PDA

View Full Version : 13x13 Convert to the Light


Juan
01-04-2011, 05:11 PM
So you can 13x13 to the Shadow using Myrdraal as a sort of filter.

First why are the Myrdraal used as filters? What about them makes them able to be used in this way?

Why couldn't the Light find a way to use a creature of good, perhaps the nym or Ogier as a filter for a 13x13 to the Light. Granted the nym are extinct, but if they weren't could they have worked?

I don't see why it couldn't be possible. If the Shadow can do it, the Light should be able to as well. The tricky part would seem to be the filter used for the Light.

Herid Fel
01-04-2011, 07:43 PM
The 13x13 is to convert someone against their will. Why would the light try to convert someone against their will?

Juan
01-04-2011, 07:59 PM
I realize. I almost addressed that in my original post, but I figured I'd rather not focus on whether they would want to or not (or whether it's moral or not), rather on whether it's possible.

Herid Fel
01-04-2011, 08:11 PM
Well, then I guess I would say that there is no possible method that would carry out an impossible premise.

I'm not trying to be pithy, it's just that the assumption in your post is that if the Shadow has a way to accomplish something, than its counterpoint must exist for the light. But with the 13x13, evil is using evil means to accomplish evil ends. If a Nym could serve the same function, than good would be using evil means to accomplish good ends. The equation doesn't compute.

Kimon
01-04-2011, 08:12 PM
The 13x13 is to convert someone against their will. Why would the light try to convert someone against their will?

Imagine the usefulness that a marionetted Chosen might serve. The only problem would be trying to avoid detection that the mole that they were sending back to the Shadow was a brainwashed puppet of the Light. Would there eyes be lifeless too, or suddenly too bright, like looking at some born-again evangelical religious fanatic?

Juan
01-04-2011, 10:04 PM
.... I guess since you insist I'll address this topic. Here's my take on it. First, you need to be aware that there are things that are objectively good. Yes, there are subjective goods too, but in the case of the WOT, the story is driven behind the idea that there is an objective good and bad/evil.

With this in mind, I'll show you an example. This is my personal experience with a person I know. This person was a drug addict and an alcoholic. Clearly, this is an objectively bad thing because the end result is that this person I know was developing mental problems and a mental and emotional stability. Furthermore, the person was also causing physical damage to himself in areas including but not limited to his brain, liver, lungs. This person had developed an addiction and so he didn't want to quit. He said that his use of drugs and consumption of alcohol made him feel "good." And he was so addicted he didn't realize the harm he was causing to not only himself, but his family and friends. So the family had to intervene. They forced him to enter into various drug rehab programs and after a long process that lasted about a year, this person was drug free. He leads a much healthier life now, is able to communicate intellectually with people, socialize, etc. He's no longer causing more damage than he already had. So, was the intervention of the family an evil action? No. Extreme measures had to be taken. Ideally, the family would've had a talk with him and he would've stopped. But clearly he was so far into his addiction that even though they did try talking to him multiple times, he kept at it.

Back to the 13x13 to the Light. Some people simply don't have a good sense of the objective good and evil. These people could be helped much in the same way the ex-drug and alcohol addict I know was helped. They don't have a proper sense of what's right and wrong, so they're in no position to truly be able to decide. A 13x13 to the Light will be enhancing the good qualities of a person, much in the same way a 13x13 to the Shadow enhances the bad/evil qualities in a person.

The very definition of good means that enhancing these good qualities is a good thing. The very definition of bad means that enhancing the bad qualities is a bad thing. So by enhancing the good you can't possibly be doing a bad thing.

But again. I really would rather stay away from this discussion and focus on whether 13x13 to the Light is possible, and if so, how it is possible.

GonzoTheGreat
01-05-2011, 06:03 AM
From what we know of it, the "turning to the Shadow" is done by removing things like empathy, compassion and such. Which raises the question: what should be removed in order to turn someone to the Light?

If you remove all selfishness from a typical Forsaken, then you'd just end up with someone like Ishamael, who does not consider anything at all of value anymore, and consequently supports the DO's efforts to destroy reality. Not really what you would want, is it?

Of course, as Juan already hinted, you could try enhancing certain characteristics. But then you would likely end up with an unbalanced persona anyway, which is still more likely to be bad in some (unpredictable) manner rather than good.
For instance, Semirhage might have used enhanced empathy simply to figure out how to be even more effective at hurting others.

Juan
01-05-2011, 05:30 PM
Thanks, Gonzo. But how does enhancing a good quality = a bad thing?

It's like saying a positive number + a positive number results in a negative number.

By enhancing the good you're bettering these people. Whether Semirhage as in your example uses their good qualities to take advantage of them and hurt them isn't that these good qualities are bad. It's that Semirhage is bad.

This goes into the argument that too much of anything is a bad thing. Not true. You can't have too much good. Good by definition is... good. Impossible for it to be bad. Of course realistically as you pointed out, that may make you more vulnerable in that people will take advantage of you, etc., but that's not because these people who are "too" good is bad. It's because the rest of the people are not good enough.

GonzoTheGreat
01-05-2011, 05:41 PM
But the problem is: are people really only bad because they have too little of some good quality?
If true, then enhancing that quality would obviously cure their badness.

But if they are bad because of some other reason, then enhancing the good quality would merely change them, and not necessarily for the better.

That doesn't mean that the 13x13 trick can't work for the Light, of course. But it does mean that it is not obvious how it could be made to work, and also that if you botch it, the results may be worse than what you started with.

Juan
01-05-2011, 06:02 PM
Bad for some other reason such as what? Example so maybe I can understand your point better?

GonzoTheGreat
01-05-2011, 06:18 PM
Well, based on what we know, Demandred turned to the Shadow not because he wasn't willing to help others, but because he was envious of Lews Therin, who he thought was less good at helping those other people. If you strengthened Demandred's compassion (willingness to fight) then you'd be merely making it more certain that he would turn to the Shadow.
Unless you also gave him overall command of the forces of the Light. Perhaps. But if you do that, and it doesn't work, then you're in even bigger trouble than with having him as a "mere high ranking commander who defected".

Envy also played a major part in the defection of others, such as Be'lal (the Envious) and Asmodean.

Both Mesaana and Aginor went over because they could get better research grants from the DO.

With Lanfear it was simple thirst for power, combined with being sidelined after she got blamed for opening the Bore.

Then consider Ingtar: he was never actually evil, he just thought that the best approach to the problem of existence was joining the Shadow.

As for Padan Fain: I wouldn't even know where to begin, when it comes to enhancing parts of his mind in order to turn him good.

Weird Harold
01-05-2011, 06:21 PM
Thanks, Gonzo. But how does enhancing a good quality = a bad thing?

One word for you: Galad.

The WOT is all about Balance -- Galad is the archetype of the Goody-two-shoes who will "do the right(good) thing" no matter who it hurts. He is as unbalanced towards "Good" as Padan Fain is towards "Evil."

13x13 Turning to evil works by removing the balance from a victim's personality -- thereby essentially destroying the victim's Free Will.

Doing the same thing to different portions of a person's simply throws off the balance in a different direction -- and effectively removes the victim's Free Will.

Such is the logic that led Aridhol to Shadar Logoth; "Using the Shadow's Methods Against the Shadow" does not make the Shadow's Methods -- eg removing someone's Free Will -- less Evil.

Turning someone either Good or Evil is essentially Compulsion -- although the mechanism is different -- and Compulsion is "inherently evil" because it imposes one person's will on another.

I can't see any situation where a 13x13 Turning can be made "Good" -- Good intentions don't change the inherent evil of destroying Free Will.

Juan
01-05-2011, 06:50 PM
But the deeds the Forsaken did were an objective evil. By binding them from violence or whatever as could be done in the Age of Legends, you could prevent things like that from happening. Semirhage for example, should've been binded in such a way. Obviously, I'm not saying everyone should be binded, it's best to refrain from the evil acts voluntarily, but sometimes extreme measures have to be applied to extreme cases: such as Semirhage.

And that's why you're not enhancing a quality such as envy, rather good virtues.

@Harold
By placing people in prison, you're taking away their freedom. Ideally, this shouldn't need to be done, but sometimes there's no choice. In my original example of the drug addict. Sometimes, they may mentally hindered and would require assistance whether they'd like it or not. Your imposing your will against theirs.

One word for you: Verin

Verin tried to do a good thing for the Light by uncovering the secrets behind the Shadow's organizational system and other important info. Along the way though, she had to commit evil acts to not give herself away. Such actions of hers whether with good intention or not were actually evil. Enhancing the good qualities and virtues in people is not.

Weird Harold
01-05-2011, 07:17 PM
... binded ...

the word is BOUND, not "binded"

Enhancing the good qualities and virtues in people is not.

You are using relative morality examples to argue for an absolute morality. If there is an absolute Good, then imposing one's will on another is an Evil act, no matter what the justification might be.

Binding, or imprisoning, a miscreant is not the same thing as changing their basic nature and turning them into someone they weren't born to be.

sleepinghour
01-05-2011, 08:18 PM
Another problem is, since Darkfriends swear their souls to the Dark One, he might still have a claim on them even if they've turned back to the Light. So the question is whether you'd be doing these people a favor by turning them good right before their souls end up with the Dark One. (Did Brandon ever tell us what happened to Verin's soul?)

Juan
01-05-2011, 08:48 PM
@Harold
Binded wasn't questioned by the spell check. But yes I'd prefer to use bound. I wrote quickly since I went to go eat dinner.. haha. Thanks for pointing that out.

Thing is, we have new information as of the epic climax of TGS. Rand's epiphany that they were reborn for new chances.

Therefore, people aren't meant to be evil. They aren't born evil. If they choose evil one life, they may not the next life. That's why everyone gets reborn--- to improve and become better. So by changing enhancing their good qualities and such you are helping them become better.

@sleepinghour
If I remember correctly being a Darkfriend doesn't mean you swear your soul to the DO. Being a Gray Man does. Darkfriends would still make oaths of obedience, but they don't swear their souls. And for channelers, such as Verin, their oaths are more binding because they use a sort of Oath Rod, but they still don't swear their souls to the DO.

Weird Harold
01-05-2011, 09:28 PM
@Harold
Binded wasn't questioned by the spell check.

Sum of us leaned to spill without smell chuckers and don't depend on then. :D

Thing is, we have new information as of the epic climax of TGS. Rand's epiphany that they were reborn for new chances.

Therefore, people aren't meant to be evil. They aren't born evil. If they choose evil one life, they may not the next life. That's why everyone gets reborn--- to improve and become better.


Rand's epiphany notwithstanding, the WOT is a predestined universe and Evil people are reborn into lives that will lead them into Temptation with personalities that disincline them to resist temptation. They may, with great effort and strength of will, reject their predestined fate, but they will face the same temptations and the same weaknesses of personality in every incarnation that their archetype dictates.

RJ did not incorporate the concept of achieving Nirvahna or earning a better life into the WOT Cosmology and came down firmly on the side of nature in the Nature vs Nurture debate.

It is also fairly clear that he believed Compulsion was inherently Evil and by extension, anything that imposes an outside standard of behavior is Objectively Evil.

Put another way, anything that interferes with a person's designated place in the Pattern throws the Wheel/Pattern out of Balance and is thus inherently Evil because it threatens the fabric of the universe.

Kimon
01-05-2011, 10:00 PM
Therefore, people aren't meant to be evil. They aren't born evil. If they choose evil one life, they may not the next life. That's why everyone gets reborn--- to improve and become better. So by changing enhancing their good qualities and such you are helping them become better.



That's not typically the way in which reincarnation works, or at least not in the usual Hindu system. You can accrue either good or bad karma, which will in turn play a role in determining your next life, so typically the decisions and actions in this life would play a role in your next life. Moreover, there was no guarantee that one would even be reborn again as a human. Whether RJ intended all of that to play a role in his system of reincarnation is unclear, but in the usual format at least, that was essentially how it would work.

Weird Harold's comment about Nirvana brings up a different problem however, as the only person in WoT that seems intent on achieving that goal is Elan Morin Tedronai. Though I suppose that Rand and Moiraine were technically helping some select individuals achieve Nirvana.

Weird Harold
01-05-2011, 11:56 PM
That's not typically the way in which reincarnation works, or at least not in the usual Hindu system.
...
Whether RJ intended all of that to play a role in his system of reincarnation is unclear, but in the usual format at least, that was essentially how it would work.

The WOT is NOT the "usual Hindu system" of reincarnation -- nor is it the Budhist version.

From the example of Brigitte and Gaidal, we can deduce that every incarnation is essentially the same script for each soul that is reborn. There is no evident progression towards "enlightenment" or regression to "purgatory," just endless performances of the same love story with minor ad lib variations.

Demandred's Soul is the eternal jealous second fiddle who is never granted the recognition he feels he deserves; whenever the opportunity to turn to Evil is permitted, he will take it.

GonzoTheGreat
01-06-2011, 05:43 AM
Weird Harold's comment about Nirvana brings up a different problem however, as the only person in WoT that seems intent on achieving that goal is Elan Morin Tedronai.Ba'alzamon as the preincarnation of the Buddha. I like it.

finn
01-06-2011, 06:16 AM
Ba'alzamon as the preincarnation of the Buddha. I like it.

Ishmael is Ghoetam (http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Ghoetam)?

GonzoTheGreat
01-06-2011, 06:52 AM
Yep. Neat idea, isn't it?

Perhaps that's how Tarmon Gaidon goes: Rand picks up Moridin, carries him off to Rhuidean, ties him to the tree, and after 40 days, a new philosophical masterpiece is written.

Would definitely have the advantage of fitting RJ's statement that the war is not being fought the way Rand thinks it is.

Goldie
01-06-2011, 08:38 AM
Gonzo, I love that idea. I had never thought of Elan that way before.

Maybe Rand needs to sit under the tree for a while. Maybe he could come up with a plan. At the very least he would be at peace.

WinespringBrother
01-06-2011, 09:30 AM
Getting back to the original topic, I would say that Shadow Turning should be undoable. It is essentially a weave, like compulsion, that causes changes in behavior, as opposed to a permanent change like amputation or turning someone into a gray man. So it may be healable or reversible in some manner.

Juan
01-06-2011, 06:42 PM
@Harold
You live new lives to try and better yourself as shown by Rand's enlightenment.

I wonder what would happen if you had a person 13x13 to the Shadow and you take that person and 13x13 to the Light. Would both effects cancel each other out?

Weird Harold
01-06-2011, 08:24 PM
@Harold
You live new lives to try and better yourself as shown by Rand's enlightenment.

I wonder what would happen if you had a person 13x13 to the Shadow and you take that person and 13x13 to the Light. Would both effects cancel each other out?
Then why are Heroes like Birgitte and Gaidal never promoted or demoted?

Birgitte remembered uncountable lives that were always the same script. If there is a chance to do better, there ought also to be rewards and punishments for doing better or worse -- which is the traditional Hindu/Budhist reincarnation model, which is NOT the model used for the WOT; or at least not for the Heroes of The Horn.

Rand's epiphany applies to Rand and why his specific soul was recycled according to Prophecy -- if it is valid at all, it is a specific case rather than a general revelation.

Juan
01-06-2011, 11:03 PM
Heroes of the Horn in many ways don't have as much freedom as other people as Rand has noted. It may seem like they have more, but they really have less.

The general people can progress and become better.

The Heroes of the Horn can too. But for them it's trickier to see because they're bound. (ah, see I used bound this time). Just because Birgitte is an archer in every life doesn't mean she can't be an evil archer in one or a good archer in another. She might always be good if that's the path she always takes. But since they have free will, they can make choices. Just like Rand got increasingly dark and evil up until his epiphany. He made choices that led him down that path.

Just because you don't get "promoted or demoted" doesn't mean they can't become better or worse in different lives. Being promote or demoted would be the result of not cause of being good or bad. And in the case of WOT, there doesn't seem to be a reward system as you pointed out, but that doesn't mean people aren't supposed to better themselves.

For example, a person is overweight. Do they lose the weight because they're going to be given a new and better home aka a reward? Right. So just because there isn't a promotion or demotion, or a reward or punishment, doesn't mean the purpose isn't to be better in each life.

Weird Harold
01-07-2011, 12:34 AM
Heroes of the Horn in many ways don't have as much freedom as other people as Rand has noted. It may seem like they have more, but they really have less.

Rand is a Hero of the Horn, but his epiphany would seem to imply that he has more freedom because he's given a second chance at a specific task -- which others don't seem to get.

The general people can progress and become better.

Why is there no allusions or references to progression anywhere in the series?

That kind of cosmology leaves traces in the language of cultures that subscribe. There are even traces of such in English despite Christianity's official non-belief in hindu-style reincarnation.

That English has such (idiomatic) traces and RJ consciously chose not to use those idioms, suggests he didn't include that feature of Hindu-style salvation through repeated reincarnation in the WOT cosmology.

...doesn't mean she can't be an evil archer in one or a good archer in another. ...

Nope. Sorry, no way, no how.

RJ was asked several times about evil heroes and evil ta'veren -- "tain't no such thing," OWTTE.


If Birgitte, or any Hero turned Evil in any incarnation, they would NOT be bound to the horn.

Juan
01-07-2011, 01:48 AM
The WOT isn't Hinduism or Buddhism or any such religion. It doesn't require a system of promotion or demotion or rewards or punishment or however you want to call it. You can't compare the WOT to such religions just because it has traces of them. That's why it's just TRACES.

There is. Rand's epiphany on Dragonmount.

Heroes of the Horn seem to be chosen because they are good. And yet they can do evil things. Like Rand has done. For example the balefiring of innocents in Graendal's palace. Moridin also claims Rand can be turned. And the DO seems to believe this as well. I'd think that the DO even though evil, might know a bit what he's about.

Weird Harold
01-07-2011, 05:33 AM
The WOT isn't Hinduism or Buddhism or any such religion. It doesn't require a system of promotion or demotion or rewards or punishment or however you want to call it.

Then why do you insist that there is a system of promotion or demotion?

You can't compare the WOT to such religions just because it has traces of them. That's why it's just TRACES.

Yopu're not reading what I'm posting: There are NOT any traces of such religions in the WOT.


There is. Rand's epiphany on Dragonmount.

Rand's epiphany is the single point in your favor, but it is an in-character conclusion by a character that conflicts with the absence of any other canon social, cultural, or philosophical evidence to support it.

There is more to Rand's epiphany than the final "I want to do it right this time."

The heart of Rand's Epiphany, the general principle as opposed to the specific task is:

All was still. Even with the tempest, the winds, the crashes of thunder. All was still.

Why? Rand thought with wonder. Because each time we live, we get to love again.

That was the answer. It all swept over him, lives lived, mistakes made, love changing everything. He saw the entire world in his mind's eye, lit by the glow in his hand. He remembered lives, hundreds of them, thousands of them, stretching to infinity. He remembered love, and peace, and joy, and hope.

"I want to do it right this time," is an individual rationalization for Rand to go ahead with fighting THIS battle, not a cosmological revelation.

Juan
01-07-2011, 02:14 PM
And you're not reading what I'm posting.

There is NO system of promotion or demotion in WOT. That's what you suggested in a previous post.

As RJ said, he drew the cosmology of the WOT from different religions, such as Christianity, Hinduism, etc. So there ARE traces of Hinduism. But not enough to be the same.

That's why even though in Hinduism the progression is to achieve a higher state of nirvana, in WOT progression is simply for the betterment of oneself. Not for a reward aka a higher state of nirvana.

Weird Harold
01-07-2011, 05:09 PM
There is NO system of promotion or demotion in WOT. That's what you suggested in a previous post.

Please point out where I made any such suggestion. the following is just one of many posts where I have asserted that RJ didn't -- a contraction meaning DID NOT -- include any system of reward or advancement in his vision of reincarnation.

Why is there no allusions or references to progression anywhere in the series?

That kind of cosmology leaves traces in the language of cultures that subscribe. There are even traces of such in English despite Christianity's official non-belief in hindu-style reincarnation.

That English has such (idiomatic) traces and RJ consciously chose not to use those idioms, suggests he didn't include that feature of Hindu-style salvation through repeated reincarnation in the WOT cosmology.

Kimon
01-07-2011, 05:49 PM
RJ was asked several times about evil heroes and evil ta'veren -- "tain't no such thing," OWTTE.


If Birgitte, or any Hero turned Evil in any incarnation, they would NOT be bound to the horn.

while I'm not contending with the majority of what you have been arguing, there does seem to be a rather serious problem with this particular claim:

tarvalon.net Q&A 26 February 2003




Q: Was Ishamael lying when he told Rand that the hero of the Light had turned to Shadow in other lifetimes?

RJ: No, he was not. Even those who lie sometimes tell the truth when it serves their purposes.




Is Rand then the only exception to this rule?

The other issue is Ishamael. Can we even be absolutely sure that he isn't bound to the Horn? After all, he, like Rand, could not have been called by the Horn at Falme since both were present there in the flesh already, but if, say in another time, when the main struggle was not taking place, if the Horn was sounded, might the Lews Therin and the Elan Morin souls lead the Heroes in place of the Hawkwing soul? Certainly Elan Morin has described his role in ways that seem to make sense as a Heroic soul. Has anyone ever asked how the Shadow managed to turn Lews Therin and yet still not achieve a complete victory? Might it have been because the wheel forced Elan Morin to turncoat, becoming the Creator's avatar so as to maintain the balance?

Juan
01-07-2011, 06:05 PM
Here

If there is a chance to do better, there ought also to be rewards and punishments for doing better or worse -- which is the traditional Hindu/Budhist reincarnation model, which is NOT the model used for the WOT; or at least not for the Heroes of The Horn.

What I've been saying is that people are meant to better themselves in each life. But that there doesn't "ought" to be a reward system. People are to better themselves for themselves and for their peers. Not necessarily because there is a reward or punishment when they die or whatever.

Weird Harold
01-07-2011, 10:51 PM
What I've been saying is that people are meant to better themselves in each life. But that there doesn't "ought" to be a reward system.

And which part of "which is NOT the model used for the WOT," did you fail to understand?

Weird Harold
01-07-2011, 11:20 PM
while I'm not contending with the majority of what you have been arguing, there does seem to be a rather serious problem with this particular claim:
tarvalon.net Q&A 26 February 2003

Q: Was Ishamael lying when he told Rand that the hero of the Light had turned to Shadow in other lifetimes?

RJ: No, he was not. Even those who lie sometimes tell the truth when it serves their purposes.

Is Rand then the only exception to this rule?

In other interviews, RJ also said that Rand is the Hero of the Light for this Turning, but it is NOT always the same "Dragon Soul" -- This turning requires the "Dragon Soul" other Ages and Other Turnings might require another Soul to balance the Wheel. He specifically hinted that there might be a "Female Dragon" (or Dragon Equivalent) that could fill Rand's role as "Champion of the LIght" in some other Turning.

If one of those alternate "Champion Souls" turned Evil -- rather than simply being trapped into swearing to the DO under duress, as Verin did -- then they would be evicted from Valhalla.

The other issue is Ishamael. Can we even be absolutely sure that he isn't bound to the Horn?

None of the Heros who responded to the Horn at Falme were "Anti-heros" as far as I can tell; I'm not totally familiar with the details of the various hero myths and archetypes referenced, so I can't be positive that none would be considered "Evil Heros."

RJ would never admit to the concept of a "Bizaro Valhalla for Evil Heroes" but he never quite killed it either.

In objective terms, the Champion of The Light would not necessarily have to be a Hero Of the Horn; many ordinary souls rise to an occasion and perform Heroic deeds without the reknown and recognition that attaches to (creates?) Heroes Of The Horn.

Being a successful Champion of the Light might even be the final exam for a new soul to replace a lost soul as a HotH (not very likely, but possible within the deduceable rules of the WOT. :D)

FWIW, I think that the statement that sometimes Heros are lost refers to situations like Mashadar or dying in T'A'R, not to Heroes turning Evil and being evicted from Valhalla.

Fie
01-12-2011, 07:40 AM
Having started my read-all-of-the-books-again-in-time-for-AMoL-reread this month, and still being at The Eye of the World, I remarked that it was not Moiraine or whoever who first said that "there isn´t anyone so bad that he can´t brought be back to the light" or the like but the Lord Captain Bornhald. I found that quite interesting. Maybe it could be a foreshadowing that Galad will do something like that ? Perhaps to 13x13 someone to the light you´d need a handful of Galads instead of Fates ? :D Alas there´s only one of him, but perhaps Elaine could make some copies of him as well when she´s working at the foxhead... :cool:

GonzoTheGreat
01-12-2011, 07:42 AM
Oh my, Elayne is gonna freak out when she meets Galad's 12 identical twins*.

* What's the word for 13 of them, anyway? I'm not a native speaker of English, so I have a good excuse for not (yet) knowing this.

Mort
01-12-2011, 10:04 AM
* What's the word for 13 of them, anyway? I'm not a native speaker of English, so I have a good excuse for not (yet) knowing this.

Tredecaplets

Shoutout to Wikipedia for that one.

Juan
01-12-2011, 11:50 PM
@Fie, Gonzo, and Mort
hahahaha well done.

In terms of the original post. Sadly enough, I had wanted this to be a thread which discussed the whether it was possible to 13x13 to the Light and how it could be possible.. yet the focus was not on that.. I am partly to blame. Damn.

Weird Harold
01-13-2011, 02:07 AM
@Fie, Gonzo, and Mort
hahahaha well done.

In terms of the original post. Sadly enough, I had wanted this to be a thread which discussed the whether it was possible to 13x13 to the Light and how it could be possible.. yet the focus was not on that.. I am partly to blame. Damn.
I think the focus stayed on that idea as long as it should have -- just enough stomping to get a nice smooth consistency to ooze between our toes, in fact. :D

Juan
01-13-2011, 02:24 AM
Yeah I blame you too Harold...

hahaah damn us both

Spasmodean
01-15-2011, 07:50 PM
Well if not 13x13'ing someone good.

What methods could be used to return someone like Tarna to her original self, restore her balance?

I think I remember RJ saying it wasn't impossible - just that the person affected would be changed in such a way that they wouldn't consider such a thing as something desirable.

Also. What exactly happens to the person in a 13x13 situation. We know that the lesser desired personality traits are brought to the fore, but how does that suddenly = Darkfriend?

We've seen plenty of complete bastards in this series that would be shocked and apalled at the thought of becoming a DF, so there must be something else involved in the 13x13 process that we haven't seen or heard of yet.

I think if I could have one wish it would be a few PoVs of the 13x13 victims describing the before and after.

Stronginthearm
01-25-2011, 02:15 PM
I think spas is right, if the theory holds it wouldn't be forcing good onto them more a cleansingness of the evil

Enigma
01-25-2011, 03:18 PM
I think I remember RJ saying it wasn't impossible - just that the person affected would be changed in such a way that they wouldn't consider such a thing as something desirable.

I don't think RJ said it was impossible just that the victim would not go looking for it willingly because they they would not see the point, ie why become a soft hearted do gooder again? It its possible it would probably have to be forced on the victim.

Also. What exactly happens to the person in a 13x13 situation. We know that the lesser desired personality traits are brought to the fore, but how does that suddenly = Darkfriend?

We've seen plenty of complete bastards in this series that would be shocked and apalled at the thought of becoming a DF, so there must be something else involved in the 13x13 process that we haven't seen or heard of yet.

I don't think it automatically makes someone a darkfriend but it opens them to the possibility. If you become selfish, powerhungry and essentially ruthless and cruel and then the 13 sisters and 13 fades come over and say would you like to join up and gain power, wealth etc or do you want to die, it probably does not take the victim too long to make up their mind.

Juan
01-25-2011, 07:59 PM
Yeah I don't think you would actually become a darkfriend immediately, but rather would be very susceptible to that temptation.

Inversely, I also don't think bringing out the good qualities in people would make a DF not a DF.. rather it would probably make them see how repulsive being a DF is and the actions done by their sort and choose to change for the better.

Enigma
01-26-2011, 12:21 PM
It might be possible to reverse the turning effect but I suspect that its impossible to make a bad person who was naturally bad, a good person.

Its been hinted and implied that swearing to the DO strips away certain protections a person has against the DO. I doubt if we will ever know for sure but I wonder would a forced turning take away those protections. The impression I had was that one had to willingly give one's self to the DO to become subject to his authority but if you are turned against one's will is that a willing surrender.

Jemlin
02-01-2011, 10:59 AM
Psh. I'm sure given a moment, Nynaeve can find a way to miraculously cure someone turned by the 13x13. After all, she cured the madness from Asha'man, and I bet the change is similar.

cindy
02-01-2011, 12:15 PM
... By binding them from violence or whatever as could be done in the Age of Legends, you could prevent things like that from happening....

i could type a few million words about why removing someone's free will to change their behavior is. . . let's say, wrong. . . but it would be easier if you just see a clockwork orange. pretty much sums it up, if you don't have a lot of time for theology.

ChubbyAiel
02-01-2011, 12:32 PM
Demandred's Soul is the eternal jealous second fiddle who is never granted the recognition he feels he deserves; whenever the opportunity to turn to Evil is permitted, he will take it.

Can we be so sure of this? Maybe this is referred to in the books but I haven't seen it (but then everyone's memory on the books seems to be better than mine...). We know certain events and personalities are replayed again and again with each turning of the Wheel, but we also know that the details can be different. Maybe in the next turning there won't be 13 Forsaken, nor even an organisation of Aes Sedai. Maybe in another turning the Aiel won't exist and the Dragon Reborn will be of another ethnicity. Maybe in another turning of the Wheel the soul of Demandred will make different choices in life and be on the side of Light, or be a completely insignficant bystander in events, who is trying trying to keep his head down and out of trouble.

In a nutshell, how can we be so sure about the recurrence of certain souls in these events, beyond Ishamael's and Rand's? And even then, we've only got Ishamael's word about his own importance - maybe he is dillusional as to his own importance?

cindy
02-01-2011, 12:33 PM
oh, and 1984 and brave new world (the books for these, not the awful movies) would help, too.

i always thought of the 13x13 as the dark one controlling someone with a hand up their metaphoric puppet-hole. it seems like it should be reversible to me, if you can remove the hand an un-puppet them.

Juan
02-01-2011, 11:03 PM
@Cindy

First off, good to see you back here again!

In the real world we have no such possibilities, so I haven't had to truly think if I would be ok with this or not. The example I provided before though, if we're talking about the real world, at least, was about a drug addict I knew/know. You may have missed my post as it was a while back.

He doesn't want to stop doing drugs, and as time passes on, he's become more aggressive, more inclined to crime (apart from the drugs themselves), and many other factors.

Yet he clearly needed help, what he was doing was not right. It was right in his head. At least I asked him and he thought doing drugs was ok, as was stealing as long as it wasn't something too expensive, and many other things. Definitely needed help. So to not mess with his "free will" you simply let him be? Continue to do what he's currently doing? Or do you against his will take him into psychiatric help? I'd go with the help, not a care if he didn't want to go. It's for his own good, even if he's convinced it's not. See he's not in a position to make that choice. He has problems.

Even criminals who may be stealing of necessity unlike in the previous case, are doing an objective harm to others, so they need to be stopped. Murderers, rapists, etc. need to be imprisoned. When they are placed in jail, you have taken away their liberties and imposing your own will upon them. But they lost the liberties themselves in doing what they did.

People who are evil, etc. are not in a position to make good/intelligent choices. They're making harmful choices to themselves and others and need to be stopped. There is an objective good, so steps have to be taken to change them from their objectively evil ways into objectively good ways. In this context of a 13x13 to the Light, you're given them a psychiatric sort of help except in a more direct way. I don't know if I'd be ok with it then since it's so direct that you are essentially changing their mind, but then again you're doing essentially the same thing with psychiatric help except in a less direct way. If you used compulsion on them, even for good, then that's not good. But if you're 13x13ing them to the Light, you're bringing out good qualities in them. I don't think that's a bad thing. I'd be inclined to take that position without having thought it over extensively. Without compulsion, but rather a 13x13 to the Light, in bringing out the good, you're reducing the chance of those people committing evil actions. They themselves are better off for it, as are others around them.

Weird Harold
02-02-2011, 12:36 AM
Demandred's Soul is the eternal jealous second fiddle who is never granted the recognition he feels he deserves; whenever the opportunity to turn to Evil is permitted, he will take it.

Can we be so sure of this? Maybe this is referred to in the books but I haven't seen it ...


I'm not sure that "we" can be sure of it, but "I" am sure of it. :D The references in the main books are sparse; Demandred's bio in the BWB provides a few more clues. But what makes me sure about Demandred's Soul being the archetypal "Jealous Second Banana" is tied up in 50+ years of reading and in having grown up immersed in the same pop-culture as RJ.

In a nutshell, how can we be so sure about the recurrence of certain souls in these events, beyond Ishamael's and Rand's? And even then, we've only got Ishamael's word about his own importance - maybe he is dillusional as to his own importance?

Actually, we can't even be sure of Rand's soul -- "The Dragon Soul" -- being involved in "these events" because RJ said that a different, female, soul, one seen with the Heros of the Horn at Falme, could/would fill Rand's role as 'Savior'in some other Turning's Third Age.

We can be sure about souls being spun out into certain predestined roles because that is the Cosmology presented as Canon and demonstrated by the example of the Heroes of The Horn in general, and Birgitte Silverbow in particular.

The fact that souls are "typecast" into archetypes and stereotypes is also deduced from the Heros of the Horn and the extrapolation that Hero souls aren't fundamentally different from regular souls. If the ranks of the HotH can be added to, then every soul must have the same basic structure -- a basic predisposition or predeliction for certain personality traits that make any incarnation of that soul's actions predictable and manageable.

Juan
02-02-2011, 12:58 AM
Actually, we can't even be sure of Rand's soul -- "The Dragon Soul" -- being involved in "these events" because RJ said that a different, female, soul, one seen with the Heros of the Horn at Falme, could/would fill Rand's role as 'Savior'in some other Turning's Third Age.


He never quite said that a female Dragon could/would fill Rand's role as a Savior in another Turning.


Question from Jonan: Mr. Jordan, is it possible that in another Age, another Turning of the Wheel, that saidar could be tainted instead of saidin? This relates to the Female Dragon Theory.
Robert Jordan: That is not something I intend to explore.


This is what he more or so said.


Female Dragon..NO when a female Hero is needed she is one of the ones bound to the Wheel. Jordan did mention a name but I didn't hear it. But he did say the Dragon is never female.
Let's try and clear some of this up... I can't remember the exact question, but from what I read in this thread, it doesn't matter (I haven't read the Female Dragon thread). RJ said that, no, it is not possible to have a female Dragon. If the Wheel needs a female Dragon, then it would weave in *insert female dragon name here*. Probably because of the blank faces he was getting he then added, you can find her in the scene where Mat blows the Horn...
He also said that a soul ready to be reborn cannot change gender, therefore the Dragon is ALWAYS male.

Weird Harold
02-02-2011, 02:11 AM
He never quite said that a female Dragon could/would fill Rand's role as a Savior in another Turning.



This is what he more or so said.

That signing report is just muddled enough to leave the possibility that it is not always "The Dragon" who is reborn to save the world. It probably IS always Rand's Soul but that explanation leaves open the possibility of a gender-bent casting like "Queen Arabela and her lady Knight so the Round Table" which would require a "Dragon Lady Soul" to play the leading role instead of Rand's Soul

ChubbyAiel
02-02-2011, 08:04 AM
As an aside, I don't think what Jordan said outside of the published books is actually canon, but maybe I'm in the minority in that.

cindy
02-02-2011, 12:10 PM
@Cindy

First off, good to see you back here again!



:)

i just typed several hundred words about the nature of the human soul and the freedom to choose between good and evil, etc., none of which had anything to do with WOT. . . in response to your post. and god corrected me by cutting the power.

because you will learn about these things in your own time and in your own way, and it doesn't make no nevermind to me.

and because what i should have said was, thanks, it's nice to be back. normally i'd be working, but i'm snowed and iced in.

and btw, it's awesomely stupid to use your free will to choose to be online when you're iced in. because the ice will inevitably cause power failures. which will cause you to lose everything you typed, and maybe your whole computer.

so that's what i'm saying.

thanks, it's nice to be back.

FelixPax
02-02-2011, 07:30 PM
As an aside, I don't think what Jordan said outside of the published books is actually canon, but maybe I'm in the minority in that.

All I know is Brandon Sanderson once did ask if Robert Jordan had stated anywhere, anything about the character of Ila. Meaning the current author cares about what Jordan said in letters,interviews, conventions et la.

Perhaps its not 'canon', but Jordan's letters, interviews et la help set a sort of outer boundaries for the series. What can, or can't occur. What motivates a character?

Juan
02-03-2011, 12:04 AM
ChubbyAiel
As an aside, I don't think what Jordan said outside of the published books is actually canon, but maybe I'm in the minority in that.

Well, there's info in the quotes that aren't in the books, so it helps us understand the world/characters/story better. Jordan being the creator of this world and story, we as readers are inclined to believe that what he says in interviews as true and relevant.

The only time were we really split is when a quote contradicts with a statement in the book. If that's the case, and there isn't another quote that provides clarification, I and a few others tend to go with the book as being right since we use the logic that since he dedicated more time into putting info in the book and it's edited, checked a few times, we give it the benefit of the doubt since it has more chances of being correct. Whereas a quote in person could be RJ misspeaking, or misunderstanding the question, or simply not recalling facts from his own story (which CAN happen. In fact there's a quote if not more where he says he doesn't remember certain character's names that he was asked about).

Other than a contradiction though, quotes are valuable and held as true.

@Cindy
... when you're iced in...

I'm sorry but I find it extremely amusing you're still getting ice/snow. Where I am at in the U.S. we have no such thing. Except in ice skating rinks and coolers.

It's a beautiful thing not to deal with that snow... ;) Yeah I know I'm being an asshole and rubbing it in. :P

ChubbyAiel
02-03-2011, 07:01 AM
All I know is Brandon Sanderson once did ask if Robert Jordan had stated anywhere, anything about the character of Ila. Meaning the current author cares about what Jordan said in letters,interviews, conventions et la.

Perhaps its not 'canon', but Jordan's letters, interviews et la help set a sort of outer boundaries for the series. What can, or can't occur. What motivates a character?

Just tried to reply to this once lost everything I typed... so here we go again:

I see what you're saying. I can see that Sanderson would want to check everything Jordan said so he can be as true to Jordan's vision as possible and not go off on his own tangent. I can also see that these interviews, etc, can help us imagine and understand the world Jordan created.

But I still hold that the books are definitive and all else is not. Take the example of Demandred's motivation. That can only be defined within the books otherwise it is open to interpretation (which may be what Jordan and Sanderson actually intend). Once the text has been written, any additional comments that the authors make are only an interpretation of what they have written and so are only one interpretation among many.

Obviously their interpretation is likely to be completely sound as they won't have missed the nuances in what they themselves have written. But if someone else has a robust theory/interpretation of something within the books, that can only be disproved within the books, by writing a new book and adding to the canon or by altering the canon by issuing reprints (maybe to remove errors).

So what is said in interviews should sometimes be taken as close to canon because it is almost certainly the interpretation that fits the books best. But if Jordan was elucidating on something that isn't really touched on much in the books (e.g. the female Dragon theory) and therefore didn't have much in the text with which to back himself up, then I would say what he said is far from canon.

That might seem a rather extreme point to take, but that's the way I see it.

ChubbyAiel
02-04-2011, 09:39 AM
Anyway, enough about literary criticism...

Back to the original question:

For a start it could be that there is something unique about the Myrdraal that allows them to be used as a filter, and it could be that the Nym (or anything else in all Creation) do not have that same or similar property that would allow the Light to do as you say. Just because the Shadow can do it does not mean that the Light can. The duality/balance in the World of the Wheel is not that specific. There is no Light's equivalent of Slayer (a man with two souls able to drop out of thin air from the World of Dreams, etc), for example, and there is no evidence of a Dark Horn of Valere.

I also agree with others that it would not be "good" to take away someone else's free will completely. Your example of the former addict you know is not really the same, because at some stage that addict will have to make their own decision for themselves and decide if they want to remain clean/sober. Helping him get to a position where he is able to make that decision is different from taking someone's free will away indefinitely. Sending someone to jail is not comparable because that person's freedom of movement is limited, not his or her freedom of thought, or his freedom to be himself even if that means continued, and even progressively more isolated, confinement. Even execution is not comparable because that person is "free" to be his own person and to go to his death as a consequence of his actions.

In a more theoretical sense, even the good characters in the Wheel of Time are flawed. Mat was quite selfish at times early on in the series, Rand could be cold and harsh, many people on here argue that Egwene is selfish and power-hungry, etc. Some Aes Sedai and Wise Ones are excessively arrogant. Maybe all of these characters could use a shot of 13x13 of the good variety to improve them – none of us are perfect – but would that be acceptable? How bad do you have to be to qualify for this, or how good to escape, were it possible? And who would make that call? Who would effectively be the judge of humanity? Why stop with followers of the Shadow if we could make the world a perfect place full of faultess automatons?

What you suggest would be ethical if it were used to turn someone back from the Shadow if they had been turned against their will in the first place, were it possible.