition they felt like joining?
>
>Refresh my memory, when did this happen?
IIRC, it was mid-aCoS (Though possibly LoC - too tired to look up the
refrence). Rand once again gated off into danger without bringing the
Maidens set to guard him along. This of course violated their honor, since
he had supposedly placed his trust in them. When he got back, they explained
the situation to him in terms he would understand, by very carefully beating
the hell out of him. I don't blame them in the slightest - Rand is being an
absolute prick to them with his "don't hurt, or by inaction allow hurt to
come to, women" thing. I think he more-or-less got the message...
Mooselord Volus, the Shadow Behind the Light
Steven M. Ginter
mant...@worldnet.att.net says...
<major snippage>
#
#Actually, there are a lot of derivations of swordplay that do not involve
#sharpened weapons. If duelling with tourney rapiers (dulled & safety
#tipped), or rattan katanas, or whatever, continued long enough, it could
#eventually become the image people have when "swords" are mentioned.
#Duelling, competitive, but not deadly.
#
#Granted, this would take a Very Long Time, but hey, we've got millenia to
#play around with here.
#
Y'know, I've never actually considered the feasability of this before,
I've just dismissed it as some contrived piece of unlikely fiction.
However, comma, let's consider many modern sports that could
conceivably be turned to a lethal application, but have most likely
rarely been even considered, like darts, bowling, horseshoes, or
something like that. These all seem fairly innocuous, but what if the
darts were tipped with poison and thrown into a guard's neck to
incapacitate him and effect an infiltration? What if bowling balls
were explosive? I think you get the point.
Of course, one need look no further than Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker
trilogy, and the description of the combat droids playing cricket, to
see that there are some places that this conversation simply shouldn't
go.
--
Steve G.
Gaidin to Emilie Sedai
"They will pay," Lews Therin growled. "I am the Lord of the Morning."
Daniel Demus
Tetsuo wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm hoping someone out there can help me, a friend lent me the first 6 books
> of WoT (i went and bought seven and eight) and so I can't exactly check for
> myself:)
>
> I was just wondering why the Aiel hate the Aes Sedai...I remember they served
> them before the Breaking following the Way of the Leaf or whatever...then they
> were exiled to the Three Fold Land...then they came back and you would think
> they would view Aes Sedai again with the same reverence but instead they claim
> the Aes Sedai failed them???
>
> Sorry if this is in the FAQ, I wouldn't know where that is either:(
>
I got the impression that apart from the most recent events involving
Rand (the kidnapping etc.) the Aiel who abandoned the Items of Power
they had been entrusted with felt betrayed by the AS for not collecting
those items, and letting them wonder around and be preyed upon after the
breaking. When they broke with the Way of the Leaf, they also abandoned
their past, so now they are not quite as friendly towards AS as before.
--
Daniel
"It's not so bad, really...of all the voices in my head the only ones
that
bother me are the three that work third shift and snore all day."
Drew Gillmore, rasfwrj
UIN: 11216730
John Rowat
> >: Differing precisely _how_ from the Maidens of the Spear who beat the
> >: living shit out of Rand for daring not to bring them along on a
> >: military expedition they felt like joining?
> >
> >Refresh my memory, when did this happen?
> IIRC, it was mid-aCoS (Though possibly LoC - too tired to look up the
> refrence).
No. It was halfway through PoD, when Rand first returns to Cairhien from
the campaign against the Seanchan.
Other than that, you got the situation right.
-John
--
"The wintry frost comes crawling / Freezing all life that's on its way
The first dead leaves come falling / Hovering in the air with the rain
Alive no more."
-Sentenced, "Dead Leaves"
smo...@my-dejanews.com
wa...@webspan.net wrote:
Hey Rich!
I'm gonna take issue with some of your stuff. Aren't you shocked?
Actually, it's not so much take issue with your conclusions, as it is take
issue with your premise(s) regarding the Oath Rod. I watched you and several
others go 'round & 'round about this a while ago, and felt that you were
_all_ giving the AoL AS way too much credit.
You take it as TRVTH that the Ageless Look is a _purposeful_ effect of the use
of the OR. This is also assumed to be the case with the lifespan reduction.
I don't buy it.
As we watch these Aes Sedai, and as we learn more about the preceding Aes
Sedai, I am forced to conclude that it is perfectly reasonable to conclude
that the AoL Aes Sedai were every bit as incompetent and prima-donnish as the
AS of the 'present time'.
It is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the Ageless Freak Look is an
unexpected side effect of the Oath Rod's use. The onset of the AL is far
enough removed from the time of the OR's use that it is quite probable that
no-one recognized the side effect for what it was for decades. Seriously,
look at it from their prospective. They just came up with this great way of
dealing with criminals, it's only after widespread use, for a few decades
that the connection is made.
Much like the x-ray in our time. It was a 'miracle'. It was used widely and
(using hindsight) recklessly. It wasn't until much later that the downside was
recognized, when cancers and tumors started appearing 20 - 30 or even 40 years
after the fact. (For a rather well known example, see Glennis Yeager. She was
the wife of Air Force legend Gen. Chuck Yeager.)
And since the shrotening of the lifespan doesn't manifest itself for several
_hundred_ years, the same can be applied here.
I don't think that _either_ the Ageless Look, or the Life shortening affect
was an intentional by product of the Oath Rod's use. I believe that both of
these caught the AS by surprise. However, the use of these tools was so
widespread and accepted (especially by the general populace, which doesn't
get to live for millenia) that there was too much inertia to overcome in
putting them aside.
IMO, you have a tendency to ascribe too much competence to these AS and expect
too high a level of societal maturity from many of the others in this series.
Look at the common methods of punishment, (does the phrase "You will kiss the
gunner's daughter." mean anything to you? It, and other much more brutal forms
of punishment were common.) etc in _our_ history at a similar point of
development.
They aren't all that different from us.
Including their level of comptetence.
--
Steve
USENET Redneck
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Richard M. Boye'
Ack!
Get a real ISP.
> In article <3692BE...@webspan.net>,
> wa...@webspan.net wrote:
>
> Hey Rich!
>
> I'm gonna take issue with some of your stuff. Aren't you shocked?
No. At least you make sense.
> > A N Yanez wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 5 Jan 1999, Richard M. Boye' wrote:
(snippage!)
> Actually, it's not so much take issue with your conclusions, as it is take
> issue with your premise(s) regarding the Oath Rod. I watched you and several
> others go 'round & 'round about this a while ago, and felt that you were
> _all_ giving the AoL AS way too much credit.
>
> You take it as TRVTH that the Ageless Look is a _purposeful_ effect of the use
> of the OR. This is also assumed to be the case with the lifespan reduction.
No, this whole argument was premised upom the notion that the life-span
truncation and AL were not unavoidable side-effects. I did say...
"It would, but for the fact that it stigmatizes the pentitent. I cannot
understand what purposes the AL would have (assuming it is _not_ an
unavoidable side-effect)."
It would make ever so much sense if they were. Because as a tool of
punishment, it has serious, gaping flaws. I don't particularly buy it
either. But this whole discussion was in response to Erdman who thought
it was a "humane" punishment. Whether or not it works out the funky
side-affects of binding are intentional or accidental, it's not that
humane, at all.
> I don't buy it.
>
> As we watch these Aes Sedai, and as we learn more about the preceding Aes
> Sedai, I am forced to conclude that it is perfectly reasonable to conclude
> that the AoL Aes Sedai were every bit as incompetent and prima-donnish as the
> AS of the 'present time'.
I would happily agree with you, really, but RJ has hit us over the head
with the notion that the AoL was happy, touchy-feely, New Age
civilization of utopian bliss. (cf...the gag...Guide) These people were
_very_ pacifistic, and "enlightened."
These people were actually so brainwashed into a people's collective of
socio-economic "liberty" and tranquility that they didn't even realize
that the "tame sport of swords" could actually be used to kill someone.
I think that any civilization were the people are so whitewashed that it
takes an intuitive leap to realize that two men dueling with essentially
large knives could result in death is in probably very deep into denial
about a very many things.
Of course _it's_ all stupid, but they all thought that it was the way to
go. And as more and more is revealed about the AoL, the more and more I
come to despise RJ.
> It is perfectly reasonable to conclude that the Ageless Freak Look is an
> unexpected side effect of the Oath Rod's use.
I do hope so, but it doesn't wash from what we have seen.
Amy Gray
> > wa...@webspan.net wrote:
> >
> > Hey Rich!
> >
> > I'm gonna take issue with some of your stuff. Aren't you shocked?
>
[snip: unavoidable side effect?]
> > I don't buy it.
> >
> > As we watch these Aes Sedai, and as we learn more about the preceding Aes
> > Sedai, I am forced to conclude that it is perfectly reasonable to conclude
> > that the AoL Aes Sedai were every bit as incompetent and prima-donnish as the
> > AS of the 'present time'.
>
> I would happily agree with you, really, but RJ has hit us over the head
> with the notion that the AoL was happy, touchy-feely, New Age
> civilization of utopian bliss. (cf...the gag...Guide) These people were
> _very_ pacifistic, and "enlightened."
>
> These people were actually so brainwashed into a people's collective of
> socio-economic "liberty" and tranquility that they didn't even realize
> that the "tame sport of swords" could actually be used to kill someone.
>
> I think that any civilization were the people are so whitewashed that it
> takes an intuitive leap to realize that two men dueling with essentially
> large knives could result in death is in probably very deep into denial
> about a very many things.
Actually, there are a lot of derivations of swordplay that do not involve
sharpened weapons. If duelling with tourney rapiers (dulled & safety
tipped), or rattan katanas, or whatever, continued long enough, it could
eventually become the image people have when "swords" are mentioned.
Duelling, competitive, but not deadly.
Granted, this would take a Very Long Time, but hey, we've got millenia to
play around with here.
[snip rest]
--
Amy Gray
UIN: 21382476
http://home.att.net/~manta_ray/
You know, I think this is the first time I've posted even close to on-
topic in months. Go figure.
John S. Novak, III
<ser...@mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>I think you're misinterpreting the extent of the visions from this trip.
>Rand didn't pop in and say "oh wow look at this neat movie that's going on
>here"; he _was_ the person he popped into. For a brief time, he was
>privy to the inner emotions and knowledge of his ?medium? Since these
>Aiel were the closest to Aes Sedai you could be without being Aes Sedai,
>it seems like their impressions would be very accurate. The current Aiel
>expected the Aes Sedai to be worthy of reverence because their ancestors
>did. They know because they were their ancestors.
Interestingly enough, Rand has personal memories of his own from that
time, as well. Yet he doesn't have anything resembling the same
attitude as the Aiel toward the Aes Sedai-- he does not regard them as
gods that have fallen into disrepute. He occasionally has flashes of
a snicker about how far they've fallen in _power and ability_ but I
think it's telling that he never once that I recall thinks, "Oh, the
Aes Sedai of the Age of Legends would never act like this!"
I think you're reading way too much into those ancient visions.
>: Sorry, but I just flatly disbelieve that a society with a use for
>: something like an Oath Rod or a Binding Chair, or the crystal throne
>: ter'angreal of the Seanchan is even remotely as happy-happy and
>: goody-goody as anyone is likely to believe.
>Do you have any proof that binding chairs or the Seanchan crystal throne
>have any connection to the AOL Aes Sedai? No? I didn't think so. Try
>sticking to things you can back up.
...And where do you _think_ they came from?
Binding chairs in particular, were mentioned by Sammael-- a strong
indication that they were around in the Age of Legends.
>The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
>suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
>Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
>was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
>criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
>humane punishment I can think of.
It's mind control.
Since they only seem to work on channelers, the existence of Oath Rods
implies a consistent enough need for mind control to keep certain
elements inline that _more than one_ was made.
>: By the same token, I refuse to believe that the Aes Sedai of that
>: period were any more noble than the average human being of today, or
>: the average Aes Sedai of Rand's time.
>Any basis for this, or do you just know? If we look at Rand's visions,
>it seems like the Aes Sedai were held in extremely high regard - and not
>just by the Aiel, but the entire population of Randland at that time.
I've already stated that I think you're reading too much into those
visions. I also think Rand's visions are fairly anecdotal-- besides,
they're the memories of a people who were bound into service. If the
Age of Legends was even remotely enlightened, this service would have
been voluntary and therefore self-selecting in terms of those
memories. Only those who revered the Aes Sedai to begin with would
_be_ in that kind of service.
>The man who knocks (forgot the Aiel's name) down is generally upset that
>he might have hurt the Aiel, showing a great deal of respect for a
>servent of the Aes Sedai.
Looked more like lip service, and fear of social consequences, than
actual regret at having knocked anyone down, to me.
This man also has his hair cut in imitation of
>the Aiel, which we learn is very common. This is clear mark of extreme
>respect.
And again, all of this is filtered through the minds of those already
predisposed to believe in the greatness of the Aes Sedai. Besides,
if you saw even one or two people imitating your clothing or hair
style, wouldn't _you_ find it remarkable? Moreso than ten people
imitating someone you didn't know? Finally, I think we all know that
simple imitation on that kind of cultural level doesn't always mean
respect by all the members for all the other people they're
imitating-- it only takes a few to start a weird fad. Imitation of
that sort doesn't always mean respect for what the imitatees think are
their best qualities, either.
>If this respect is given to the servant's, what respect must
>the master (bad terminology, but oh well) get. Also extremely telling is
>the fact that the Aes Sedai's closet servants (the Aiel) are sworn to the Way
>of the Leaf. Do you think these things are marks of the petty, grasping
>society that you seem to envision?
Oh, the whole society probably wasn't rotten to the core. But I
refuse to believe the whole society was sweetness and light, too,
unless it was populated largely by non-human entities.
What's _really_ telling is that the Aiel were known for service to the
Way of the Leaf, but that the Aes Sedai, with their vast abilities to
do damage, weren't. And required a number of Oath Rods to keep their
numbers in line.
>: You think those of us who are smarter than average are automatically
>: good and noble? Read history. You think those of us who are stronger
>: than average are automatically good and noble? Read history. You
>: think those of us born to lead nations or command armies are
>: automatically good and noble? Read history. You think those of us
>: who are older than others are automatically good and noble? Read
>: history.
>History is almost completely irrelevant to this discussion. Past
>leaders in our world not being models of good behavior has little
>applicability to this situation. We are discussing a very different
>enviroment and times, and we are also talking about the heights that
>people can attain, not the depths to which they can sink.
Individuals attain the heights.
Groups achieve the depths.
The Aes Sedai were, and are, a group.
They are, most notably, a human group, and history is the study of
human beings and groups of human beings.
>: Furthermore, it applies just as much to the Aiel, in the persons of
>: the Wise Ones, and even moreso in some places-- they may not be as
>: uniformly strong as the Aes Sedai, but some of them aer stronger.
>: They have gifts the Aes Sedai have not, such as dreamwalking. They
>: live even _longer_ than the Aes Sedai, and have a similar advantage in
>: knowledge (at least, cultural knowledge) over their common Aiel.
>Live longer? Where'd you get that idea? I got got the opposite impression.
They haven't sworn to the Oath Rod.
Unless they're being killed in battle, there is little doubt that the
Aiel Wise Ones live longer lives than the Aes Sedai.
>: The Aiel Wise Ones are every bit as bad as the Aes Sedai.
>: Worse in some areas, better in others, but on the whole,
>: reprehensible.
>The Aiel Wise Ones are in a much harsher enviroment than the Aes Sedai.
No excuse.
>They need to use their power and wisdom to help their people survive.
>They don't have a sect that is completely devoted to logical
>contemplation of problems. Instead, they look for water. Slight
>difference in priorities, wouldn't you say? Also, the Wise Ones do
>follow a strict moral code, much of which is admirable even to us today.
>They are bound by conscience and admit wrong due not to threat of
>punishment but instead because they think it's right.
Rarely, however, does any of that get in the way of their actually
oing something wrong. It can actually have a negative consequence,
just like the free and unrestricted use of Confession and Indulgences
in the Middle Ages-- if forgiveness is ritual, any action can be
condoned for a little while.
>Which Randland society would you compare the Aiel to, to show how stupid
>and disadvantageous the Aiel code is? The average Aiel is much more
>concerned with moral matters and responsibility than the Randland
>commoner.
But they're _not_ necessarily concerned with moral matters, they're
concerned with forms. When the forms go counter to their innate sense
of right and wrong in any given situation, that's when the anguish and
the potential for manipulation comes in.
>Their leaders are concerned with the well-being of their
>people and not their own personal glory or power.
Not like Couladin, or Sevanna, or any of the subleaders they
attracted. Or do they not count as Aiel, now?
> Power and influence
>has no effect at shielding them from doing something wrong. Shadowsworn
>are killed no matter what position they hold. Sulin, a leader, does
>penance for an offense given to the lowest of their society.
Oh, a Darkfriend publicly exposed in any of the wetlander nations
would be done away with just as quickly. What makes you think that's
a point of difference?
> Add in the
>fact that the Aiel can kick the shit out of any other nation and maybe
>you'll understand that their honor is not as stupid as you think. I'd
>say it passes the reality test pretty well, acutally.
What does military strength have to do with the correctness of honor?
>: Differing precisely _how_ from the Maidens of the Spear who beat the
>: living shit out of Rand for daring not to bring them along on a
>: military expedition they felt like joining?
>Refresh my memory, when did this happen?
The. Last. Book.
>: > The Aes Sedai regard the Aiel much as
>: >you do, calling them savages and disregarding anything the Aiel tell
>: >them.
>: I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
>: average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
>: because that is precisely what they are.
>Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
>non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
>Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
>Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be civilized.
Savage in that they scrabble around in the desert fighting wars of
"honor" which are more wars of form.
Matt Fletcher
>
[snip context, etc.]
> Binding chairs in particular, were mentioned by Sammael-- a strong
> indication that they were around in the Age of Legends.
A FS could have made the binding chairs. That would explain why Sammael
would refer to them, unless I'm misremembering where this occurred.
Note: I'm not saying there is any proof that a FS made them, just that
I don't know of any proof they didn't.
> The. Last. Book.
[snip to end]
ObNitPick: Most recent, not last. I certainly hope there will be more
books!
Fletch
Eric McCoy
news:771bmn$h...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net...
[do Wise Ones live longer, since they've never sworn on the Oath Rod?]
>Actually, it's unlikely that they do, though this doesn't seem to make
much
>sense.
No, it doesn't.
>_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a fair
margin).
>We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the power, but none are
older.
Could be there's some specific way of using the Power that results in
extended life. Or, more likely, it's related to the frequency with
which they use the Power. Aes Sedai seem to use it more than Aiel.
>The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
>violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term
effects
>of poor nutrition.
Not even that; Wise Ones are sacrosanct. True, that won't protect them
from accidentally walking into an arrow or from a Trolloc's blade, but
even so, I don't think it'd cause the amount of deaths it would have to.
And frankly, I don't think the poor nutrition argument flies; all the
Aiel seem to have plenty to eat and drink, even if it *is* lizard.
--
Eric McCoy - emc...@hamilton.edu
impartial, adj. Unable to perceive any promise of personal advantage
from
espousing either side of a controversy or adopting either of two
conflicting opinions. - Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
Erik Steiro
<wa...@webspan.net> wrote:
>Stephen J Erdman wrote:
>
>> (snippity doo-dah)
>
>>
>> The Oath Rod, or more specifically the Aes Sedai's use of it, seems to
>> suggest a quite the opposite of what you suggest. We learn from
>> Semirhage's POV that the Aes Sedai treatment of criminals in their midst
>> was to bind them from doing harm again and that they fully expected the
>> criminal to submit to the Oath Rod. Seems like just about the most
>> humane punishment I can think of.
>
>It would, but for the fact that it stigmatizes the pentitent. I cannot
>understand what purposes the AL would have (assuming it is _not_ an
>unavoidable side-effect). If the purpose of the oath binding is render
>the person being punished safe and no longer a threat, what reason could
>they have to mark their faces up so that they stand out in a crowd? To
>warn people off? From someone who is no longer a threat? That doesn't
>make sense. It would, however, creating a lasting stigma upon the
>pentitent, essentially the same as if they had branded their foreheads
>"Thief!!"
>
IIRC the average in AOL didn't know what a ageless face meant.
There is a reference to this in one of books (I haven't got access to
my books,so I can't find a quote) that Greandal didn't know about the
Oath Road, and that she was furious that Sammael knew something she
didn't.
If a famous AS din't know I doubt that the average does AOL know .
>And the other thing is the truncation of lifespan. Being bound on the
>rod robs these people of _centuries_ of life. In Semirhage's case, I'm
>not sure her sicko crimes would warrant her forfeiting a half a
>millennia of life. I don't blame her for fleeing, personally. Lock her
>up in a ward somehere for a determined sentence and then let her go
>free. This buisness of intentionally shortening life smacks of capital
>punishment (which I'm not sure was warranted. She was a sick woman, not
>a murderer.)
>
>On closer inspection, the Oath Rad is far less humane than it seems.
>
In Semirhage's case she is probably one of the few who would deserve
it.
She did, as you pointed out her crimes, but IIRC she did _kill_ those
she didn't judge worthy to live (before she joined the shadow).
Again I haven't got the books available so I can't find out where.
<snip>
--
Remove spam to reply.
Dave Rothgery
John S. Novak, III wrote in message ...
>On 5 Jan 1999 20:14:13 GMT, Stephen J Erdman
><ser...@mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>
>>: Furthermore, it applies just as much to the Aiel, in the persons of
>>: the Wise Ones, and even moreso in some places-- they may not be as
>>: uniformly strong as the Aes Sedai, but some of them aer stronger.
>>: They have gifts the Aes Sedai have not, such as dreamwalking. They
>>: live even _longer_ than the Aes Sedai, and have a similar advantage in
>>: knowledge (at least, cultural knowledge) over their common Aiel.
>
>>Live longer? Where'd you get that idea? I got got the
>>opposite impression.
>
>They haven't sworn to the Oath Rod.
>Unless they're being killed in battle, there is little doubt that the
>Aiel Wise Ones live longer lives than the Aes Sedai.
Actually, it's unlikely that they do, though this doesn't seem to make much
sense.
_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a fair margin).
We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the power, but none are older.
The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term effects
of poor nutrition.
--
Dave Rothgery WPI CS 1998
dave...@altavista.net http://www.wpi.edu/~daveroth/
Programmer for hire, no reasonable offer refused
Billy Todd
wrote:
<Novak: Aiel are savage.>
<Erdman: How come?>
>Savage in that they scrabble around in the desert fighting wars of
>"honor" which are more wars of form.
I thought they fought in the desert over economic issues, like water
sources or such.
Not unlike fighting for oil in the Middle East.
---------------------------
Billy Todd WT...@clemson.edu
Willum
Richard M. Boye' wrote in message <36927A...@webspan.net>...
>Stephen J Erdman wrote:
>
>> (snippity doo-dah)
>
<snippity snip>
>> : I wouldn't disregard the Aiel, simply because I'm smarter than the
>> : average Aes Sedai. I will dismiss them as savages, on the other hand,
>> : because that is precisely what they are.
>>
>> Nice label. Savage like the American Indian? Or maybe like
>> non-Christians? How about the American troops who fought in Vietnam?
>> Say what you mean. I don't understand them and I'm not going to try.
>> Now let's burn their books and make them like us so they'll be
civilized.
>
>Nice job. (And people accuse _me_ of pushing emotional buttons)
>
>Savage as in leadership contests like Nadera's and Sulin's are resolved
>by one beating the shit out of the other one. Savage in that weddings
>involve a kidnapping, where the bride's family and the groom's family
>try to beat the shit out of each other.
Ofcourse, civilized people wait until after the wedding to beat each other
up.
Savage in that they reduce those
>prisoners who have given their parole to them into menials and servants.
>Savage in that they practice human rights, brainwashing and corporal
>punishment abuses upon captives.
Their not a whole lot different to most feudal 'civilizations' around the
world, in that regard. The fact is, such practices were common in the past,
especially the middle ages. Does that mean we would call medievil (or even
Renaissance) Europeans savages?
Harsh times and harsh climes breed harsh people.
Savage in that sister-wives assist each
>other in disciplining their husband by stabbing him.
Hell, won't be long before there's a special provision for this kind of
thing in the law somewhere in one of our 'civilized' countries.
>
>The Aiel do have some laudable practices, such as the directive that
>noncombants are not to be fucked with, but they are a very butal people.
>
Quite deliberatly, on RJ's part, I think. And I think it quite likely that
Aiel 'civilization' as we know it, is not going to survive past the Last
Battle.
--
Willum,
Eric McCoy
news:36943C47...@pittsburgh.crosswinds.net...
>"John S. Novak, III" wrote:
>[snip context, etc.]
>> ...And where do you _think_ they came from?
>> Binding chairs in particular, were mentioned by Sammael-- a strong
>> indication that they were around in the Age of Legends.
>A FS could have made the binding chairs.
Yes, but the AS have precedent - they made the Oath Rod, or binders, or
whatever they're really called, so why not binding chairs too?
>That would explain why Sammael
>would refer to them, unless I'm misremembering where this occurred.
>Note: I'm not saying there is any proof that a FS made them, just that
>I don't know of any proof they didn't.
No proof they didn't, just a fairly clear implication that it was
somebody else.
Dave Rothgery
Eric McCoy wrote in message <36944...@news1.ibm.net>...
>Dave Rothgery <dave...@altavista.net> wrote in message
>news:771bmn$h...@bgtnsc03.worldnet.att.net...
>
>[do Wise Ones live longer, since they've never sworn on the Oath Rod?]
>
>>make much sense.
>
>
>>_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>
>>She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a fair
>>margin).
>>We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the power, but
>>none are older.
>
>extended life. Or, more likely, it's related to the frequency with
>which they use the Power. Aes Sedai seem to use it more than Aiel.
I don't think so.
That wouldn't explain the Kin.
>>The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
>>violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the
>>long-term effects of poor nutrition.
>
>Not even that; Wise Ones are sacrosanct. True, that won't protect them
>from accidentally walking into an arrow or from a Trolloc's blade, but
>even so, I don't think it'd cause the amount of deaths it would have to.
Well, Bair remembers a young-looking 300-year old WO who died of a
bloodsnake bite. That's more along the lines of what I was thinking of.
Other Aeil aren't the only dangerous things in the waste.
>And frankly, I don't think the poor nutrition argument flies; all the
>Aiel seem to have plenty to eat and drink, even if it *is* lizard.
I was kind of thinking that perhaps the typical Aeil diet might not really
be appropriate to the dietary needs of an aging female, which aren't the
same as that of a 20-year old spear-chucker.
Bill Griffiths
18:31:13 PST, j...@concentric.net (John S. Novak, III) wrote:
>On 5 Jan 1999 20:14:13 GMT, Stephen J Erdman
><ser...@mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>Interestingly enough, Rand has personal memories of his own from that
>time, as well. Yet he doesn't have anything resembling the same
>attitude as the Aiel toward the Aes Sedai-- he does not regard them as
>gods that have fallen into disrepute. He occasionally has flashes of
>a snicker about how far they've fallen in _power and ability_ but I
>think it's telling that he never once that I recall thinks, "Oh, the
>Aes Sedai of the Age of Legends would never act like this!"
Along the same lines, there is the comparison by one of the FS of the
bickering among modern AS with those of the _ajah_ in the old days (I
don't recall which FS or what book).
>>Do you have any proof that binding chairs or the Seanchan crystal throne
>>have any connection to the AOL Aes Sedai? No? I didn't think so. Try
>>sticking to things you can back up.
>
>...And where do you _think_ they came from?
>Binding chairs in particular, were mentioned by Sammael-- a strong
>indication that they were around in the Age of Legends.
Actually, Sammael's memory only indicates that binding chairs were
around before the Bore was sealed. There are three likely time
periods for the creation of such things:
AoL proper (before the Bore): If the mind control devices do date from
this era, it would say interesting things about the reality behind the
"happy-happy and goody-goody" facade of the AoL.
Bore period (between the opening and sealing of the Bore, including
both the War of Power and the long decline before it): Since the DO's
hand was on the world, it's hard to infer much about the AoL proper
from anything made in this period. The throne could have been created
for an FS, or for a darkfriend/DO-influenced warlord before the actual
WoP. Binding chairs and oath rods could have been used for forced
conversions.
Breaking (after the sealing, but before the complete collapse of old
abilities): The Eye dates from this period, and likely the Rhuidean
see-through-ancestors'-eyes ter'angreal, so at least some AS were
still capable of great things. Mind-control devices could have been
developed to try to fight the Taint-madness.
[snippage]
>>If this respect is given to the servant's, what respect must
>>the master (bad terminology, but oh well) get. Also extremely telling is
>>the fact that the Aes Sedai's closet servants (the Aiel) are sworn to the Way
>>of the Leaf. Do you think these things are marks of the petty, grasping
>>society that you seem to envision?
>
>Oh, the whole society probably wasn't rotten to the core. But I
>refuse to believe the whole society was sweetness and light, too,
>unless it was populated largely by non-human entities.
>
>What's _really_ telling is that the Aiel were known for service to the
>Way of the Leaf, but that the Aes Sedai, with their vast abilities to
>do damage, weren't. And required a number of Oath Rods to keep their
>numbers in line.
Call me a realist, but I always found the translation of AS to be
pretty telling. Frederick the Great styled himself the "first servant
of the Prussian state." Any group calling itself "servants of all"
either wields absolute power, or aspires to do so.
--
Bill Griffiths
"The fool hath said in his heart, there is no such thing as justice." Hobbes
John S. Novak, III
> IIRC, it was mid-aCoS (Though possibly LoC - too tired to look up the
>refrence). Rand once again gated off into danger without bringing the
>Maidens set to guard him along. This of course violated their honor, since
>he had supposedly placed his trust in them. When he got back, they explained
>the situation to him in terms he would understand, by very carefully beating
>the hell out of him. I don't blame them in the slightest - Rand is being an
>absolute prick to them with his "don't hurt, or by inaction allow hurt to
>come to, women" thing. I think he more-or-less got the message...
Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
John S. Novak, III
>You take it as TRVTH that the Ageless Look is a _purposeful_ effect of the use
>of the OR. This is also assumed to be the case with the lifespan reduction.
>I don't buy it.
Does it actually matter?
Both are known effects,and sentencing someone to die young is still
sentencing them to die young, whether the shortened life span is a
side effect or not.
>I don't think that _either_ the Ageless Look, or the Life shortening affect
>was an intentional by product of the Oath Rod's use. I believe that both of
>these caught the AS by surprise. However, the use of these tools was so
>widespread and accepted (especially by the general populace, which doesn't
>get to live for millenia) that there was too much inertia to overcome in
>putting them aside.
I don't really think that's much of an excuse.
That sort of disregard for consequences is part of what I point to as
justification that the Age of Legends (and the Aes Sedai of the Age of
Legends) were hardly sweetness and light.
John S. Novak, III
>_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a fair margin).
>We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the power, but none are older.
>The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
>violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term effects
>of poor nutrition.
Or Jordan screwing up.
I still claim that the lifespan and ageless look thing was tacked on
as an afterthought some time after tGH.
Dave Rothgery
John S. Novak, III wrote in message ...
>On 7 Jan 1999 04:03:35 GMT, Dave Rothgery <dave...@altavista.net> wrote:
>
>>_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>
>>She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a
>>fair margin). We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the
>>power, but none are older.
>
>>The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
>>violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term effects
>>of poor nutrition.
>
>Or Jordan screwing up.
>I still claim that the lifespan and ageless look thing was tacked on
>as an afterthought some time after tGH.
>
character mentioned more than in passing) until LoC, at the earliest. RJ
certainly could have made her stronger in the Power and/or created a few
other ancient WOs.
Bunnythor
>Harsh times and harsh climes breed harsh people.
Tough times demand tough talk, demand tough hearts, demand tough songs.
--Tshen
Qodaxti Institute, YYZ Conference Room.
(We can move with savage grace to the rhythms of the night...)
Laura M. Parkinson
blurted out:
Hey, it sounds great to me. Lets the person/deity know that you are
dissatisfied, and lets off steam all at once.
Seriously, I don't exactly approve of the Maidens beating Rand up to
make their point... but then again, I think they've tried just about
every other way to do so. I'd basically frown on their method, but not
enough to call them savages.
Besides, Rand could probably use a few more people to box his ears.
*sniff*
Oh dear, I've definitely been reading too much RJ.
(That, and not getting enough sleep.)
-'-,-'-<<0 Trickster 0>>-'-,-'- lpark...@mindspring.com
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/1327
VampCode Beta: PNlmpA23MrHnWc* VS\/^I\/^^\/^B\/^^WnRnH\/^ NR^\/^^\/^L\/^Oci
"Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be
destroyed." -Richard Adams, Watership Down
Chris Mullins
>
>Tough times demand tough talk, demand tough hearts, demand tough songs.
>
Yea, but can you rise and fall like an Empire? Can you Flow in and out like
the tides? Are you cool and remote, like dancing girls?
Until you're all of the above I'm afraid you just going to have to hold your
fire.
--
Chris "Another Shot of 151? YUK! (hic)" Mullins
smo...@my-dejanews.com
j...@concentric.net wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Jan 1999 14:29:46 GMT, smo...@my-dejanews.com
> <smo...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
>
> >use of the OR. This is also assumed to be the case with the lifespan
> >reduction.
>
> >I don't buy it.
>
> Both are known effects,and sentencing someone to die young is still
> sentencing them to die young, whether the shortened life span is a
> side effect or not.
Probably not, but I'm not sure. At the current time, the only people to make
this leap so far are Elayne & Nyn (well, she's actually still pretty much in
the dark, but she's softer than a sneaker full of puppy-shit, anyway), how
long did it take the AoL Aes Sedai to figure this out? Part of my point was,
since it's an unexpected side effect that took a long time for the effect to
manifest, at least for the first 100 or so years no-one recognized that this
was happening.
>
> >I don't think that _either_ the Ageless Look, or the Life shortening affect
> >was an intentional by product of the Oath Rod's use. I believe that both of
> >these caught the AS by surprise. However, the use of these tools was so
> >widespread and accepted (especially by the general populace, which doesn't
> >get to live for millenia) that there was too much inertia to overcome in
> >putting them aside.
>
> I don't really think that's much of an excuse.
> That sort of disregard for consequences is part of what I point to as
> justification that the Age of Legends (and the Aes Sedai of the Age of
> Legends) were hardly sweetness and light.
>
I don't actually argue that they were. In fact, I'm fairly well convinced
that the AoL wasn't all that different from our time (with the exception of
armed conflicts). The SaSG story shows the AoL AS as a group of ego-driven,
contentious "I know better than you" politicians. I mean, really - if you
can't even band together when your enemy is the True Embodiment of EVIL, you
aren't being the selfless "Servants of All" that they proclaim.
I guess my feeling is that the 'current day' Aes Sedai heven't devolved very
far at all. The AoL hype is just that, Madison Ave. hyperbole.
Daniel Demus
"John S. Novak, III" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 21:15:00 -0800, Mooselord Volus <shand...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > IIRC, it was mid-aCoS (Though possibly LoC - too tired to look up the
> >refrence). Rand once again gated off into danger without bringing the
> >Maidens set to guard him along. This of course violated their honor, since
> >he had supposedly placed his trust in them. When he got back, they explained
> >the situation to him in terms he would understand, by very carefully beating
> >the hell out of him. I don't blame them in the slightest - Rand is being an
> >absolute prick to them with his "don't hurt, or by inaction allow hurt to
> >come to, women" thing. I think he more-or-less got the message...
>
> Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
> disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
> and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
>
They have told him quite a few times that he's pissing in there gruel,
but he has ignored them repeatedly. Delivering a petition in triplicate
would not have helped much and it is not because Rand has a lot of
advisors he listens to, either.
--
Daniel
CHILDREN'S BOOKS YOU'LL NEVER SEE:
"Strangers Have the Best Candy"
UIN: 11216730
Daniel Demus
Eric McCoy wrote:
>
> Matt Fletcher <fle...@pittsburgh.crosswinds.net> wrote in message
> news:36943C47...@pittsburgh.crosswinds.net...
> >"John S. Novak, III" wrote:
>
> >[snip context, etc.]
> >> ...And where do you _think_ they came from?
> >> Binding chairs in particular, were mentioned by Sammael-- a strong
> >> indication that they were around in the Age of Legends.
>
> >A FS could have made the binding chairs.
>
> Yes, but the AS have precedent - they made the Oath Rod, or binders, or
> whatever they're really called, so why not binding chairs too?
>
Both Rods and Chairs could have been made in the 100 or so years between
the opening of the Bore and start of the WoP, while society quietly
deteriorated.
[snip]
John S. Novak, III
<lpark...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Seriously, I don't exactly approve of the Maidens beating Rand up to
>make their point... but then again, I think they've tried just about
>every other way to do so. I'd basically frown on their method, but not
>enough to call them savages.
They have an odd notion of leadership.
They seem to think that Rand has some obligation to take them on every
battle he joins, or even most battles he joins. No other tropps enjoy
those privlegdes, why should they?
He _did_ take them on the battle at Caemlyn, over and above anyone
else. He didn't take them on the battles against the Seanchan, but
then, he didn't take _any_ Aiel on that battle as I recall. He had
his reasons, as stupid as they were-- he was trying to use them as
Damane fodder, because he actively wanted their particular leaders
weakened.
>Besides, Rand could probably use a few more people to box his ears.
>*sniff*
It might be novel if people actually talked with him.
And I mean _with_ him. Not at him.
It's a novel enough idea that only Cadsuane seems to have mastered it.
John S. Novak, III
>> Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
>> disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
>> and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
>They have told him quite a few times that he's pissing in there gruel,
>but he has ignored them repeatedly. Delivering a petition in triplicate
>would not have helped much and it is not because Rand has a lot of
>advisors he listens to, either.
And therefore beating him senseless is the correct approach?
John S. Novak, III
>> Both are known effects,and sentencing someone to die young is still
>> sentencing them to die young, whether the shortened life span is a
>> side effect or not.
>Probably not, but I'm not sure. At the current time, the only people to make
>this leap so far are Elayne & Nyn (well, she's actually still pretty much in
>the dark, but she's softer than a sneaker full of puppy-shit, anyway), how
>long did it take the AoL Aes Sedai to figure this out? Part of my point was,
>since it's an unexpected side effect that took a long time for the effect to
>manifest, at least for the first 100 or so years no-one recognized that this
>was happening.
Probably, they figured it out really damned quickly.
First, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a sophisticated enough
theoretical basis to predict it outright. (Assuming Boye is wrong and
it's unintentional.) Second, the ageless look itself becomes pretty
obvious after a few years, and that would prompt some serious
intensive research into the thing as a general tool. If it causes the
ageless look, what else does it do?
>> I don't really think that's much of an excuse.
>> That sort of disregard for consequences is part of what I point to as
>> justification that the Age of Legends (and the Aes Sedai of the Age of
>> Legends) were hardly sweetness and light.
>I don't actually argue that they were. In fact, I'm fairly well convinced
>that the AoL wasn't all that different from our time (with the exception of
>armed conflicts).
I think it's where we are, or worse. Perhaps better in some ways, but
worse in others. What would be nice, is if I knew whether Jordan
actually believes this happy-happy goody-goody shit he writes about
the Age of Legends (and thus, would intend it to be factual in
context) or if he expects us to read between the lines as we are.
I would hope, the latter.
Rebel Yell
>
>
> >> Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
> >> disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
> >> and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
>
> >They have told him quite a few times that he's pissing in there gruel,
> >but he has ignored them repeatedly. Delivering a petition in triplicate
> >would not have helped much and it is not because Rand has a lot of
> >advisors he listens to, either.
>
> And therefore beating him senseless is the correct approach?
>
Works for me.
Emma Pease
>They [Aiel Maidens] have an odd notion of leadership.
>They seem to think that Rand has some obligation to take them on every
>battle he joins, or even most battles he joins. No other tropps enjoy
>those privlegdes, why should they?
I suspect they consider themselves as his bodyguards and as such are
different from regular troops and should accompany him everywhere
(much like the Secret Service with the President). The difference
being that they are somewhat self appointed (Rand did state that they
carry his honour and that might have triggered all sorts of Aiel
obligations [such as bodyguarding] on their part) and are a somewhat
large force for a bodyguard [though if Rand appointed a smallish
subgroup to come with him they would probably be satisfied].
Emma
ps. For Rand's somewhat dubious sanity it is very fortunate they
didn't come otherwise when he lost it at Ebou Dar a fair number of
them might have died at his hands.
--
\----
|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
|_\/ em...@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht
Daniel Demus
"John S. Novak, III" wrote:
>
They administered corporal punishment for breaking the law. They are
warriors. He didn't listen to anything else they tried, so they took the
drastic approach. I personally believe that taking into account the
usual hardhanded nature of Aiel society the maidens have been the
paragons of self-control until now.
As Rand is also wasting potential warriors by trying to coddle them, I
think yes, giving him a beating was the only option left.
And he wasn't beaten senseless, just bruised.
What in your esteemed opinion should they have done, taking the rest of
Randland's level into account?
--
Daniel
Oh, yeah, what are you gonna do? Release the dogs? Or the bees? Or
the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark, they shoot
bees at you?
-Homer Simpson
UIN: 11216730
Laura M. Parkinson
blurted out:
>On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:08:45 GMT, smo...@my-dejanews.com
Actually, would the fact that there are criminals that need to be
bound, and the "fact" (if it is so) that the Age of Legends was "happy
happy joy joy time" be mutually exclusive? I mean, we are dealing with
human nature, here. Do we ever truly expect any age, even a Golden
Age, to be completely happy and crime-free? Some people are
psychopaths. Some go on power trips. That doesn't change. The thing
with the Age of Legends seems to be that, for the most part, most
crime and social problems have been eradicated. Poverty seems to be a
thing of the past, which would cut down immensely on crime right
there, as well as the better educational systems. The One Power is in
use, which would cut down on other problems like pollution, resource
depletion, etc., and even help to reverse them. I'm not saying that
every single person was living in harmony with the world, and that
nothing bad ever happened. Obviously, this wasn't the case. What seems
to be the case is that most social problems were greatly reduced, if
not eradicated, illnesses were a lot less serious due to Healing, life
spans were greatly increased, the social norm was to be giving and
charitable rather than to rebel and try to get all that you can get
for yourself, environmental problems were probably gone, resource
problems probably gone as well... things like that. Hell, even crime
and violence couldn't have been nearly a hair as prevalent as they are
in our own world. Not simply "because RJ says so" in the Guide or
straight out, but because of the evidence from the books. Can you ever
possibly imagine a culture like the Aiel (the original culture, not
the desert culture from Rand's time) existing in a world that WASN'T
peaceful to the extreme? Sure, we have incidents like tempers flaring,
a few isolated criminals, etc. But not enough to undermine the fact
that, in general, the Age of Legends WAS a Golden Age.
Bryon Wasserman
wrote:
>
>_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>
>She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a fair margin).
>We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the power, but none are older.
Do we know how sharply rate of aging correlates with strength in the
power? I know that stronger channelers live longer, but how much
longer?
Reanne seems to be aging at roughly the same rate as Moghedien despite
being only 1/4th as strong.
>The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
>violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term effects
>of poor nutrition.
Violent death? I thought that the Aiel had restrictions about killing
Wise Ones. IIRC, the maidens that the supergirls meet in TDR were
shocked at the idea that anyone would harm a wise one.
Bryon Wasserman
wass...@law.georgetown.edu.removetoreply
" Ahh It's the Rapture! Quick get Bart out of
the house before God comes!"
Jason Atkinson
wrote:
>They administered corporal punishment for breaking the law. They are
>warriors. He didn't listen to anything else they tried, so they took the
>drastic approach. I personally believe that taking into account the
>usual hardhanded nature of Aiel society the maidens have been the
>paragons of self-control until now.
He was not breaking any laws.
Besides, what would people think if the Secret Service started beating
the president anytime he disagreed with them. Would we think they are
going to far? Would we think they are being barbaric? Would we think
that they are trying to usurp power that is not rightfully theirs?
Yes. The President does not have to follow the SS's will, and the
Dragon Reborn does not have to do everything the Maidens tell him.
Dave Rothgery
<36978549...@news-stand.acs.ohio-state.edu>...
>On 7 Jan 1999 04:03:35 GMT, "Dave Rothgery" <dave...@altavista.net>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>>
>>She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a
>>fair margin). We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the
>>power, but none are older.
>
>Do we know how sharply rate of aging correlates with strength in the
>power? I know that stronger channelers live longer, but how much
>longer?
>
>Reanne seems to be aging at roughly the same rate as Moghedien despite
>being only 1/4th as strong.
Reane is 412, and looks to be at least 60 (probably older).
Moghedien is well over 300, IIRC, and looks about 40.
obAside: We really don't know how Reanne compares to Moghedien
quantatatively. Qualitatively, we know that there are at least four
'levels' in between them ( Moiraine, Meilyn, Cadsuane, Elayne ), but the
exact relationship is kind of fuzzy.
>>The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
>>violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term effects
>>of poor nutrition.
>
>Violent death? I thought that the Aiel had restrictions about killing
>Wise Ones. IIRC, the maidens that the supergirls meet in TDR were
>shocked at the idea that anyone would harm a wise one.
There are things other than other Aeil that can cause a violent (or at least
accidental) death. Many of these are very common in the waste. That's what
I was thinking of.
--
John S. Novak, III
>> >They have told him quite a few times that he's pissing in there gruel,
>> >but he has ignored them repeatedly. Delivering a petition in triplicate
>> >would not have helped much and it is not because Rand has a lot of
>> >advisors he listens to, either.
>> And therefore beating him senseless is the correct approach?
>They administered corporal punishment for breaking the law.
Excuse me?
Pissing off Maidens of the Spear is against the law?
Aside from the fact that the very idea is ludicrous, one does have to
remember that Rand was not in the Aiel Waste when that "law" was
broken and that "punishment" administered.
> They are
>warriors. He didn't listen to anything else they tried, so they took the
>drastic approach. I personally believe that taking into account the
>usual hardhanded nature of Aiel society the maidens have been the
>paragons of self-control until now.
They were paragons because they refrained from beating the crap out of
people that didn't do exactly what they wanted? Well, fuck, I should
be up for canonization any day now. But no one seems to apply that to
me.
>What in your esteemed opinion should they have done, taking the rest of
>Randland's level into account?
As I said, trying to talk with him would be novel.
Not at him. With him.
Daniel Demus
Jason Atkinson wrote:
>
> On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 05:56:41 +0100, Daniel Demus <de...@softhome.net>
> wrote:
>
> >They administered corporal punishment for breaking the law. They are
> >warriors. He didn't listen to anything else they tried, so they took the
> >drastic approach. I personally believe that taking into account the
> >usual hardhanded nature of Aiel society the maidens have been the
> >paragons of self-control until now.
>
> He was not breaking any laws.
>
He was breaking their laws and promises he had made to them,
incidentally.
> Besides, what would people think if the Secret Service started beating
> the president anytime he disagreed with them. Would we think they are
> going to far? Would we think they are being barbaric? Would we think
> that they are trying to usurp power that is not rightfully theirs?
> Yes. The President does not have to follow the SS's will, and the
> Dragon Reborn does not have to do everything the Maidens tell him.
The SS has other means of influencing the Pres. I also think that if the
Pres consequently ignored them and put himself in danger, they would
lose a lot of members, because he would be trampling their honour or
demeaning their work.
Secondly we have not defined barbaric as compared to what. In comparison
to the rest of Randland, the Aiel are less barbaric. Compared to modern
society (or the AoL for that matter), they are of course barbaric, as
there aren't any warrior societies running around nowadays, so there is
no comparison.
--
Daniel
CHILDREN'S BOOKS YOU'LL NEVER SEE:
"You Were an Accident"
UIN: 11216730
To reply in newsgroups remember that softhome is only a net, not a com.
Daniel Demus
"John S. Novak, III" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 05:56:41 +0100, Daniel Demus <de...@softhome.net> wrote:
>
> >> >They have told him quite a few times that he's pissing in there gruel,
> >> >but he has ignored them repeatedly. Delivering a petition in triplicate
> >> >would not have helped much and it is not because Rand has a lot of
> >> >advisors he listens to, either.
>
> >> And therefore beating him senseless is the correct approach?
>
> >They administered corporal punishment for breaking the law.
>
> Excuse me?
> Pissing off Maidens of the Spear is against the law?
>
> Aside from the fact that the very idea is ludicrous, one does have to
> remember that Rand was not in the Aiel Waste when that "law" was
> broken and that "punishment" administered.
>
He made a promise and told them to "carry his honour". Now he is trying
to sideline them. Rand is in the same military organization as the
maidens, so he has to abide by the rules, or lose their allegiance. He
doesn't seem to have realized this yet, so maybe a beating can make him
see that they will abandon him if he pisses them off too much.
> > They are
> >warriors. He didn't listen to anything else they tried, so they took the
> >drastic approach. I personally believe that taking into account the
> >usual hardhanded nature of Aiel society the maidens have been the
> >paragons of self-control until now.
>
> They were paragons because they refrained from beating the crap out of
> people that didn't do exactly what they wanted? Well, fuck, I should
> be up for canonization any day now. But no one seems to apply that to
> me.
>
I assume you are not a member of any warrior societies, so I assume you
don't run around fighting people generally. And what is this "exactly as
they wanted" shit? They want to participate on an equal footing with all
the other Aiel, and not be embarrassed because their commander has a
silly view of women. He's preventing them form doing their jobs to the
best of their ability.
> >What in your esteemed opinion should they have done, taking the rest of
> >Randland's level into account?
>
> As I said, trying to talk with him would be novel.
> Not at him. With him.
>
They have tried to explain to him their ideas of honour, and whatnot,
after which he seemed to start accepting it, except when it actually
matters to them. Didn't he even promise at some point before the attack
on the Seanchan, that he would not exclude or leave them behind when he
faced danger? I mean what do you think of some politician who promises
the sun and the sky to get elected, and then conveniently ignores this
when he is in power. They're certainly not going to have a lot of
respect for the man, if he continues as he does.
--
Daniel
CHILDREN'S BOOKS YOU'LL NEVER SEE:
"Daddy Drinks Because You Cry"
Authorised User
John S. Novak, III <j...@concentric.net> wrote in article
<slrn79dc...@207.155.184.72>...
Actually, I think that the AS *KNEW* that it would shorten their extra life
(they *DO* still live longer than "mortals", just not as much). I think
that Siuan summed it up best when she said that swearing on the Rod was
what made one Aes Sedai, not just the ability to channel. I think they
made the choice between "shorten their lives a little" and "shorten them a
lot".
After the breaking, I don't think the commoners trusted *ANY* AS, male *or*
female. The only way they could gain trust was to use a drastic measure
(binding oneself to know the end of time, or whatever Messanna? said). By
the Oaths, which people knew the AS had to obey, they could be trusted
(somewhat).
Authorised User
John S. Novak, III <j...@concentric.net> wrote in article
<slrn79apg...@207.155.184.72>...
> On 7 Jan 1999 04:03:35 GMT, Dave Rothgery <dave...@altavista.net> wrote:
>
> >_Sorilea_ is the oldest living Wise One.
>
> >She's weaker in the One Power than Daigan (the weakest AS by a fair
margin).
> >We know of Wise Ones that are far stronger in the power, but none are
older.
>
> >The only reasonable explanation is the extremely high probablility of a
> >violent death when you live in the Waste, or perhaps the long-term
effects
> >of poor nutrition.
>
> Or Jordan screwing up.
> I still claim that the lifespan and ageless look thing was tacked on
> as an afterthought some time after tGH.
>
You mean like when he decided that the other FS wouldn't be old, like A&B?
Let's see, they will look like regular people, but what about that
"ageless" look...I know...the Oath Rod!
tdc...@students.uiuc.edu
Ginter) wrote:
>In article <MPG.10fd9ce42...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>mant...@worldnet.att.net says...
>
><major snippage>
>
>#
>#Actually, there are a lot of derivations of swordplay that do not involve
>#sharpened weapons. If duelling with tourney rapiers (dulled & safety
>#tipped), or rattan katanas, or whatever, continued long enough, it could
>#eventually become the image people have when "swords" are mentioned.
>#Duelling, competitive, but not deadly.
>#
>#Granted, this would take a Very Long Time, but hey, we've got millenia to
>#play around with here.
>#
>
>Y'know, I've never actually considered the feasability of this before,
>I've just dismissed it as some contrived piece of unlikely fiction.
>However, comma, let's consider many modern sports that could
>conceivably be turned to a lethal application, but have most likely
>rarely been even considered, like darts, bowling, horseshoes, or
>something like that. These all seem fairly innocuous, but what if the
>darts were tipped with poison and thrown into a guard's neck to
>incapacitate him and effect an infiltration? What if bowling balls
>were explosive? I think you get the point.
>
>Of course, one need look no further than Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker
>trilogy, and the description of the combat droids playing cricket, to
>see that there are some places that this conversation simply shouldn't
>go.
>--
>Steve G.
>Gaidin to Emilie Sedai
>
>"They will pay," Lews Therin growled. "I am the Lord of the Morning."
Take wrestling for example. It's normally accepted as a high school
sport, and purely that, "sport" with no martial derivations. But,
from knowing some friends who have used it in fights and personal
experience in other martial arts, it's one of the most highly
developed, applicable, and _best_ unarmed martial art out there.
I'd give you more info on it's martial art relatives, history, and
random, useless junk, but I'd be blabbing.
tim
Mad Hamish
>On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 21:15:00 -0800, Mooselord Volus <shand...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> IIRC, it was mid-aCoS (Though possibly LoC - too tired to look up the
>>refrence). Rand once again gated off into danger without bringing the
>>Maidens set to guard him along. This of course violated their honor, since
>>he had supposedly placed his trust in them. When he got back, they explained
>>the situation to him in terms he would understand, by very carefully beating
>>the hell out of him. I don't blame them in the slightest - Rand is being an
>>absolute prick to them with his "don't hurt, or by inaction allow hurt to
>>come to, women" thing. I think he more-or-less got the message...
>
>Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
>disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
>and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
They'd tried making their point several other ways without it getting
through.
****************************************************************************
The Politician's Slogan
'You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all
of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
Fortunately only a simple majority is required.'
****************************************************************************
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@postoffice.utas.edu.au
h_l...@tassie.net.au
u43jb
: j...@concentric.net (John S. Novak, III) pondered for a while, then
: blurted out:
: >On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 16:08:45 GMT, smo...@my-dejanews.com
: ><smo...@my-dejanews.com> wrote:
: >
: >>> Both are known effects,and sentencing someone to die young is still
: >>> sentencing them to die young, whether the shortened life span is a
: >>> side effect or not.
: >
: >>Probably not, but I'm not sure. At the current time, the only people to make
: >>this leap so far are Elayne & Nyn (well, she's actually still pretty much in
: >>the dark, but she's softer than a sneaker full of puppy-shit, anyway), how
: >>long did it take the AoL Aes Sedai to figure this out? Part of my point was,
: >>since it's an unexpected side effect that took a long time for the effect to
: >>manifest, at least for the first 100 or so years no-one recognized that this
: >>was happening.
: >
: >Probably, they figured it out really damned quickly.
: >First, I wouldn't be surprised if they had a sophisticated enough
: >theoretical basis to predict it outright. (Assuming Boye is wrong and
: >it's unintentional.) Second, the ageless look itself becomes pretty
: >obvious after a few years, and that would prompt some serious
: >intensive research into the thing as a general tool. If it causes the
: >ageless look, what else does it do?
: >
: >>> I don't really think that's much of an excuse.
Rather like the British Empire.
James Bremner
ps Rule Brittania, Brittania rules the wave...
John S. Novak, III
<h_l...@postoffice.utas.edu.au> wrote:
>>Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
>>disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
>>and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
>They'd tried making their point several other ways without it getting
>through.
Gosh.
I've tried making a point to my boss several times, but he can be
pretty fuckin' stupid, sometimes.
What do you reckon would happen to me if I lurked outside the
stairwell, waited until I saw him coming, and kicked his ass down the
stairs and punctuated the discussion with a couple of swift kicks to
the ribs?
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
Helge Moulding
> stairwell, waited until I saw him coming, and kicked his ass down the
> stairs and punctuated the discussion with a couple of swift kicks to
> the ribs?
I think that Jordan may not be trying to portrait barbaric people, but
*disciplined* people. There's a world of a difference.
I bet this observation has been made in the past, but Jordan did go to
the "Citadel", where I understand beating the crap out of a cadet who
is "pretty fucking stupid" is SOP. (At least to me military schools are
famous for this. I don't know if the "Citadel" is a specific exception.)
A lot of folks who go through that sort of thing tend to be proud of how
they bore up, and tend to wish other people got the same treatment. At
least, I've heard many guys tell me, "my dad would knock me through the
wall!" to impress on me that was where their great behavior came from.
I do not want to get into a debate on the merits of corporeal
punishment. That doesn't belong in this group.
I personally agree with Novak that a civilized society cannot afford
that kind of behavior, and that I wouldn't want to fall prey to the
Aeils' tender mercy. But I think that Jordan sees the Aiel through
different eyes, and that point of view may be more pertinent.
--
Helge Moulding
mailto:hmou...@mailexcite.com Just another guy
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/1401 with a weird name
John S. Novak, III
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>I think that Jordan may not be trying to portrait barbaric people, but
>*disciplined* people. There's a world of a difference.
I'm very disciplined, but I don't get to use that as an excuse if I
want to kick the shit out of some asshole who desperately deserves it.
>I bet this observation has been made in the past, but Jordan did go to
>the "Citadel", where I understand beating the crap out of a cadet who
>is "pretty fucking stupid" is SOP. (At least to me military schools are
>famous for this. I don't know if the "Citadel" is a specific exception.)
I expect most people would consider a good deal of what goes on in the
Citadel to be barbaric, as well. Established hazing routines, for
instance.
Ben Ryan
> On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:50:18 -0700, Helge Moulding
> >I bet this observation has been made in the past, but Jordan did go to
> >the "Citadel", where I understand beating the crap out of a cadet who
> >is "pretty fucking stupid" is SOP. (At least to me military schools are
> >famous for this. I don't know if the "Citadel" is a specific exception.)
>
> I expect most people would consider a good deal of what goes on in the
> Citadel to be barbaric, as well. Established hazing routines, for
> instance.
Hazing aside, even at those stone cold military institutions
"beating the crap out of someone" for anything is *not* SOP, thank you
very much. In fact, it's grounds for some severe penalties.
--
Ben Ryan http://www.core.binghamton.edu/~mobius
"Accuracy is, in every case, advantageous to beauty, and just reasoning to
delicate sentiment. In vain would we exalt the one by depreciating the
other." -David Hume
Steven M. Ginter
says...
#On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 07:32:32 GMT, Mad Hamish
#<h_l...@postoffice.utas.edu.au> wrote:
#
#>>Yes, and beating the shit out of someone is the proper way to express
#>>disatisfaction with one's general, commander in chief, effective king,
#>>and saviour of the world. People wonder why I call them savage.
#
#>They'd tried making their point several other ways without it getting
#>through.
#
#Gosh.
#I've tried making a point to my boss several times, but he can be
#pretty fuckin' stupid, sometimes.
#
#What do you reckon would happen to me if I lurked outside the
#stairwell, waited until I saw him coming, and kicked his ass down the
#stairs and punctuated the discussion with a couple of swift kicks to
#the ribs?
#
I know you're being sarcastic, but I have seen this done and it
_works_.
When the needle it skipping, sometimes it just needs a good thump to
get it going again...
Steven M. Ginter
goul...@student.REMOVE.law.ucla.edu says...
#On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:50:18 -0700, Helge Moulding
#<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
#
#>I bet this observation has been made in the past, but Jordan did go to
#>the "Citadel", where I understand beating the crap out of a cadet who
#>is "pretty fucking stupid" is SOP. (At least to me military schools are
#>famous for this. I don't know if the "Citadel" is a specific exception.)
#
#The federal service academies (Naval Academy, Air Force Academy,
#West Point, etc.) outlawed physical hazing more than a generation
#ago, even before they were gender-integrated (in 1976).
#
#Not only can upper-class midshipmen/cadets not physically touch the
#plebes/doolies (first year students), they aren't even allowed to
#assign physical punishments like push-ups or sit-ups. They can (and
#do) make life miserable in other ways...
#
#The Citadel and VMI are state-level institutions (S. Carolina and
#Virginia, respectively), and run on different rules and under
#different administrative regimes than the federal academies.
#
Be that as it may, hazing still occurs in all levels of all military
institutions. "Rites of Passage" are still very much an integral part
of military life, the childish concept that "I was here before you
therefore I get to punish you for it" is still actively practiced by
most military personnel. Oh sure it's denied and spoken against, and
the CO even issued strict orders against it on several occasions, and
it may not be as bad or severe as it used to be, but it still happens
frequently, make no mistake.
--
Steve G.
Gaidin to Emilie Sedai
"From personal experience, I can attest that reading the
documentation for Microsoft's ActiveX gains 1D4 Mythos
Knowledge and incurs 1D6 SAN loss."
-Russell Wallace, rasfwr-j
John S. Novak, III
Well, we're up to _six_ copies of this message...
Really, it was barely worth posting once.
>But the Aiel arent in the here and now, you cant expect the things we
>consider "normal" to apply to them, our society is what deems what is "right
>and proper" ..who knows, mebbe had things gone a little differently, beating
>people could be a daily "norm". Just because you believe what they do is
>"savage" doesnt mean it is. Perhaps you could look back to years ago, and
>see that not only beatings were "norm" but actually hanging people was too.
>The world they live in is not ours, so you can't judge them by today's
>standards.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
It's been said before, and it's been said a lot better.
Do allow me to try and short this particular circuit of useless
discourse (is there a way to selectively invoke Godwin's theorem) and
ask you if there is any behaviour you _wouldn't_ condone in the holy
name of cultural relativism?
John S. Novak, III
<sgi...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>#What do you reckon would happen to me if I lurked outside the
>#stairwell, waited until I saw him coming, and kicked his ass down the
>#stairs and punctuated the discussion with a couple of swift kicks to
>#the ribs?
>I know you're being sarcastic,
Actually, I'm not.
John M. Atkinson
wrote:
>I expect most people would consider a good deal of what goes on in the
>Citadel to be barbaric, as well. Established hazing routines, for
>instance.
As well as stupidity like setting fire to people's clothes, etc.
Which a bunch of them got in serious trouble for not long ago. There
are about three major holes in the "logic" used by the defenders of
hazing, and each of them can have a batallion marched through 'em.
John M. Atkinson
'erols' instead of spamblock
"Ultimately, most problems can be solved by applying a large
brick to the correct skull. Difficulties arise when you don't
have a brick or can't find the right skull. The devil is always
in the details."
--Marcus Cole
Trent Goulding
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>I bet this observation has been made in the past, but Jordan did go to
>the "Citadel", where I understand beating the crap out of a cadet who
>is "pretty fucking stupid" is SOP. (At least to me military schools are
>famous for this. I don't know if the "Citadel" is a specific exception.)
The federal service academies (Naval Academy, Air Force Academy,
West Point, etc.) outlawed physical hazing more than a generation
ago, even before they were gender-integrated (in 1976).
Not only can upper-class midshipmen/cadets not physically touch the
plebes/doolies (first year students), they aren't even allowed to
assign physical punishments like push-ups or sit-ups. They can (and
do) make life miserable in other ways...
The Citadel and VMI are state-level institutions (S. Carolina and
Virginia, respectively), and run on different rules and under
different administrative regimes than the federal academies.
--
Trent
"The age has obliterated human magnificence by linking a banality
with a non sequitur- the observation that everyone has flaws,
and the conclusion that therefore no one merits emulation."
jare
John S. Novak, III wrote in message ...
>>*disciplined* people. There's a world of a difference.
>
>I'm very disciplined, but I don't get to use that as an excuse if I
>want to kick the shit out of some asshole who desperately deserves it.
jare
jare
jare
jare
Trent Goulding
Ginter) wrote:
>Be that as it may, hazing still occurs in all levels of all military
>institutions. "Rites of Passage" are still very much an integral part
>of military life, the childish concept that "I was here before you
>therefore I get to punish you for it" is still actively practiced by
>most military personnel. Oh sure it's denied and spoken against, and
>the CO even issued strict orders against it on several occasions, and
>it may not be as bad or severe as it used to be, but it still happens
>frequently, make no mistake.
I don't dispute any of what you say; but I would point out that I
was speaking of a very particular situation- physical hazing in the
federal service academies.
It seems to me that you are speaking of something much more diffuse,
across the military at large.
jare
John S. Novak, III wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:50:18 -0700, Helge Moulding
><hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>
>>I think that Jordan may not be trying to portrait barbaric people, but
>>*disciplined* people. There's a world of a difference.
>
>I'm very disciplined, but I don't get to use that as an excuse if I
>want to kick the shit out of some asshole who desperately deserves it.
>
>>I bet this observation has been made in the past, but Jordan did go to
>>the "Citadel", where I understand beating the crap out of a cadet who
>>is "pretty fucking stupid" is SOP. (At least to me military schools are
>>famous for this. I don't know if the "Citadel" is a specific exception.)
>
>I expect most people would consider a good deal of what goes on in the
>Citadel to be barbaric, as well. Established hazing routines, for
>instance.
>
>
jl...@my-dejanews.com
"jare" <ja...@plazma.net> wrote:
> But the Aiel arent in the here and now, you cant expect the things we
> consider "normal" to apply to them, our society is what deems what is "right
> and proper" ..who knows, mebbe had things gone a little differently, beating
> people could be a daily "norm". Just because you believe what they do is
> "savage" doesnt mean it is. Perhaps you could look back to years ago, and
> see that not only beatings were "norm" but actually hanging people was too.
> The world they live in is not ours, so you can't judge them by today's
> standards.
Wrong. I love it when people try to use the rather pathetic excuse that our
society is not allowed to judge other society for some reason or other. Why
the hell can't I judge them by today's standards?
Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel are a society, whose entire
philosiphy is built around violence. Frankly, any culture that has the idea of
the "blood feud" or researches and practice torture has a long way to go in my
book.
Sounds like savagery to me.
John Mcgivney
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Aseem Garg
the aiel are the vanguard of the dragon's armies. the dragon has laid claim
to the most fearsome people in the land. naturally, you don't create a
fearsome people by coddling one another. the aiel are so barbaric because
they need to be, it's what they were born to do. without the aiel, rand
would be screwed, so he's got to deal with the side-effects that go along
with being the chief of chiefs of the most fearsome fighting force.
Helge Moulding
> >I think that Jordan may not be trying to portrait barbaric people,
> >but *disciplined* people. There's a world of a difference.
> I'm very disciplined, but I don't get to use that as an excuse if I
> want to kick the shit out of some asshole who desperately deserves it.
That's not the point. I am postulating that Jordan's background lead him
to portrait disciplined people as people who use physical duress to
enforce that discipline. Jordan's Aiel are not meant to be seen as
barbarians, but as disciplined soldiers.
However, it is entirely reasonable for you to conclude that someone who
portraits disciplined people like Jordan portraits the Aiel must be a
barbarian. I suppose some folks even take pride in that epithet.
--
Helge "the librarian" Moulding
Helge Moulding
> Wrong. I love it when people try to use the rather pathetic excuse
> that our society is not allowed to judge other society for some reason
> or other. Why the hell can't I judge them by today's standards?
Hm. Repost that question with a TAN: header. It's off topic, but lots of
folks will love to debate it with you, no doubt.
> Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel are a society,
No, they are not. They are a bunch of characters in Jordan's book.
Jordan's description of them serves a purpose besides generating an
anthropological catalog of customs. In fact, there is so much of that
anthropological catalog missing that the "society" is pathetically
two-dimensional. What exists of the catalog is often inconsistent with
what real world observation would seem to indicate is possible. Luckily
(for Jordan) people tend not to care about that when reading a novel.
--
Helge Moulding
jl...@my-dejanews.com
Fine. Here:
Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel philosiphy anc culture is built
around violence.
Happy now?
Laura M. Parkinson
>In article <c3Vm2.1$Dm....@nsw.nnrp.telstra.net>,
> "jare" <ja...@plazma.net> wrote:
>
>> But the Aiel arent in the here and now, you cant expect the things we
>> consider "normal" to apply to them, our society is what deems what is "right
>> and proper" ..who knows, mebbe had things gone a little differently, beating
>> people could be a daily "norm". Just because you believe what they do is
>> "savage" doesnt mean it is. Perhaps you could look back to years ago, and
>> see that not only beatings were "norm" but actually hanging people was too.
>> The world they live in is not ours, so you can't judge them by today's
>> standards.
>
>Wrong. I love it when people try to use the rather pathetic excuse that our
>society is not allowed to judge other society for some reason or other. Why
>the hell can't I judge them by today's standards?
Um, because today's standards are based on completely different mores,
are historically different, and aren't perfect themselves?
The Aiel are an honor-based society. We're not. Their culture is based
around the need to survive, in the middle of a freaking desert. Ours
isn't. Just for starters.
>Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel are a society, whose entire
>philosiphy is built around violence. Frankly, any culture that has the idea of
>the "blood feud" or researches and practice torture has a long way to go in my
>book.
Actually, their entire philosophy is built around a) honor, b)
survival. Because of A, any lack of honor will be taken very harshly,
as it needs to be, if the entire society can continue to function
based around honor. Because of A and B, they're not going to be able
to use long-winded, he-said-she-said trials, punishment such as
imprisonment, etc. They take too much time, undermine the meaning of
"honor," and aren't feasable in the environment. So what would you
have the Aiel do? Slap an offender on the wrist, say "bad boy, no
oosquai"? They take gai'shan, and they use physical means to punish,
to settle disputes, etc. It's quick, and efficient, which is good for
the environment, where they have to be prepared for anything and can't
be bogged down by procedure too much. It helps to keep the Aiel fit
and alert, and ready to take on other enemies, such as their
environment.
>Sounds like savagery to me.
Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
Besides, any culture has elements of savagery. What do you call our
own military mindsets, our high crime rates, and such "recreations" as
football and boxing?
-'-,-'-<<0 Trickster 0>>-'-,-'- lpark...@mindspring.com
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/1327
VampCode Beta: PNlmpA23MrHnWc* VS\/^I\/^^\/^B\/^^WnRnH\/^ NR^\/^^\/^L\/^Oci
"Be cunning and full of tricks and your people shall never be
destroyed." -Richard Adams, Watership Down
Jason Atkinson
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>That's not the point. I am postulating that Jordan's background lead him
>to portrait disciplined people as people who use physical duress to
>enforce that discipline. Jordan's Aiel are not meant to be seen as
>barbarians, but as disciplined soldiers.
>However, it is entirely reasonable for you to conclude that someone who
>portraits disciplined people like Jordan portraits the Aiel must be a
>barbarian. I suppose some folks even take pride in that epithet.
Okay, we're using mention of the Citadel and soldiers for our
arguments.
Want to guess what would happen to a Citadel student who beat the crap
out of the head of school for, say, not letting his unit do the flag
ceremony? What would happen to a group of MP's who assaulted a
general because they disagreed with him?
Disciplined soldiers do what they are told. They most certainly do
not assault their commander in chief.
johnjoh1
> Um, because today's standards are based on completely different mores,
> are historically different, and aren't perfect themselves?
>
> The Aiel are an honor-based society. We're not. Their culture is based
> around the need to survive, in the middle of a freaking desert. Ours
> isn't. Just for starters.
>
> >Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel are a society, whose entire
> >philosiphy is built around violence. Frankly, any culture that has the idea of
> >the "blood feud" or researches and practice torture has a long way to go in my
> >book.
>
> Actually, their entire philosophy is built around a) honor, b)
> survival. Because of A, any lack of honor will be taken very harshly,
> as it needs to be, if the entire society can continue to function
> based around honor. Because of A and B, they're not going to be able
> to use long-winded, he-said-she-said trials, punishment such as
> imprisonment, etc. They take too much time, undermine the meaning of
> "honor," and aren't feasable in the environment. So what would you
> have the Aiel do? Slap an offender on the wrist, say "bad boy, no
> oosquai"? They take gai'shan, and they use physical means to punish,
> to settle disputes, etc. It's quick, and efficient, which is good for
> the environment, where they have to be prepared for anything and can't
> be bogged down by procedure too much. It helps to keep the Aiel fit
> and alert, and ready to take on other enemies, such as their
> environment.
>
>
Frankly, I find the idea of any society based on such strict rules of "honor"
ludicrous. Defining honor as a series of rules and regulations doesn't work with
me. The Aiel society is all about the Asian concept of 'face', how you look to
others, not necessarily on any particular concept of internal honor, thus the need
for a system like ji'e'toh. It reminds of me of Jewish society, and the complex
rules and regulations they built around the law of Moses.
And who decided Rand was wrong? The Maidens? Rand? Aiel society? Law and order can
be swift, w/out losing any of it's fairness; it only becomes long and drawn-out
when we forget the basics. How exactly does a trial undermine honor?
> >Sounds like savagery to me.
>
> Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
>
Er . . . The Japanese culture was ruthless, with little regard for human life. The
Seanchan culture is modeled after it. The idea that the ruler or noble is always
right, is repugnant to me.
>
> Besides, any culture has elements of savagery. What do you call our
> own military mindsets, our high crime rates, and such "recreations" as
> football and boxing?
That doesn't make it right. What is savagery and civilization anyway? I think it's
pointless to define civilization. We don't know what makes a civilization, we don't
know how they are formed. We can talk about violence and brutality, but talking
about civilization and savagery is pointless. Are the Aiel civilized? What about
16th century England? Where do we determine that? Savagery is not just violence,
and violence does not mean savagery, IMO.
John Johnson "Cogito ergo sum--I think, therefore I am." Descartes
Helge Moulding
> Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel philosiphy anc culture is
> built around violence.
> Happy now?
No. The Aiel don't exist. Jordan exists. He created the Aiel, and for
reasons certainly known best to him chose to endow them with these
attributes. Jordan did not intend to create a bunch of barbarians,
even though that's how the Aiel come across to you lot. To understand
the story you need to take into account Jordan's intent, which is
expressed in the roles that he assigns to his characters.
What I'm saying here is that I think your quarrel is not with the Aiel
but with Jordan. Jordan wanted to show Rand as the leader of morally
supreme warriors, and for Jordan this moral supremacy involves moral
strength, leadership, and duty. He depicts the Aiel as having those
qualities, ahead of other, lesser qualities like compassion,
cooperation, or nurture.
Your quarrel is with Jordan's hierarchy of values, not with the nature
of Aiel culture. I don't agree with his hierarchy of values, either,
but I think that characterizing the Aiel as savages misses the point
Jordan is making.
There's no point to reading his books if I insist on missing his point,
is there?
John S. Novak, III
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>That's not the point. I am postulating that Jordan's background lead him
>to portrait disciplined people as people who use physical duress to
>enforce that discipline. Jordan's Aiel are not meant to be seen as
>barbarians, but as disciplined soldiers.
It hardly maters how they are intended to be seen.
What remains is that many of the acts described are the acts of
barbarians and savages.
John S. Novak, III
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>jl...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>> Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel philosiphy anc culture is
>> built around violence.
>> Happy now?
>No. The Aiel don't exist.
Will you stop banging that particular semantic gavel?
I'm sure you think it has relevance here, but it doesn't.
We all fucking _know_ we're reading a story.
We all fucking _know_ that the Aiel have no physical existance.
We all fucking _know_ Jordan made them up.
What you apparently don't fucking know is that when someone says, "The
Aiel are this," or "The Aiel are that," they are using verbal
shorthand, because trying to say something like, "The description of
the Aiel culture as inferred from written apssages indicates that..."
It's cumbersome and of interest only to highly irksome pedants.
>Jordan exists. He created the Aiel, and for
>reasons certainly known best to him chose to endow them with these
>attributes. Jordan did not intend to create a bunch of barbarians,
>even though that's how the Aiel come across to you lot. To understand
>the story you need to take into account Jordan's intent, which is
>expressed in the roles that he assigns to his characters.
Go talk to Sea Wasp.
For my part, when I read a story, _I_ decide whether or not people are
savages or barbarians. Jordan can jump up on my desk and shout in my
face that they're not savages or barbarians-- all that means is that
I'll knock him down, that I'll chase him out of my office, and that's
he's wrong. Authors _can_ be wrong, you know.
During the last Virginia signing, he indicated that he thought the
Seanchan culture was a viable and reasonable response to the
conditions they found on the other side of the ocean. I find the
Seanchan culture entirely reprehensible, not somuch morally bankrupt
as actively acruing karmic debt-- ie, Jordan is wrong.
>What I'm saying here is that I think your quarrel is not with the Aiel
>but with Jordan. Jordan wanted to show Rand as the leader of morally
>supreme warriors, and for Jordan this moral supremacy involves moral
>strength, leadership, and duty. He depicts the Aiel as having those
>qualities, ahead of other, lesser qualities like compassion,
>cooperation, or nurture.
Just exactly what morality is there in beating the crap out of your
commander in chief? I see no great morality in the Aiel. Morality is
a product of choice, and the Aiel choice is essentially binary--
comply, or not comply with a rigid and ridiculous code of honor.
>Your quarrel is with Jordan's hierarchy of values, not with the nature
>of Aiel culture. I don't agree with his hierarchy of values, either,
>but I think that characterizing the Aiel as savages misses the point
>Jordan is making.
>There's no point to reading his books if I insist on missing his point,
>is there?
There's also little point in reading if you're just going to
uncritically accept his point as valid. _My_ point is that the Aiel
are savages. If Jordan's point is that they are not savages, then my
sub-point is that Jordan is wrong.
John McGivney
Helge Moulding was an absolute moron in message
<369D23...@mailexcite.com>...>
>No. The Aiel don't exist.
What! Oh, holy shit! I thought all these books were NON-fiction!
Of course the Aiel don't exist. They exist in the books, though. A-duh.
>Jordan exists. He created the Aiel, and for
>reasons certainly known best to him chose to endow them with these
>attributes. Jordan did not intend to create a bunch of barbarians,
>even though that's how the Aiel come across to you lot. To understand
>the story you need to take into account Jordan's intent, which is
>expressed in the roles that he assigns to his characters.
Wow, you're speaking for Robert Jordan! Even better, you're saying he
instills his personal philosiphy in every society he writes about. Um, no.
Last I checked authors were allowed to write about people, places, and
societies that do not agree with the author's politics, morals, etc...
>What I'm saying here is that I think your quarrel is not with the Aiel
>but with Jordan. Jordan wanted to show Rand as the leader of morally
>supreme warriors, and for Jordan this moral supremacy involves moral
>strength, leadership, and duty.
Point 1: Constant warfare and torture? Morally supreme?
Point 2: How exactly do you know Jordan was trying to do that? Maybe he was
just showing what happens to people after you stick them in the desert for a
thousand odd years?
He depicts the Aiel as having those
>qualities, ahead of other, lesser qualities like compassion,
>cooperation, or nurture.
>
>Your quarrel is with Jordan's hierarchy of values, not with the nature
>of Aiel culture. I don't agree with his hierarchy of values, either,
>but I think that characterizing the Aiel as savages misses the point
>Jordan is making.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.
Sir, you appear to be the worst form of following lapdog in desperate search
of an identity and philosiphy that I have ever run across. Oddly, you also
seem labor under the curious idea that authors do not want people to think
about the pros and cons of what they write about. I fail to understand why
to seem to think that the Aiel represent Jordan's hierarchy of values. They
are simply characters in the books, like the Illianers, Shinarians and
Forsaken.
>There's no point to reading his books if I insist on missing his point,
>is there?
>--
> Helge Moulding
No, there is no point in reading his books if you don't want to think.
Anyway, these books are not political manifestos like some of RAH's work.
They are a good fun, *detailed* read, and I like to think about the details.
Get A F*cking Clue,
sincerely,
John McGivney
John McGivney
Laura M. Parkinson wrote in message
<369cfc40...@news.mindspring.com>...
>Um, because today's standards are based on completely different mores,
>are historically different, and aren't perfect themselves?
>
>The Aiel are an honor-based society. We're not. Their culture is based
>around the need to survive, in the middle of a freaking desert. Ours
>isn't. Just for starters.
So what? I'm not allowed to say that torture, killing, and pointless warfare
is savage? Just because I come from different circumstances I can't judge
things? Hey, I can see where the Aiel are coming from. That dosen't justify
anything, it just explains it.
>
>Actually, their entire philosophy is built around a) honor, b)
>survival. Because of A, any lack of honor will be taken very harshly,
>as it needs to be, if the entire society can continue to function
>based around honor. Because of A and B, they're not going to be able
>to use long-winded, he-said-she-said trials, punishment such as
>imprisonment, etc. They take too much time, undermine the meaning of
>"honor," and aren't feasable in the environment. So what would you
>have the Aiel do? Slap an offender on the wrist, say "bad boy, no
>oosquai"? They take gai'shan, and they use physical means to punish,
>to settle disputes, etc. It's quick, and efficient, which is good for
>the environment, where they have to be prepared for anything and can't
>be bogged down by procedure too much. It helps to keep the Aiel fit
>and alert, and ready to take on other enemies, such as their
>environment.
Well, I actually see the Aiel culture as a harsh society shaped by their
enviornment, who engage in constant warfare with ritual rules in order to
keep the body count low.
>>Sounds like savagery to me.
>
>Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
Certain elements and periods, yes. I can point at any current culture and
point out the elements I consider wrong, and the elements I don't like, and
the fuzzy-grey elements I'm unclear on. It takes a lot for me to paint a
whole culture as savage, though.
>Besides, any culture has elements of savagery. What do you call our
>own military mindsets, our high crime rates, and such "recreations" as
>football and boxing?
Yeah, I was waiting for that one. So <wherever I come from> isn't perfect. I
guess I better stay out of all moral discussions now. Besides, when did I
ever say that our society wasn't savages.
The entire Aiel culture is built from a harsh enviornment, and revolves
around ritual warfare. To me, war is savage. The Aiel are savages. They may
be highly educated, very polite people, and have been screwed over by the
world, and who just happen to go around killing each other.
John McGivney
Helge Moulding
> >No. The Aiel don't exist.
If you know, then why are you getting all outraged about how they Aiel
act? Why aren't you throwing Jordan's book down in disgust? "I've had it
with this idiot's barbaric idea of how people should act!"
None of Jordan's societies are viable upon closer examination. His
national borders are a joke. The interplay between his state powers
is ludicrous. People don't act that way; they have never acted that way.
*Certainly* not for six thousand years! To complain about specific
failings, like the Aiel notion of morality, seems very silly to me.
Definitely sillier than hitting you lot over the head with my patented
semantic hammer.
> Jordan is wrong.
I agree.
> Just exactly what morality is there in beating the crap out of your
> commander in chief?
This is how it works. (NB: I don't agree with this, but Jordan probably
does.)
If your leader has the moral right to be your commander, then you can't
touch him: moral right implies moral strength, and moral strength
implies physical superiority. Since you can beat up your leader, it
means that you have the moral right to do so, and it establishes the
fact that your leader must instead let you lead. If you didn't have the
moral right to do so, then your leader would clean your clock. QED. (In
short hand: Might makes right.)
Have a look at _Moral Politics_. The author explains why Jordan's
choice of qualities are necessary qualities of Jordan's version of
morally superior people. What seems repugnant to you and me is only
common sense to Jordan.
--
Helge "If I had a hammer!" Moulding
John S. Novak, III
<hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>If you know, then why are you getting all outraged about how they Aiel
>act? Why aren't you throwing Jordan's book down in disgust? "I've had it
>with this idiot's barbaric idea of how people should act!"
<Sigh>
Because, as you belabour to point out, it's just a fucking story.
What's more, it's an _interesting_ story.
What the hell do you smoke before you post, anyway?
>None of Jordan's societies are viable upon closer examination. His
>national borders are a joke. The interplay between his state powers
>is ludicrous. People don't act that way; they have never acted that way.
>*Certainly* not for six thousand years!
Oh, a good deal of his cultural stuff is pretty decent. A lot of his
interpersonal stuff is very good. And some of his cultural stuff is
just plain foolish, like the lack of religion.
>To complain about specific
>failings, like the Aiel notion of morality, seems very silly to me.
Clue: This is just one thread. Threads generally have topics.
Specific topics. In _other_ threads, I have complained about the
Seanchan, and the Aes Sedai, and the general lack of religion.
In _this_ thread, the topic is the Aiel and their stupid code of honor
and their savagery and barbarism.
Clear?
>If your leader has the moral right to be your commander, then you can't
>touch him: moral right implies moral strength, and moral strength
>implies physical superiority.
The idea that moral purity correlates with physical strength, or
physical skill, is itself a hallmark of barbarism and savagery,
and can only lead in that direction of further savagery. It sets
up nothing but government by brutish force, where the biggest fist
rules best and screw all the rest-- take a ood look at militia-ruled
Somalia for an example of the logical endpoint of rule by strength.
And look to historical curiosities like trial by combat and
witch-drownings for footnotes and garnish.
I'll say it again-- this is savagery. This is barbarism.
I don't care what justification you put forth for it, I don't
care what noted (or not) authors explain it or hold to it, it is
hollow savagery.
>Have a look at _Moral Politics_. The author explains why Jordan's
>choice of qualities are necessary qualities of Jordan's version of
>morally superior people. What seems repugnant to you and me is only
>common sense to Jordan.
You have an interesting tendency to assume that you know what Jordan
is thinking when he writes things. I'd call it fairly pretentious.
John McGivney
>Well, I think we might be going on slightly different definitions of
>"savages" for one.
>
>
>-'-,-'-<<0 Trickster 0>>-'-,-'- lpark...@mindspring.com
>http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/1327
I think I'll agree with you there, and call it a day.
John
John S. Novak, III
<lpark...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>And yes, the idea of any society based on strict rules of honor is
>absolutely horrifying. *gasp* actually being able to take someone on
>their word rather than to have tons of failsafes and checks on people,
>etc... how horrible!
You may intend irony, but with sufficient thought, I suspect you'd
drop the ironic note. Honor is a difficult, if not an impossible,
thing to define. The broad outlines can be pinned down and maybe a
few cutlture-specific things that make sense at the time.
But replacing a legal system with a formalized concept of honor is a
ferociously bad idea. Laws can be overturned by a proper collection
of men. Outmoded concepts of honor perpetuate themselves forever,
much like they have done with the Aiel.
And the _true_ irony is, once a system of honor grows past a certain
point in complexity, that system of honor develops more and more
legalistic ways to twist out of circumstances, bend the original
intents, skirt the modern issues, and even give you psychological
handles with which to manipulate other people.
Yes, a society based on a strict code of honor is a bad idea. It's
inflexible, and doomed to failure in the long run, and likely doomed
to corruption in the short run.
(I have a code of honor, myself. But it's a private code. And one of
the highest tenets is, "Anyone who tries to manipulate me through my
code of honor is asking to become raw meat." But no social code of
honor will ever contain that clause, any more than any religion will
encourage freedom of thought.)
>Rand WAS wrong according to the codes of the Aiel society. Of which
>Rand, as car'a'carn, is intrinsically a part.
I don't quite see where Rand's not bring the Maidens into battle
whenever and wherever they want is either a crime or a breach of
honor. What it is, is Rand failing them the opportunity to indulge
their _pride_.
>The _entire_ Japenese culture? And while the Seanchan can be cruel and
>ruthless (especially when following some of their questionable
>leaders) I wouldn't call them savages, by any means. Especially not
>the entire culture, after some of the PoV's we get in PoD.
The Seanchan are sophisticated savages, nothing more.
Judi M
would make them behave, keep them from going beyond the waste and destroying
places on the other side of the mountain range. As far as I remember, there
was no mention they believed in the afterlife, if this is true, then there
would be no religious reward for good behavior at the end of there life.
Anybody recall Hammurabi's Code?
Judith
Emma Pease wrote in message ...
>In article <slrn79qbi...@207.155.184.72>, John S. Novak, III wrote:
>>On Wed, 13 Jan 1999 10:22:23 -0700, Helge Moulding
>><hmou...@mailexcite.com> wrote:
>>
>>>That's not the point. I am postulating that Jordan's background lead him
>>>to portrait disciplined people as people who use physical duress to
>>>enforce that discipline. Jordan's Aiel are not meant to be seen as
>>>barbarians, but as disciplined soldiers.
>>
>>It hardly maters how they are intended to be seen.
>>What remains is that many of the acts described are the acts of
>>barbarians and savages.
>
>Let me suggest something.
>
>I believe we agree the the Aiel are barbaric.
>
>However, in speculating about where the story is going whether Jordan
>also thinks they are barbaric and wrong (such as beating up Rand) is
>important. Note that Egwene and Rand both seem to have adopted many
>of the Aiel ideas (Rand allows himself to be beaten up and seems to
>think the Maidens were right to do so). So if Egwene and Rand have
>adopted ideas from the Aiel that are wrong in the author's point of
>view then things are going to turn out one way, but, if they are right
>in the author's point of view then things will turn out another way.
>
>Personally, I think Jordan may hold more with Perrin's point of view,
>and, Perrin dislikes much of what the Aiel do.
>
>Emma
>
>--
>\----
>|\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster
>|_\/ em...@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht
The Amorphous Mass
> Laws can be overturned by a proper collection
> of men.
Actually, the idea of repeal is a relatively recent one (or at least, a
historically and geographically local one). It appears in colonial
Massachusetts, in marked contrast to contemporary (17th c.) England, where
a law, once passed, was on the books forever.
If the "proper collection of men" is an armed revolution, or an
invasion, then that method suffices to overturn *any* cultural or
political order.
> Outmoded concepts of honor perpetuate themselves forever,
> much like they have done with the Aiel.
Americans declared days of "fasting and humiliation" to repent for their
sins whenever something disastrous happened (crop failure, for example),
right up through the Civil War, when Lincoln declared one. Somehow, not
only the practice but the entire ethic behind it has vanished entirely
from the mainstream culture in a few generations. Most Americans don't
even know it ever existed.
--
The Amorphous Mass
amo...@avalon.net
http://www.avalon.net/~amorph <-- being rebuilt from scratch
johnjoh1
> johnjoh1 <john...@isu.edu> pondered for a while, then blurted out:
>
> ><snip everything>
>
> Don't snip attributions, please.
>
> >> The Aiel are an honor-based society. We're not. Their culture is based
> >> around the need to survive, in the middle of a freaking desert. Ours
> >> isn't. Just for starters.
> >>
> >> >Also, even judging by any standard, the Aiel are a society, whose entire
> >> >philosiphy is built around violence. Frankly, any culture that has the idea of
> >> >the "blood feud" or researches and practice torture has a long way to go in my
> >> >book.
> >>
> >> Actually, their entire philosophy is built around a) honor, b)
> >> survival. Because of A, any lack of honor will be taken very harshly,
> >> as it needs to be, if the entire society can continue to function
> >> based around honor. Because of A and B, they're not going to be able
> >> to use long-winded, he-said-she-said trials, punishment such as
> >> imprisonment, etc. They take too much time, undermine the meaning of
> >> "honor," and aren't feasable in the environment. So what would you
> >> have the Aiel do? Slap an offender on the wrist, say "bad boy, no
> >> oosquai"? They take gai'shan, and they use physical means to punish,
> >> to settle disputes, etc. It's quick, and efficient, which is good for
> >> the environment, where they have to be prepared for anything and can't
> >> be bogged down by procedure too much. It helps to keep the Aiel fit
> >> and alert, and ready to take on other enemies, such as their
> >> environment.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Frankly, I find the idea of any society based on such strict rules of "honor"
> >ludicrous. Defining honor as a series of rules and regulations doesn't work with
> >me. The Aiel society is all about the Asian concept of 'face', how you look to
> >others, not necessarily on any particular concept of internal honor, thus the need
> >for a system like ji'e'toh. It reminds of me of Jewish society, and the complex
> >rules and regulations they built around the law of Moses.
>
> No internal honor? Okay, whatever you say. Although then why the Aiel
> find a need to redeem themselves even after doing something that no
> one else could see or know about is beyond me...
>
Like I said before, it's the idea of 'face'. I didn't say that _no_ Aiel had any kind of
internal honor, I said that basing your ideas of honor on a set of rules and codes as
complex as the Aiel's are is ludicrous.
>
> And yes, the idea of any society based on strict rules of honor is
> absolutely horrifying. *gasp* actually being able to take someone on
> their word rather than to have tons of failsafes and checks on people,
> etc... how horrible!
>
I don't see how the Aiel system of ji'e'toh makes them any better, or more honorable.
If it did, there shouldn't be any Darkfriends among them. There should be no liars, no
thieves, no treachery. It doesn't work. Aiel have all of those, and yet, they can use
the concept of ji'e'toh to justify it, as the Shaido do. Honor is an internal
concept--it shouldn't be based on a set of complex rules, unless they're your own rules.
>
> >And who decided Rand was wrong? The Maidens? Rand? Aiel society? Law and order can
> >be swift, w/out losing any of it's fairness; it only becomes long and drawn-out
> >when we forget the basics. How exactly does a trial undermine honor?
>
> Rand WAS wrong according to the codes of the Aiel society. Of which
> Rand, as car'a'carn, is intrinsically a part. And maybe not every
> trial would undermine honor.. but the ones as we see them (the
> he-said-she-said types) are basically contests where everyone calls
> everyone else a liar.. "He did that..." "I did not..." which would
> definitely call into question a person's honor. Granted, trials could
> be done differently... but the Aiel have a quick, efficient system
> that works for them. It might not always be right, but it doesn't make
> them savages, either.
>
He who is quickest with the rope/gun/whatever weapon you want wins eh? Brute strength is
right, while any concept of law and order is to be done away with? I don't buy it.
>
> >> >Sounds like savagery to me.
> >>
> >> Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
> >>
> >
> >Er . . . The Japanese culture was ruthless, with little regard for human life. The
> >Seanchan culture is modeled after it. The idea that the ruler or noble is always
> >right, is repugnant to me.
>
> The _entire_ Japenese culture? And while the Seanchan can be cruel and
> ruthless (especially when following some of their questionable
> leaders) I wouldn't call them savages, by any means. Especially not
> the entire culture, after some of the PoV's we get in PoD.
Are you asking if the whole history of Asian (I'm including them, as they are similar
in many respects to the Japanese) culture is barbaric? Actually, I am. During most of
their civilization, they _were_ brutal and cruel. In fact, many Asian nations now, (I'm
talking about the governments, not necessarily the individual people) still trample on
human rights. I don't care how high your technological status is, if you still live by
the code of 'might makes right,' you're savage.
>
> And the idea that someone is always right because he is a noble is
> pretty repugnant, but it's hardly the hallmark of a "savage."
>
>
> >> Besides, any culture has elements of savagery. What do you call our
> >> own military mindsets, our high crime rates, and such "recreations" as
> >> football and boxing?
> >
> >That doesn't make it right. What is savagery and civilization anyway? I think it's
> >pointless to define civilization. We don't know what makes a civilization, we don't
> >know how they are formed. We can talk about violence and brutality, but talking
> >about civilization and savagery is pointless. Are the Aiel civilized? What about
> >16th century England? Where do we determine that? Savagery is not just violence,
> >and violence does not mean savagery, IMO.
>
> Who said it's automatically right? "Not right" != "savage." And no,
> savagery isn't always violence. But the entire discussion got started
> because the Aiel are seen by some to be "savages."
>
>
I think this whole discussion is fruitless, until we can define "civilization, and
savages." At what point do people become 'civilized', and when are they 'savages'? Once
we figure that out, then we can decide if the Aiel are savages.
Samuel Kleiner
>
> But the Aiel arent in the here and now, you cant expect the things we
> consider "normal" to apply to them, our society is what deems what is "right
> and proper" ..who knows, mebbe had things gone a little differently, beating
> people could be a daily "norm". Just because you believe what they do is
> "savage" doesnt mean it is. Perhaps you could look back to years ago, and
> see that not only beatings were "norm" but actually hanging people was too.
> The world they live in is not ours, so you can't judge them by today's
> standards.
I think that the entire thread so far was just a bait to get somebody to
say this.
--
Samuel Kleiner Everybody knows that dragons don't exist.
But while this simplistic formulation may satisfy the layman,
it does not suffice for the scientific mind. -Stanislav Lem
John M. Atkinson
Parkinson) wrote:
>>Sounds like savagery to me.
>
>Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
Absolutely.
John M. Atkinson
'erols' instead of spamblock
"Ultimately, most problems can be solved by applying a large
brick to the correct skull. Difficulties arise when you don't
have a brick or can't find the right skull. The devil is always
in the details."
--Marcus Cole
Kurt Montandon
Atkinson) wrote:
>On Wed, 13 Jan 1999 20:13:40 GMT, lpark...@mindspring.com (Laura M.
>Parkinson) wrote:
>
>>>Sounds like savagery to me.
>>
>>Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
>
>Absolutely.
Yeah. Especially the horrific Tokugawa period, when people so rarely
fought that nothing that could be called a major war occured, and the
primary focuses were cultural and scientific.
Horrific.
Kurt Montandon
Laura M. Parkinson
><snip everything>
And yes, the idea of any society based on strict rules of honor is
absolutely horrifying. *gasp* actually being able to take someone on
their word rather than to have tons of failsafes and checks on people,
etc... how horrible!
>And who decided Rand was wrong? The Maidens? Rand? Aiel society? Law and order can
>be swift, w/out losing any of it's fairness; it only becomes long and drawn-out
>when we forget the basics. How exactly does a trial undermine honor?
Rand WAS wrong according to the codes of the Aiel society. Of which
Rand, as car'a'carn, is intrinsically a part. And maybe not every
trial would undermine honor.. but the ones as we see them (the
he-said-she-said types) are basically contests where everyone calls
everyone else a liar.. "He did that..." "I did not..." which would
definitely call into question a person's honor. Granted, trials could
be done differently... but the Aiel have a quick, efficient system
that works for them. It might not always be right, but it doesn't make
them savages, either.
>> >Sounds like savagery to me.
>>
>> Oh? Would you call the entire course of Japanese history "savage"?
>>
>
>Er . . . The Japanese culture was ruthless, with little regard for human life. The
>Seanchan culture is modeled after it. The idea that the ruler or noble is always
>right, is repugnant to me.
The _entire_ Japenese culture? And while the Seanchan can be cruel and
ruthless (especially when following some of their questionable
leaders) I wouldn't call them savages, by any means. Especially not
the entire culture, after some of the PoV's we get in PoD.
And the idea that someone is always right because he is a noble is
pretty repugnant, but it's hardly the hallmark of a "savage."
>> Besides, any culture has elements of savagery. What do you call our
>> own military mindsets, our high crime rates, and such "recreations" as
>> football and boxing?
>
>That doesn't make it right. What is savagery and civilization anyway? I think it's
>pointless to define civilization. We don't know what makes a civilization, we don't
>know how they are formed. We can talk about violence and brutality, but talking
>about civilization and savagery is pointless. Are the Aiel civilized? What about
>16th century England? Where do we determine that? Savagery is not just violence,
>and violence does not mean savagery, IMO.
Who said it's automatically right? "Not right" != "savage." And no,
savagery isn't always violence. But the entire discussion got started
because the Aiel are seen by some to be "savages."
-'-,-'-<<0 Trickster 0>>-'-,-'- lpark...@mindspring.com
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Lofts/1327
VampCode Beta: PNlmpA23MrHnWc* VS\/^I\/^^\/^B\/^^WnRnH\/^ NR^\/^^\/^L\/^Oci