PDA

View Full Version : I call bollocks!


looqas
06-23-2011, 08:37 AM
Shadowspawn cannot survive passing through gateways and simply die without a mark on them when this occurs.


I took that from WoT wiki. The thread about Gray Men and Bloodknives got me thinking when someone reminded me of the "truth" above and about the plus for the Grey Men is that they can be 'gated to a target and back.

I have one question only: How come gholam didn't die when it went through the gateway? Unless gholam is not a shadowspawn it should have dropped dead the minute Mat kicked it through the "door".

If we are going to be nitpicky to my recollection it has never been explained how and at what point shadowspawn die when going through the gateway. (I might be wrong here too. I have a nagging feeling that it was explained a bit when Rand and Logain used those Deathgates.)

But in general I see Herr Sanderson stepping in poo with this one. Sure we get a action movie -esque last words scene, but goes against the rules of the universe :p

Davian93
06-23-2011, 08:39 AM
There was an interview/Q & A quote about this...basically, that rule doesn't apply to Gholams.

Spidy
06-23-2011, 08:45 AM
Also a good way of getting rid of a nasty "G" when you're not sure what will actually work. Falling off a platform was a nasty end for a nasty critter.

Perhaps Aginor was skimming one day when one fell on top of his platform from a fall 30000 years ago and wellah, here is another S'Spawn. Not sure about that last bit though as the "G" probably would have tried to kill him unless it was the one and only Gholam Aginor created originally. Time vortex that one.

looqas
06-23-2011, 08:50 AM
There was an interview/Q & A quote about this...basically, that rule doesn't apply to Gholams.


Before or after ToM? *wink wink* :p

Tamyrlin
06-23-2011, 08:59 AM
IMHO.

frenchie
06-23-2011, 09:28 AM
Brandon's answer implies this. Trollocs, Drakhar, Worms, Darkhounds, etc were made combining the True Power, the One Power, and splicing DNA of multiple animals, whereas the Gholem are implied to have been human beings directly altered via the True Power/One Power. The souls that the other Shadowspawn have were never intended for them. The Gholem's souls are still their own.

Spidy
06-23-2011, 09:40 AM
So by implication, that Gholam and its apparent attachment soul is lost forever.

maacaroni
06-23-2011, 09:49 AM
I'm delighted how our delightful mods have not noticed a low-grade profanity in use.

Bollocks is in my top three swearwords, it's just so versatile.

I have to agree on the gholam death scene, seemed a bit D.E.M. to me...

Terez
06-23-2011, 09:58 AM
We don't care about profanity.

The assumption is that the gholam were originally human, and that they were (like the Gray Men) altered somehow to make them into what they are. Therefore they are not constructs, like Trollocs and Myrddraal.

WinespringBrother
06-23-2011, 10:31 AM
The answer from Team Jordan was that Gholam are constructs, but just more perfect than the other non-gateway-surviving types.

As for the WOT wiki, I'm not sure how much stock I would put into it. I've been reading the page about Whitecloaks and it says the following, which I cannot determine if there is a source in the books or BWB for this or not:

http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Children_of_the_Light

In the 930s NE they reached an accord with the king of Amadicia, who agreed to let them establish a permanant base of operations, the Fortress of the Light, in the capital city of Amador. However, the power of the Children within Amadicia rapidly outstripped that of the king, and within a few years the royal Serenda Palace had been removed to outside the capital and the Amadician army reduced to an auxillary force under the Children.

Can anyone provide a quote for the date of this accord, or any of the other facts in that statement?

Terez
06-23-2011, 10:34 AM
The answer from Team Jordan was that Gholam are constructs, but just more perfect than the other non-gateway-surviving types.
No, it wasn't - no one ever said they were constructs.

I have a no-editing policy on the Wiki. It sucks.

WinespringBrother
06-23-2011, 11:29 AM
I was going off memory, so I forgot the exact wording of the quote - "They are more perfected Shadowspawn", not "constructs". However, this quote from the BWB says they are constructs:


The World of Robert Jordan's the Wheel of Time
CHAPTER: Aginor
Ishar Morrad was one of the first of the Forsaken to go over to the Shadow, probably some time in the first three decades of the Collapse. After becoming Forsaken, he dedicated his energies to the creation of “Shadowspawn”, living constructs designed to serve the shadow. His handiwork first appeared in the form of Trollocs, creatures made from combinations of human and animal substance. It is certain that the creation of Trollocs began well before the War of Power, because they appeared in very large numbers in the very first days. Prolific breeders, the Trollocs formed the bulk of the Shadow’s armies by the end of the war. Soon these were followed by other creations, some of which still exist, such as the Drakhar, and some known only through historical records, such as the Gholam and the jumara.

ETA:

Lord of Chaos
CHAPTER: 23 - To Understand a Message
Graendal smiled a good deal more warmly than she felt inside, though if her gown changed color, it was by a hair. She had had an unpleasant, in fact almost fatal, experience with one of Aginor's creations. The man had been brilliant in his way, but mad. None but a madman would have made the gholam. "You seem in very good mood."

Terez
06-23-2011, 11:56 AM
Not all Shadowspawn were constructs. There were some creatures, like those called Gray Men, who were in truth ordinary living men and women..

GonzoTheGreat
06-23-2011, 12:18 PM
And those were not constructed by Aginor, were they?
The Gholam, being capable of squeezing through mouse holes, is not "in truth an ordinary living man"

frenchie
06-23-2011, 12:40 PM
They are altered human beings. Their thread that already existed has been altered. Constructs are threads that would have never been woven in the first place. That's the difference.

Terez
06-23-2011, 01:00 PM
And those were not constructed by Aginor, were they?
The gholam? Created, yes. 'Constructed', no. As for the Gray Men, those seem to be made at Shayol Ghul by the Dark One himself.

The Gholam, being capable of squeezing through mouse holes, is not "in truth an ordinary living man"Neither is the Gray Man, somehow ordinary-looking and at the same time virtually invisible.

Crispin's Crispian
06-23-2011, 01:28 PM
Perhaps Aginor was skimming one day when one fell on top of his platform from a fall 30000 years ago and wellah, here is another S'Spawn. Not sure about that last bit though as the "G" probably would have tried to kill him unless it was the one and only Gholam Aginor created originally. Time vortex that one.
I love this idea. Although, if this were true you'd expect the Skimming Space to be filled with falling stuff. People would be getting bonked on the head all the time!

I love it!

Davian93
06-23-2011, 01:32 PM
I love this idea. Although, if this were true you'd expect the Skimming Space to be filled with falling stuff. People would be getting bonked on the head all the time!

I love it!

Honestly though, how many times do you think a male channeler has simply urinated off the side of said skimming platform? I mean, its not as if there are any restrooms there and when you have to really go, I have to assume that camping rules apply.

Terez
06-23-2011, 01:33 PM
People don't pee in WoT. Everybody knows that.

frenchie
06-23-2011, 01:36 PM
People don't pee in WoT. Everybody knows that.

Someone better let Tuon know.:)

Terez
06-23-2011, 01:40 PM
Shhh, there are a few small exceptions. And she went to powder her nose anyway.

Davian93
06-23-2011, 01:46 PM
Shhh, there are a few small exceptions. And she went to powder her nose anyway.

Pure Colombian?

frenchie
06-23-2011, 01:50 PM
Pure Colombian?

Well, she is Seanchan, which corresponds roughly to the America's.

WinespringBrother
06-23-2011, 02:04 PM
Originally Posted by BWB
Not all Shadowspawn were constructs. There were some creatures, like those called Gray Men, who were in truth ordinary living men and women.

This quote proves my point. Gray men are listed as an exception to the shadowspawn-as-constructs rule, but Gholams aren't.

So, would Fain and Slayer be considered creations, or constructs, or something else? And what is the difference, anyway?

Davian93
06-23-2011, 02:06 PM
The BWB is specifically noted to contain inconsistencies and mistakes per RJ so its hard to use it as a definitive source for such a debate in light of the later Q & A response that contradicts it.

WinespringBrother
06-23-2011, 02:34 PM
The BWB is specifically noted to contain inconsistencies and mistakes per RJ so its hard to use it as a definitive source for such a debate in light of the later Q & A response that contradicts it.

If you are talking about the Q&A that said that Gholam are more perfected Shadowspawn, that never addressed whether they were constructs or not (that was just me not remembering the quote correctly). If you are talking about another Q&A, can you provide the quote?

Terez
06-23-2011, 03:33 PM
This quote proves my point. Gray men are listed as an exception to the shadowspawn-as-constructs rule, but Gholams aren't.
It's made clear in the passage that Gray Men aren't the only such non-constructs, so no, it doesn't prove your point.

So, would Fain and Slayer be considered creations, or constructs, or something else? And what is the difference, anyway?
Constructs don't occur in nature; they're created. Non-constructs start out as something that occurs in nature (not just pieces of such things spliced together, like Trollocs are). Slayer is not a construct.

frenchie
06-23-2011, 03:42 PM
Construct vs Real, version 2.0.

WinespringBrother
06-23-2011, 10:06 PM
Construct vs Real, version 2.0.

And just as circular and subjective :D

frenchie
06-23-2011, 10:10 PM
What fun would it be if we didn't have things to debate(argue about) after the series ends?:D

The Unreasoner
06-23-2011, 10:15 PM
What fun would it be if we didn't have things to debate(argue about) after the series ends?:D

That was actually the main point of a thread I started that has since been merged into my Bryne bashing thread.

One candidate is: who killed asmodean? (clue edition)

And I'm sure we will need a gloating thread for people whose long shot theories were ultimately proven right.

WinespringBrother
06-23-2011, 10:22 PM
It's made clear in the passage that Gray Men aren't the only such non-constructs, so no, it doesn't prove your point.

It doesn't hurt though. Not one quote provided says that Gholam are naturally existing, and two that associate them categorically with Trollocs, which I hope you are not arguing are not constructs.

Constructs don't occur in nature; they're constructed. Non-constructs start out as something that occurs in nature (not just pieces of such things spliced together, like Trollocs are). Slayer is not a construct.

Fixed :D

So what was the point of all this again?

frenchie
06-23-2011, 10:30 PM
This is one of the things I hope is in the encyclopedia.

The Unreasoner
06-23-2011, 10:38 PM
Trollocs can breed, nym and gholam can't. Birgitte says they were created.

In any case I think stepping through a hole in the pattern begins to rip at artificially created life (including trollocs), it's just that the 'seams' which hold gholam together can endure it longer, and if a gholam steps back into the world fast enough, the 'seams' heal themselves. The one hounding mat died in the skimming space because his 'seams' were too long exposed.

Toss the dice
06-23-2011, 10:52 PM
It is my opinion that the gholam is still falling through the endless black, about 50 yards beneath a glob of bloody spittle.

The Unreasoner
06-23-2011, 11:07 PM
It is my opinion that the gholam is still falling through the endless black, about 50 yards beneath a glob of bloody spittle.

However, falling through the Skimming gateway for a few minutes did kill the gholam and it is really dead and it's not going to show up again.

From the interview database, the tom book tour in Paris.

Toss the dice
06-24-2011, 03:27 AM
You just had to ruin it didn't you?

The Unreasoner
06-24-2011, 04:17 AM
However, falling through the Skimming gateway for a few minutes didn't kill the gholam and it isn't really dead and it's going to show up again.

Fixed. Theorize away.

Technically since you never claimed it was still alive while it was falling, you may have been right anyway, provided he didn't just disintegrate. Or it rather. It was made, not born.

GonzoTheGreat
06-24-2011, 05:32 AM
Neither is the Gray Man, somehow ordinary-looking and at the same time virtually invisible.To a certain extend Balwer shares that feature. Being easy to overlook is something ordinary humans can have.
But no human can fit through a hole too small for his or her largest bone to fit through.

Terez
06-24-2011, 09:13 AM
Not without alterations, anyway.

WinespringBrother
06-24-2011, 09:32 AM
Trollocs can breed, nym and gholam can't. Birgitte says they were created.

In any case I think stepping through a hole in the pattern begins to rip at artificially created life (including trollocs), it's just that the 'seams' which hold gholam together can endure it longer, and if a gholam steps back into the world fast enough, the 'seams' heal themselves. The one hounding mat died in the skimming space because his 'seams' were too long exposed.

Don't have quotes in front of me, but IIRC when Somestra died, an oak tree grew where his corpse was, so he can reproduce in a way (obviously, plants don't "breed" lol)

Tree Brother
06-24-2011, 01:39 PM
Don't have quotes in front of me, but IIRC when Somestra died, an oak tree grew where his corpse was, so he can reproduce in a way (obviously, plants don't "breed" lol)

I don't have the quote either. Somestra grasped an acorn when he died. Everything he touches grows. He just did a power transfer. All his growing ability transferred in an instant into the oak.

There was a discussion in the past over what had souls. Did the Nym have souls (even though they are constructs)?

The Unreasoner
06-24-2011, 01:44 PM
I think RJ said something along the lines of, 'they have souls temporarily borrowed from ones not currently being used'

Terez
06-24-2011, 01:46 PM
Specifically, they aren't reborn as Nym. But Trollocs can only be reborn as Trollocs (or maybe Fades; no one's quite sure how that works).

Davian93
06-24-2011, 01:52 PM
I don't have the quote either. Somestra grasped an acorn when he died. Everything he touches grows. He just did a power transfer. All his growing ability transferred in an instant into the oak.

There was a discussion in the past over what had souls. Did the Nym have souls (even though they are constructs)?

I wonder, and have wondered, if that will come up again in the story. Will someone be trapped in the Blight and find temporary safety under Somestra's Oak Tree? Loial said it would always be Blight free so it stands to reason that it could still be stumbled upon by someone in Need just like the Eye.

Frenzy
06-25-2011, 02:58 PM
The BWB is specifically noted to contain inconsistencies and mistakes per RJ so its hard to use it as a definitive source for such a debate in light of the later Q & A response that contradicts it.

You're putting answers from a Q&A session where people can make stuff up on the fly over what's been written, edited, rewritten, re-edited, and gone to print?

seriously?

Terez
06-25-2011, 03:26 PM
It doesn't hurt though. Not one quote provided says that Gholam are naturally existing, and two that associate them categorically with Trollocs, which I hope you are not arguing are not constructs.
We know that gholam started out as human because they can pass through gateways, and constructs cannot. It's not that complicated (nor is it even slightly subjective).

The Unreasoner
06-25-2011, 04:14 PM
That seems to be backwards logic.
It's like a venn diagram, constructs, shadowspawn, and shadowspawn constructs.
Nym are (just) constructs, Trollocs are (just) shadowspawn. Gholam are both, and more perfected.

Constructs require a maker to 'animate' it with a soul on loan.
Non-constructs can and are born with a soul. However effed up Trollocs are, it came from mixing humans and animals, and at no point lacked a soul.

Gholam are killed by simply being in the skimming space for too long. They were built to endure short exposure to gateways, but clearly they are not human and have never been.

I'm surprised it's a matter of debate at all.

Zombie Sammael
06-25-2011, 05:04 PM
You're putting answers from a Q&A session where people can make stuff up on the fly over what's been written, edited, rewritten, re-edited, and gone to print?

seriously?

I've always considered the BWB to be of somewhat questionable canonicity, both for its appalling illustrations and the fact that it was co-authored by someone with little other connection to the series.

Jokeslayer
06-25-2011, 05:58 PM
That seems to be backwards logic.
It's like a venn diagram, constructs, shadowspawn, and shadowspawn constructs.
Nym are (just) constructs, Trollocs are (just) shadowspawn. Gholam are both, and more perfected.

Constructs require a maker to 'animate' it with a soul on loan.
Non-constructs can and are born with a soul. However effed up Trollocs are, it came from mixing humans and animals, and at no point lacked a soul.


I think we might be trying to apply a more rigid terminology than RJ himself did, which can only cause problems. (unless we use all-new words, which doesn't seem practical). Doubly so since some of our answers come from BS, who may not use the terminology the same way RJ would have.

***


ACOS, ch 39
"Gholam were created in the middle of the War of the Power, during the Age of Legends," he began from the beginning. Almost from the beginning of what Birgitte had told him. He turned, facing each group of women as he spoke. Burn him if he was going to let one bunch think they were more important. Or that he was bloody pleading with them. Especially since he was. "They were made to assassinate Aes Sedai. No other reason. To kill people who could channel. The One Power won’t help you; the Power won’t touch a gholam. In fact, they can sense the ability to channel, if they’re within, say, fifty paces of you. They can feel the power in you, too. You won’t know the gholam until it’s too late. They look just like anybody else. On the outside. Inside... Gholam have no bones; they can squeeze themselves under a door. And they’re strong enough to rip a door off steel hinges with one hand." Or rip out a throat. Light, he should have let Nalesean stay in bed.



ACOS ch 39
There were only six gholam made - three male and three female; at least, that’s what they look like

Week 6 Question: How were the gholams made? Were they created or bred like the Trollocs? How exactly are they controlled if they are immune to the One Power?

Robert Jordan Answers: The gholam---singular and plural are the same---were created, not bred. Supposedly their creation involved making them so that they would be obedient to the Chosen, whoever they might be at any given time. This was an attempt at copying something that had turned up in Myrddraal, which seem incapable of disobeying one of the Chosen, possibly because of the use of the True Power in creation of the Trollocs, the parent stock of the Myrddraal. Even Aginor, who created the Trollocs, and thus indirectly the Myrddraal, was uncertain about the actual cause. (Becoming one of the Forsaken involves receiving a mark from the Dark One in return for your oaths; this mark is invisible and cannot be sensed by another human being, even another of the Forsaken, but it can be [seen] by certain non-human creatures, including Myrddraal and draghkar among others. This may play a part in the Myrddraal's obedience but doesn't explain it completely.) This element in gholam has some flaws, however, as we have seen in a small measure. In any case, if I were you, I wouldn't try giving orders to a gholam unless I were one of the Forsaken

That's all I can find on the origin of the Gholam, and no mention of them being altered humans. Not conclusive, I know, but the language certainly suggests that they were built.

Trollocs started out with human biology too, and we know animals don't have a problem travelling, but the mixing of the two (people+animals+whatever Aginor did) creates somethign that can't travel. It can't be that gholam can travel because they're pure constructs, since Nym can't travel. So we have altered people and pure constructs that can't travel and an unknown that can; I don't think it's possible to use travelling evidence to be conclusive about if the gholam were ever human or not.

The Unreasoner
06-25-2011, 06:32 PM
Maybe I applied a too-rigid terminology, but all of my conclusions are supported by evidence, and are largely in line with what you said anyway.

And for something this specific, BS probably is speaking from the notes.

Jokeslayer
06-25-2011, 07:07 PM
And for something this specific, BS probably is speaking from the notes.

I've never been to a signing, but unless he's taking the notes with him (seems unlikely, but like I said, never been) and consulting them at the signing, the same problem applies.


Maybe I applied a too-rigid terminology, but all of my conclusions are supported by evidence, and are largely in line with what you said anyway.


Well expcept for the conclusion (where you concluded gholam had never been human andIconcluded it was impossible to know)

Terez
06-25-2011, 07:29 PM
That seems to be backwards logic.
It's like a venn diagram, constructs, shadowspawn, and shadowspawn constructs.
Nym are (just) constructs, Trollocs are (just) shadowspawn. Gholam are both, and more perfected.
Just because you know what a Venn diagram is doesn't mean your logic is sound. RJ said that Shadowspawn cannot go through gateways because they are constructs. In other words, it's the fact that they are constructs that makes it impossible for them to go through gateways.

Knife of Dreams book tour 24 October 2005 - Tim Kington reporting (http://theoryland.yuku.com/reply/201239/t/another-signing-report.html#reply-201239)

Q: Why can't Shadowspawn pass through gateways?
RJ: It's because they're artificial constructs. They can't tolerate the passage.
Q: So would a Nym have the same problem?
RJ: Yes.
Q: How about Ogier?
RJ: No. Ogier are not artificial constructs.
Brandon has not said anything to contradict this, so the fact that people are debating this is surprising, indeed.

The Unreasoner
06-25-2011, 07:41 PM
BS has said that they are a more perfected shadowspawn. He implied that this was unusual. Didn't you make the interview database?

The degree of physical differences between gholam and humans alone is evidence against them ever having been human.

Maybe instead of construct in the venn diagram I should have said 'not with its own soul'

Frenzy
06-25-2011, 07:43 PM
I'm delighted how our delightful mods have not noticed a low-grade profanity in use.

i have these on my wall at work, next to the verbal ethics policy :p

http://cdn.svcs.c2.uclick.com/c2/d926aeb05f74012ee3c100163e41dd5b

http://cdn.svcs.c2.uclick.com/c2/b35602d05f32012ee3c100163e41dd5b

http://cdn.svcs.c2.uclick.com/c2/302951505f3d012ee3c100163e41dd5b

The Unreasoner
06-25-2011, 08:00 PM
I've never been to a signing, but unless he's taking the notes with him (seems unlikely, but like I said, never been) and consulting them at the signing, the same problem applies.



Well expcept for the conclusion (where you concluded gholam had never been human andIconcluded it was impossible to know)

I'm speaking of a specific quote, where he called them perfected shadowspawn. He was specific and confident, and he has gotten better at hedging when he's uncertain. I took all of this into consideration, and concluded he had a specific source in mind.

For that last bit, yeah, lol, that was the 'largely'.

Davian93
06-25-2011, 08:03 PM
You're putting answers from a Q&A session where people can make stuff up on the fly over what's been written, edited, rewritten, re-edited, and gone to print?

seriously?

RJ tended to use the Q & As as a chance to clarify things and correct mistakes. As you are well aware from having attended them, RJ was always very careful about what he said and what he didn't say. He would often correct himself in mid-sentence or pause to make sure he got it right. The BWB, per RJ, was full of inconsistencies and was even written from the voice of a miscellaneous 3rd Age historian and had essentially the deliberate mistakes that any History book is full of.

SO yeah, I take later Q & As from RJ over the BWB. I put it as Actual WoT Novels>Q & A>BWB for reliability.

Terez
06-25-2011, 08:36 PM
BS has said that they are a more perfected shadowspawn. He implied that this was unusual.
That doesn't have anything to do with them being constructs or not being constructs.

The degree of physical differences between gholam and humans alone is evidence against them ever having been human.That's idiotic. You don't know how much they were changed, so why would you pretend? They are human in appearance - just like the Gray Men, in fact, with the 'ordinary' look.

The Unreasoner
06-25-2011, 09:13 PM
Well they have no bones and have the proportional strength of an ant.
They look 'ordinary' not 'unnoticeable' .

And I thought you used that kod quote to argue that shadowspawn were by definition artificial constructs. If you didn't, my apologies.

Terez
06-25-2011, 10:02 PM
Well they have no bones and have the proportional strength of an ant.
If Semirhage can remove every drop of blood in someone's body and instantly replace it with another fluid, then surely someone can remove bones.

They look 'ordinary' not 'unnoticeable'.
I didn't say they were unnoticeable, did I?

And I thought you used that kod quote to argue that shadowspawn were by definition artificial constructs. If you didn't, my apologies.
I didn't, nor do I remember arguing anything remotely similar to that.

The Unreasoner
06-25-2011, 10:31 PM
You said gholam could pass through gateways. Then you said this was because they were once human. And then you posted a quote, where the question was, "why can't shadowspawn pass through gateways?" The answer was "because [shadowspawn] are artificial constructs".

But like I said, I misinterpreted your intent, and apologized.

Although I still think if the reason gholam can go through gateways is because they were once human, that reason seriously falls apart when we consider the fact that the one gholam died in the skimming space, and presumably not from starvation as little time was spent there.

Maybe they were once humans. Maybe. At best, I think aginor tweaked with corpses though. The gholam doesn't have a mental gender identity, and never thought about once being human (though that could be from amnesia, or several other things as well).

I think he could have used human corpses as the base of the design, but any kind of soul was borrowed, making it a construct.

Terez
06-26-2011, 12:17 AM
Although I still think if the reason gholam can go through gateways is because they were once human, that reason seriously falls apart when we consider the fact that the one gholam died in the skimming space, and presumably not from starvation as little time was spent there.
Since we don't know why it died, then no, the reason does not fall apart.

The Unreasoner
06-26-2011, 02:03 PM
However, falling through the Skimming gateway for a few minutes did kill the gholam and it is really dead and it's not going to show up again.

The quote seems to say that being in the Skimming space did in fact kill it.

And even if you don't accept that, it is clear on the time it took for the gholam to die. Starvation and thirst don't hit that fast. The odds of encountering something that can even hurt it (let alone kill it) in the world are low enough- in the skimming space the odds become astronomical, at least in any practical length of time.

Terez
06-26-2011, 02:17 PM
The quote seems to say that being in the Skimming space did in fact kill it.
It says that the falling killed it. If it had anything to do with the gateway, then it should have died immediately.

Usually when RJ says something in interview for which there is an exception, he'll say so without telling us exactly what that exception is (there are numerous examples of this). He didn't when he made the comment about artificial constructs. Therefore you need to accept that the gholam is not a construct and come up with some other reason that makes you happy as to why it eventually died.

The Unreasoner
06-26-2011, 02:55 PM
It was the falling in the skimming space that killed it.
There are numerous examples of him changing his mind too.
In any case, since gholam do in fact seem to be killed by prolonged 'passage' between gateways, he may not have seen them as an exception. The unusual bit is that they survive 'short passages' (traveling gateways), not that they die in long ones (skimming space).
They are more perfectly crafted and can therefore travel, but the fundamental weakness of constructs is still there, and so they die in the skimming space.

What is it you believe killed it?

Frenzy
06-26-2011, 03:00 PM
Ok, dumb question: WE know that going thru a gateway kills Shadowspawn; Rand knows it, and a bunch of others know it too, But does Mat know? If he doesn't, it's just his idle speculation that the gholam will die by starvation or boredom.

The Unreasoner
06-26-2011, 03:02 PM
I don't see how he could know. Lmao at dying from boredom though.

Toss the dice
06-26-2011, 03:14 PM
Ok, dumb question: WE know that going thru a gateway kills Shadowspawn; Rand knows it, and a bunch of others know it too, But does Mat know? If he doesn't, it's just his idle speculation that the gholam will die by starvation or boredom.

I think he does, although I can't provide quotes for that opinion.

That said, if he DOES know, he almost certainly distinguishes skimming spaces apart from gateways (Traveling). He kicked the gholam into a skimming space, not a gateway. To his mind, if he knew that Shadowspawn can't survive passage through gateways, why would he assume the same thing for skimming spaces? He's not a reader, he is a very non-omniscient character. That could very well explain why he figured the gholam would fall forever, until it went mad. He said he hoped it couldn't die, and considering his experiences with the creature, he probably figured that was a decent bet.

cindy
06-26-2011, 03:20 PM
interesting discussion. not sure i follow all the intricacies, and distinctions being made.

i always thought gholam were based on golems, made of dust/mud/clay/inorganic material, animated by written/verbal instructions, and not by souls. created to perform the instructions. not any kind of "spawn" as they are manufactured individually and can't reproduce.

i figured being in the skimming place (which seems somewhat separated from "real" space?) for any length of time would "separate" them from their instructions/instructors, and they would crumble to dust, or whatever they're made of, like golems with their words removed.

but i base this only on the similarity of the words gholam and golem, and the descriptions in the books, which seem very golem like, and not on any RJ specific references, so maybe this only makes sense to me.

but i'm probably missing the whole point. :o

Terez
06-26-2011, 03:26 PM
interesting discussion. not sure i follow all the intricacies, and distinctions being made.

i always thought gholam were based on golems, made of dust/mud/clay/inorganic material, animated by written/verbal instructions, and not by souls. created to perform the instructions. not any kind of "spawn" as they are manufactured individually and can't reproduce.
None of that prevents Aginor from having bypassed the deficiencies of artificial constructs by using non-constructed starting material for his new fancy Shadowspawn Idea. Gray Men were no doubt an inspiration, but we don't know for sure to what extent.

i figured being in the skimming place (which seems somewhat separated from "real" space?) for any length of time would "separate" them from their instructions/instructors, and they would crumble to dust, or whatever they're made of, like golems with their words removed.Constructs don't crumble to dust when passing through gateways; they die immediately.

but i base this only on the similarity of the words gholam and golem, and the descriptions in the books, which seem very golem like, and not on any RJ specific references, so maybe this only makes sense to me.RJ never parallels anything directly; he likes to mix and match attributes so as to create something that could have feasibly been distorted by human error to something resembling our legends today.

but i'm probably missing the whole point. :oOnly that RJ said artificial constructs can't survive the passage through a gateway.

The Unreasoner
06-26-2011, 03:28 PM
interesting discussion. not sure i follow all the intricacies, and distinctions being made.

i always thought gholam were based on golems, made of dust/mud/clay/inorganic material, animated by written/verbal instructions, and not by souls. created to perform the instructions. not any kind of "spawn" as they are manufactured individually and can't reproduce.

i figured being in the skimming place (which seems somewhat separated from "real" space?) for any length of time would "separate" them from their instructions/instructors, and they would crumble to dust, or whatever they're made of, like golems with their words removed.

but i base this only on the similarity of the words gholam and golem, and the descriptions in the books, which seem very golem like, and not on any RJ specific references, so maybe this only makes sense to me.

but i'm probably missing the whole point. :o
No, I would say you get it pretty well. Except the bit about the souls, as the gholam do exhibit a modicum of agency.

Travelling is practically skimming with zero distance between the two gateways in the skimming space. And it seems to be backwards, but like rand learned from asmodean, the power has little to do with gateways.

cindy
06-26-2011, 03:35 PM
yeah, i guess what i'm saying is i see gholams as a very specific type of thing (i won't use the word construct because i see it is being used in a way that i don't entirely understand; this is one of the distinctions i don't really get. . . sorry, my fault, not yours) that require direct instruction to operate, like golems. only golems, and to my mind, gholam, would literally or figuaratively "crumble" (or, you know, just stop working, i.e. die) when their animating instructions are removed. like when the body loses the soul. back to dust we all go.

but as i see this discussion involves backstory of which i am clueless, i withdraw with my ignorance intact. :)

The Unreasoner
06-26-2011, 03:47 PM
I think that you have precisely described the mechanism by which shadowspawn are killed by passage through gateways.

While I don't know about turning to dust, I think that the space between all gateways is some part of Tel'aran'rhiod. Just like entering Tel'aran'rhiod in the flesh can risk humanity, it is even more dangerous for constructs, as the passage seems to rip at the seams which contain the soul.

Edited to add-
Sorry about the ridiculous face, can't see how to pull it.

looqas
06-27-2011, 03:17 AM
Ok, dumb question: WE know that going thru a gateway kills Shadowspawn; Rand knows it, and a bunch of others know it too, But does Mat know? If he doesn't, it's just his idle speculation that the gholam will die by starvation or boredom.

It wasn't Mat's idea. I mean shoving gholam through the gateway/skimming door thingie. It was Elayne's and Kin's idea. Mat's idea was to shove the foxhead in it's throat and Mat 'comments' that this was a better idea.

So it stand to reason that the idea was to drop the gholam from the Skimming platform in the first place for a really long drop. I don't think they even contemplated the Gateway, because I don't see how could know/assume Gateways were any help to them. So I count gateway out which leaves Skimming and thus the need for a platform where the channeler steps on.

PS. This just occurred to me and reading my first post I really call bollock on myself :D I really should be much sharper when reading/posting/opening my piehole. ;)

WinespringBrother
06-27-2011, 01:44 PM
Ok, dumb question: WE know that going thru a gateway kills Shadowspawn; Rand knows it, and a bunch of others know it too, But does Mat know? If he doesn't, it's just his idle speculation that the gholam will die by starvation or boredom.

I don't see how he could know. Lmao at dying from boredom though.

It would make sense that Birgitte would know about the weakness of shadowspawn and gateways, since she was very well-versed about Gholams (though maybe she also knew they weren't vulnerable to gateways like Trollocs and other constructs), and for her to pass that information on to Mat and Elayne. Though obviously we don't know for sure.

SauceyBlueConfetti
07-05-2011, 01:51 PM
SO yeah, I take later Q & As from RJ over the BWB. I put it as Actual WoT Novels>Q & A>BWB for reliability.

If we don't have an "I'm a nerd and this is proof" board, we need one.

Algebra to prove the argument which source is more viable when arguing minute factoids in a book written about a fantasy world.

I loves me my HCFF friends :p

Zombie Sammael
07-05-2011, 02:29 PM
If we don't have an "I'm a nerd and this is proof" board, we need one.

Algebra to prove the argument which source is more viable when arguing minute factoids in a book written about a fantasy world.

I loves me my HCFF friends :p

The BWB was written in collaboration with someone who was not Robert Jordan, had not been hand-picked by Robert Jordan's wife to be the successor to Robert Jordan, and did not have full access to all of Robert Jordan's notes. It's cannonicity is entirely questionable. Plus, when the encyclopedia is released it will have been completely replaced for usefulness.

Davian93
07-05-2011, 02:54 PM
The BWB was written in collaboration with someone who was not Robert Jordan, had not been hand-picked by Robert Jordan's wife to be the successor to Robert Jordan, and did not have full access to all of Robert Jordan's notes. It's cannonicity is entirely questionable. Plus, when the encyclopedia is released it will have been completely replaced for usefulness.

Yeah but will the Encyclopedia have the fantastic artwork of the BWB? It'll be tough to compete with such awesomeness.

Zombie Sammael
07-05-2011, 05:14 PM
Yeah but will the Encyclopedia have the fantastic artwork of the BWB? It'll be tough to compete with such awesomeness.

Ah, the BWB artwork. The only WOT art, including fanart, to ever have surpassed the covers of Darrell K Sweet.

RJ likedthe cover art. :eek:

The Unreasoner
07-05-2011, 06:50 PM
Don't the british versions have superior cover art? I almost didn't continue with the series when i saw the series in a library in all its artistic splendour.

Jonai
07-09-2011, 05:49 AM
Ah, the BWB artwork. The only WOT art, including fanart, to ever have surpassed the covers of Darrell K Sweet.

RJ likedthe cover art. :eek:

He did? Seemed like he was always b* tching about Rand not being tall enough, or wrong hair colour or something. AFAIK he mentioned something once about redoing the whole series with whelan art after the series was complete. As to the construct debate, I do think the word "artificial" makes a whole lot of difference, but I really don't want to get into that too much. I think the arguments in this thread are more fun than the actual canonical debate. ;)

Mort
07-09-2011, 07:46 AM
It would be hilarious if the skimming space would be filled up with a lot of junk people throw off the platform when skimming. Kinda like space junk. All skimming has to stop because of falling debris, and urine. :D

Juan
07-10-2011, 04:46 AM
So you can't really kill or hurt the gholam by physical weapons or the OP. But can you eat it? :P

Zombie Sammael
07-10-2011, 06:53 AM
He did? Seemed like he was always b* tching about Rand not being tall enough, or wrong hair colour or something. AFAIK he mentioned something once about redoing the whole series with whelan art after the series was complete. As to the construct debate, I do think the word "artificial" makes a whole lot of difference, but I really don't want to get into that too much. I think the arguments in this thread are more fun than the actual canonical debate. ;)

I may be misremembering. It might have been the BWB art he said he actually liked. Either way, he had terrible taste.

the_collective
07-11-2011, 05:35 PM
All this talk about the Skimming space got me thinking:

Why the hell did it never occur to anyone to toss the Sad Bracelets/Domination Band/male a'dam (whatever you'd like to call that nameless ter'angreal) overboard in the same endless space that ultimately took the gholam (and various excretory ejecta over the millenia, as suggested elsewhere in this thread)?

I'd rather this question not be answered with various rationales trying to defend the authors' decisions to keep this idea out of characters' heads, and more focus on some theoretically 'practical' reason this could not be accomplished. It seems far too easy to dispose of undesirables in this way, and there must have been something stopping them from trying it, I hope.

Zombie Sammael
07-11-2011, 05:54 PM
All this talk about the Skimming space got me thinking:

Why the hell did it never occur to anyone to toss the Sad Bracelets/Domination Band/male a'dam (whatever you'd like to call that nameless ter'angreal) overboard in the same endless space that ultimately took the gholam (and various excretory ejecta over the millenia, as suggested elsewhere in this thread)?

I'd rather this question not be answered with various rationales trying to defend the authors' decisions to keep this idea out of characters' heads, and more focus on some theoretically 'practical' reason this could not be accomplished. It seems far too easy to dispose of undesirables in this way, and there must have been something stopping them from trying it, I hope.

Because at the time the Sad bracelets were located in Tanchico, no-one knew how to Skim, with the possible exception of Rand, but I think it was before even he learned how to do it properly.

The Unreasoner
07-11-2011, 06:13 PM
Oh I remember this thread..
We agreed that gholam were constructs (had souls on loan), no?

And for the collective...
One recurring theme in the books is people rarely try to find better ways to do anything. If rand and Egwene put two and two together a bit faster, there would be fewer books.

I think its also to keep it 'relatable'. Many issues 'could' have been resolved by a more creative use of the power, but are always either retroactively deemed impossible (tying off gateways) or are never thought of.

the_collective
07-11-2011, 06:28 PM
Because at the time the Sad bracelets were located in Tanchico, no-one knew how to Skim, with the possible exception of Rand, but I think it was before even he learned how to do it properly.

Yes, of course. Early in the series this was true. I'm more referring to when they just sat in Cadsuane's 'ordinary' trapped box for however long it was. Granted, this may have been merely days or even hours, but still...

Jonai
07-11-2011, 06:41 PM
The real reason the sad bracelets were never tossed over the side of a gateway platform is....it would have made the series shorter by 300 pages. The same reason there are no cel'lphone ter'angreal in the possession of the main characters.

the_collective
07-11-2011, 06:46 PM
I think its also to keep it 'relatable'. Many issues 'could' have been resolved by a more creative use of the power, but are always either retroactively deemed impossible (tying off gateways) or are never thought of.

While I'm willing to accept the possibility that it just never occurred to anyone (except Elayne, apparently, who suggested the gholam idea in the first place), I feel I must point out that - in this instance - this particular action with the power is retroactively deemed possible by virtue of Elayne's aforementioned idea (and further confirmation by BS that the gholam is, in fact, unrecoverable - read: the Sad Bracelets should logically be as well, by the same token).

the_collective
07-11-2011, 07:01 PM
The real reason the sad bracelets were never tossed over the side of a gateway platform is....it would have made the series shorter by 300 pages. The same reason there are no cel'lphone ter'angreal in the possession of the main characters.

It's a shame that this is very probably true. The vast majority of this series is so elegantly laid out and every event placed just so to lay the groundwork for the next chain of events, ad infinitum. If this sort of thing (i.e. obvious tasks that could've saved a ton of needless drama had they been carried out) ends up happening a lot in AMoL, that would be disappointing.

I do realize that this series deals a lot with this topic of making decisions without all the info, etc; but this Sad Bracelet thing was a glaring oversight by comparison, in my opinion. I mean, it was the single most dangerous object with respect to our Hero, he was quite afraid of it being used on him again, and he wanted to be completely rid of it to ensure this, yet he apparently didn't spend much time thinking about how this might be accomplished. I mean, he successfully skimmed at least half a dozen times (spending hours in the 'Space' per trip to think about the darkness around him, no less). <Sigh>

David Selig
07-11-2011, 07:07 PM
I am not sure Rand wanted the sad bracelets gone forever - my impression is that he wanted them kept safe, but they might've had their use for him, on a captured Forsaken for example. He didn't even order Cadsuane when he exiled her to give him back the other copies he got from Semirhage back in KoD.

Kimon
07-11-2011, 07:12 PM
It's a shame that this is very probably true. The vast majority of this series is so elegantly laid out and every event placed just so to lay the groundwork for the next chain of events, ad infinitum. If this sort of thing (i.e. obvious tasks that could've saved a ton of needless drama had they been carried out) ends up happening a lot in AMoL, that would be disappointing.

I do realize that this series deals a lot with this topic of making decisions without all the info, etc; but this Sad Bracelet thing was a glaring oversight by comparison, in my opinion. I mean, it was the single most dangerous object with respect to our Hero, he was quite afraid of it being used on him again, and he wanted to be completely rid of it to ensure this, yet he apparently didn't spend much time thinking about how this might be accomplished. I mean, he successfully skimmed at least half a dozen times (spending hours in the 'Space' per trip to think about the darkness around him, no less). <Sigh>

Keep in mind, that Cadsuane had wished to keep the a'dam on site so that it could be studied, which obviously prevented it being discarded anywhere. Removing it moreover would likely have been pointless, as one would then have needed to assume, almost certainly erroneously, that they had obtained all the copies, along with the original, when Semirhage was taken captive. They could not thus have ridden the world of all a'dam at this point. And, of course, if the a'dam had been successfully submerged in the deep earlier (or instead cast into the abyss of the skimming dimension) then that would have made its entire plotline rather pointless. After all, why bother introducing the bloody thing at all unless for eventual use on Rand.

the_collective
07-11-2011, 07:24 PM
Keep in mind, that Cadsuane had wished to keep the a'dam on site so that it could be studied, which obviously prevented it being discarded anywhere. Removing it moreover would likely have been pointless, as one would then have needed to assume, almost certainly erroneously, that they had obtained all the copies, along with the original, when Semirhage was taken captive. They could not thus have ridden the world of all a'dam at this point. And, of course, if the a'dam had been successfully submerged in the deep earlier (or instead cast into the abyss of the skimming dimension) then that would have made its entire plotline rather pointless. After all, why bother introducing the bloody thing at all unless for eventual use on Rand.

Copies, he says!! I apologize to all reading this. Somehow the detail that Semirhage had had copies made escaped me when I hungrily read through those books the first time (and not at all since, as I'm still working my way toward them again). I retract my previous commentary on the subject, as it's all moot. Thanks for pointing that out for me, Kimon. Perhaps next time I'll come up with a better conversation topic...

The Unreasoner
07-11-2011, 08:02 PM
While I'm willing to accept the possibility that it just never occurred to anyone (except Elayne, apparently, who suggested the gholam idea in the first place), I feel I must point out that - in this instance - this particular action with the power is retroactively deemed possible by virtue of Elayne's aforementioned idea (and further confirmation by BS that the gholam is, in fact, unrecoverable - read: the Sad Bracelets should logically be as well, by the same token).

Well the gholam is dead and stuck. Constructs can't survive the passage between gateways. But since there are ways around death (balefire), there may be ways to recover items from the skimming space.

Lol and I thought you knew there were potential copies.

Marie Curie 7
07-11-2011, 11:45 PM
He did? Seemed like he was always b* tching about Rand not being tall enough, or wrong hair colour or something. AFAIK he mentioned something once about redoing the whole series with whelan art after the series was complete. As to the construct debate, I do think the word "artificial" makes a whole lot of difference, but I really don't want to get into that too much. I think the arguments in this thread are more fun than the actual canonical debate. ;)

More specifically, the cover artist choice was between Sweet and Whelan. The timing for completing the artwork led to the final selection of Sweet.

The Path of Daggers book tour, Louisville, KY 14 November 1998 - report by Matthew Hunter

Someone asked how he chose the cover artist, and we got a nice long spiel with some previously unknown information. Jordan and his wife went through bookstores picking out books based on their (if they liked it) cover art and finding out who did the cover. It came down to two artists, Darrel K Sweet and Michael Whelan. The deciding factor was that Whelan wants the manuscript to read for a year before he will deliver a cover, and they just couldn't wait that long.

They are apparently considering a later reissue of the entire series with different covers, perhaps by Whelan, once it is complete.

However, RJ was not all that excited by the cover art after all.

The Path of Daggers book tour, Dayton, OH 15 November 1998 - report by Michael Martin

Like Matthew Hunter (see his post), I was surprised by the candor of RJ's remarks regarding Sweet's covers. At least we know he is just as exasperated by them as we are. If only Michael Whelan and Jordan had been able to work a deal out--man. Talk about poster-worthy and collectible art.

skaywalker
07-12-2011, 03:03 AM
The real reason the sad bracelets were never tossed over the side of a gateway platform is....it would have made the series shorter by 300 pages. The same reason there are no cel'lphone ter'angreal in the possession of the main characters.

Elayne has at least one "phone" ter'angreal but of course why use it, then everyone of the main heroes will be up to date with everything. It will be against the books' main concept which is - "nobody shares information".

GonzoTheGreat
07-12-2011, 04:48 AM
The same reason there are no cel'lphone ter'angreal in the possession of the main characters.Moridin might be willing to give them to Rand and friends, since he has the means to phone'tap them. Then, of course, the Shayol Ghul Gazette would have had an article on how that led to the demise of the News of the Wheel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_of_the_world).

Davian93
07-12-2011, 08:38 AM
Well the gholam is dead and stuck. Constructs can't survive the passage between gateways.

I'm guessing someone didn't read the first 90+ posts on this thread about how the Gholam COULD survive such a passage.

The Unreasoner
07-12-2011, 05:10 PM
Well BS said that it's dead, and that falling through the skimming space killed it. I posted the quote somewhere in this thread. I don't know how terez interpreted it, but I saw it, when combined with the fact that they are a more perfect shadowspawn, as confirmation that it was a construct. and that what was unusual was that short passages between gateways do not kill gholam, not that long ones do. As asmodean said, the power has little to do with gateways. Exposure to what is beyond a gateway, however small, normally kills constructs. Not the gateway itself. It would be like claiming opening the door killed a person who went outside and froze to death in Antarctica. Gholam just have slightly better winter clothes.

Davian93
07-13-2011, 08:46 AM
The very existance of Death Gates contradicts that theory. Shadowspawn pass through the gateway and immediately die...not due to the Skimming Space (which they're not entering as its a Traveling Gateway) but due to going through a gateway.

GonzoTheGreat
07-13-2011, 09:04 AM
Yep.

Then again, is Skimming Space itself survivable at all?
If it is 'naturally' like a hard vacuum, then anyone who fell into that without the protection of a channeler who maintains a more hospitable environment would freeze to death while asphyxiating as a result of the lack of air. It does not seem too surprising that not even a gholam can't survive that for long.
I would say that unless there is further evidence, something like this is the best explanation for why the gholam would die.

Davian93
07-13-2011, 09:24 AM
Yep.

Then again, is Skimming Space itself survivable at all?
If it is 'naturally' like a hard vacuum, then anyone who fell into that without the protection of a channeler who maintains a more hospitable environment would freeze to death while asphyxiating as a result of the lack of air. It does not seem too surprising that not even a gholam can't survive that for long.
I would say that unless there is further evidence, something like this is the best explanation for why the gholam would die.


Well, there is the fact that Gholam need to feed on human blood to live in the first place that would quickly kill it off. That and the fact that it only survived to the 3rd Age thanks to a Stasis box in the first place (which suggests a finite life span in the first place in addition to the need for sustinance.)

The Unreasoner
07-13-2011, 11:33 AM
Oh I remember this thread..
We agreed

Seems I was wrong. My apologies.

The Unreasoner
07-13-2011, 11:43 AM
The very existance of Death Gates contradicts that theory. Shadowspawn pass through the gateway and immediately die...not due to the Skimming Space (which they're not entering as its a Traveling Gateway) but due to going through a gateway.

well, I don't think we know what by what mechanism shadowspawn are killed with gateways. Is it entering, departing, or the passage between the two? The three happen simultaneously with traveling, but not with skimming. I took this principle, along with RJ saying shadowspawn can't survive the passage, and concluded that the space between traveling gateways is, like the skimming space, very much like Tel'aran'rhiod entered in the flesh. And it is that 'exposure' that I think rips at artificially created life. But I suppose we don't know.

Although I don't think we have any conclusive evidence that gray men can pass through gateways either.

GonzoTheGreat
07-13-2011, 12:11 PM
As far as we know, there is no "space between traveling gateways", which would seem to be rather troublesome for your interpretation.

Everywhere it is described, we're told that both sides of the gateway are the same, that there is no distance in between at all.

Davian93
07-13-2011, 12:35 PM
As far as we know, there is no "space between traveling gateways", which would seem to be rather troublesome for your interpretation.

Everywhere it is described, we're told that both sides of the gateway are the same, that there is no distance in between at all.

Even the process described to make both female and male gateways indicates that there is zero space in between. One bends the Pattern to eliminate the space and the other creates an similarity in the Pattern...this along with the description of gateways as razor thin and impossible to even see from the side indicates that there is essentially ZERO space in a normal gateway. Its the passage through the gateway that kills the constructs, not the time on the other side.

Thus, gholam are "perfected constructs" that aren't killed by passing through the gateway and thus it likely died of starvation if it is indeed dead now.

The Unreasoner
07-13-2011, 02:46 PM
It must have been very hungry indeed while fighting mat

FelixPax
07-13-2011, 04:20 PM
Yep.

Then again, is Skimming Space itself survivable at all?

Yes.


Can, and do Dreams survive?

Yes.


What has RJ pulled over reader's eyes in WoT series?

A Lewis Carroll method, of writing in reverse. (See: 'Adventures In Wonderland'; 'Through the Looking-Glass')


In WoT, even worlds are reversed, as Hopper once tried to explain to Perrin:

What is real is not real. What is not real is real. Flesh is a dream, and dreams have flesh.


The Dragon Reborn, Chapter 43 "Shadowbrothers"--Perrin pov, in Wolfdream/TAR with Hopper speaking

This is one likely reason the Wolves do not kill deer or white stags in Wolf Dreams (ToM book).


Sorilea once made similar comments to Egwene al'Vere in Cairhien:

We are always more afraid than we wish to be, but we can always be braver than we expect. Hold on to your heart, and the Aes Sedai cannot harm what is really you, your heart.

The Shadow Rising, Chapter 33 "Courage to Strengthen" -- Egwene al'Vere pov, with Wise Ones



Question I ponder, is why do Trollocs not survive moving through Gateways?

Trollocs do have dreams, similar to Humankind or Wolves, Lanfear/Mierin once claimed (TDR--Perrin pov).

So are Trollocs a product or being created by someone else's dream?

Or do Trollocs' own fears & nightmares ultimately cause death of them, if pushed into the TAR/Skimming Worlds by a gateway?

Zombie Sammael
07-13-2011, 04:25 PM
It seems to me that the answer to how it dies is dependent on the nature of the skimming space. If the skimming space is something that exists, for example, only whilst the gateway at one end or the other is open, and winks out of existence when closed - thus being unique to each skimming usage - then that explains it. Equally, the skimming space might be lethal, and the platform itself, whatever form it takes, provide some protection.

It's also possible that the Gholam's very nature killed it. The skimming space might - might - be a function of the Power, and having been pushed through, the Gholam's power-neutralisation effect may in some manner cause it to be annihilated.

Whilst the explanations that it died of boredom, starvation, or insanity, do make sense, those are all things that would take varying degrees of time, which might give the lie if Brandon were to suggest it was already dead following the relatively short space of time that has passed in the books.

frenchie
07-13-2011, 06:56 PM
Ok, let me try to spell this out differently. When Aginor(who it seemed did most of the biological research) made the Trollocs, Drakhar, Dark Hounds,, Jumara, he took genetic material from different animals (including humans)and he used both the One and True Powers to combine the DNA of the animals. Thus, they are constructs, beings that never would have existed naturally. That is why passing through a gateway kills them. The Gholam, it is implied, was made by using the One and True Powers to give an existing being unique traits. As such, they were CREATED, not constructed. That is why a Gholam can pass through a gateway. They already existed as a live being.

The Unreasoner
07-13-2011, 07:19 PM
The Gholam...already existed as a live being.

This is one key point to your position that I don't accept. but whatever, the lines are drawn and we are all reasonable people and generally know the facts, such as they are. further argument seems useless until more information becomes available.

Weiramon
07-13-2011, 07:21 PM
Pshaw!

Gholams? Old wives tales!

Burn me it's clear this young Mat Cauthon has committed some bloody murders and has spawned this story of a legendary creature in order to throw off the scent. Note the vicious slayings all occur in the areas that this young lad is travelling through. Why, by just skimming over reports of this, it becomes obvious to all, thus a new story needed to be constructed and brandished about - claiming the supposed creature has been consigned to some void where it conveniently can never be seen again. Akin to a gleeman's tale, yet no doubt many will fall for it.

Kimon
07-13-2011, 07:45 PM
This is one key point to your position that I don't accept. but whatever, the lines are drawn and we are all reasonable people and generally know the facts, such as they are. further argument seems useless until more information becomes available.

Here's is RJ's description of the process.

Week 6 Question: How were the gholams made? Were they created or bred like the Trollocs? How exactly are they controlled if they are immune to the One Power?

Robert Jordan Answers: The gholam---singular and plural are the same---were created, not bred. Supposedly their creation involved making them so that they would be obedient to the Chosen, whoever they might be at any given time. This was an attempt at copying something that had turned up in Myrddraal, which seem incapable of disobeying one of the Chosen, possibly because of the use of the True Power in creation of the Trollocs, the parent stock of the Myrddraal. Even Aginor, who created the Trollocs, and thus indirectly the Myrddraal, was uncertain about the actual cause. (Becoming one of the Forsaken involves receiving a mark from the Dark One in return for your oaths; this mark is invisible and cannot be sensed by another human being, even another of the Forsaken, but it can be [seen] by certain non-human creatures, including Myrddraal and draghkar among others. This may play a part in the Myrddraal's obedience but doesn't explain it completely.) This element in gholam has some flaws, however, as we have seen in a small measure. In any case, if I were you, I wouldn't try giving orders to a gholam unless I were one of the Forsaken.

It's pretty vague, so I don't think that we could definitively say that either you or Frenchie are right or wrong. Why it is that they are a more "perfect" construct, and hence able to pass through gateways has never been adequately explained (at least in my opinion), but if they were, as Frenchie claims, just genetically manipulated humans, that might explain both the fact that they can pass through gateways, and the fact that they still look normal.

We tend to focus on the oddity of the fact that they can Travel, but that really isn't any harder to explain than their other two oddities - their elasticity, and their ability to negate channeling. I wonder if Aginor had been experimenting with making human ter'angreal and the gholam were the result. And, of course, the gholam scared the crap out of the Forsaken so much that they only made that first batch of them...

Lupusdeusest
07-14-2011, 05:15 AM
I've always wondered what'd happen if a Gholam fell into pure Source, like the Eye. I believe this has been debated elsewhere.

ArtK
07-20-2011, 06:18 PM
When Mat and Noal Charin met up with the Gholam in Ebou Dar, and the gholam did its mouse-hole trick, Noal said something like "I've never seen anything like that before", and Mat said "I have, at Shadar Logoth."

Not only that, but the description of Mordeth's version of the trick has certain resemblances to what "Slayer" looks like to Perrin in T'A'R when he's "long-stepping". (I don't mean to suggest something unique to "Slayer", I suspect Egwene would have looked similar to somebody watching her step from one place to another.)

I'm going to suggest that both of these cases (Mordeth and gholam) involve certain aspects of T'A'R being "dragged into the real world" and applied to their subjects.

If anybody's speculated about how Mordeth got his powers, I'm unaware of it, but it makes sense to me that he asked for something from the Eelfinn, that gave him certain powers. I've always been suspicious of Moiraine's description of the events at Aridhol, she could easily have been concealing things, and there could have been a lot she (and perhaps all Aes Sedai) didn't know. It certainly seems (by hindsight) that events in Shadar Logoth are more like something that could happen in T'A'R than the real world.

It would make sense to me that in creating the gholam, Aginor used OP/TP manipulations of T'A'R. For instance, he might have taken a human, pulled him entirely into T'A'R, destroyed his old body, then brought his T'A'R essence into the real world using a gateway. Perhaps he also gave the gholam some sort of construct-body created with the OP, but subject to the rules of the "spirit-body" brought from T'A'R. (Maybe a weave similar to that used on Birgitte, but into a construct-body rather than a human one.)

Indeed, I also suspect the Eelfinn had something to do with the Isam/Luc trick. According to the dark prophesy at Fal Dara, "One lives, One dies, but both are". Whatever that means, I suspect that "Slayer" is also a construct of sorts, created somehow through the agency of the Eelfinn, with part of the process taking place in T'A'R.

This is reinforced by the appearance of the dreamspike (http://wot.wikia.com/wiki/Dreamspike) in ToM. Here we have an artifact in T'A'R that can influence the real world, contra everything the Wise Ones taught Egwene.