Malazan Empire: The Betrayal at Pale - Malazan Empire

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

The Betrayal at Pale Rate Topic: -----

#21 User is offline   Urizen 

  • First Sword
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 517
  • Joined: 13-August 08
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 22 October 2009 - 07:44 PM

View PostImperial High Mage Tayschrenn, on 22 October 2009 - 09:53 AM, said:

I for one think the version Dujek gave was true.

It makes perfect sense for Night Chill to go after the sword to free her brother
That she takes out A'karonys when he has spoken out against her, with ice magic is only further proof (Rake is firing his stuff indiscriminately)
Tays going for Nightchill and her partner after that seems logical too.
If Tays thought members of the Cadre were involved he'd attack them as well.
And that while under assault of Rake, and keeping up the pounding at Moons Spawn with raw Telas, seems quite busy


Except, as I've said before, Nightchill is ripped apart before A'karonys is killed...
" Ah, I despair, or I would if I cared enough. No, instead, I will make some ashcakes. Which I will not share."
0

#22 User is offline   Sinisdar Toste 

  • Dead Serious
  • View gallery
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 3,851
  • Joined: 14-July 07
  • Location:The C-Hood

Posted 22 October 2009 - 08:42 PM

View PostMentalist, on 22 October 2009 - 05:24 AM, said:

Ice-magic has been (so far) in the series reserved exclusively for Jaghut and Stormriders.

I wouldn't expect Bellurdan to wield it.

perhaps wouldn't expect, but bellurdan has jaghut blood. he says it himself. he could have frozen a'karonys, knowing that he was responsible for tays learning of nightchills plan to take dragnipur and tays then killing her.
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

- Oscar Levant
0

#23 User is offline   iRFNA 

  • Lieutenant
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 124
  • Joined: 01-April 08

Posted 23 October 2009 - 06:32 AM

Nightchill was posing as a mage of rashan, and no one seemed surprised about her using "cold" magic. Why does it seem so unlikely that bellurdan was able to use rashan to do the same thing?
0

#24 User is offline   Silencer 

  • Manipulating Special Data
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 5,683
  • Joined: 07-July 07
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Malazan Book of the Fallen series.
    Computer Game Design.
    Programming.

Posted 23 October 2009 - 10:18 AM

Well, her excuse is as the "Sister of Cold Nights". Not that anybody knew that, though Nightchill is still a good, suggestive name. As I said earlier, either Ruse or Rashan could have aspects of cold. The question is who and why. Bellurdan told Tattersail that he didn't think Tayschrenn had betrayed them. He denied any suspicions against the High Mage, and so it's unlikely that he thought A'karonys killed Nightchill, either.

Which is where our problem comes from.

I re-read the scene last night, and there are huge inconsistencies.

10 to 1, this sounds like Tay taking out Calot. Certainly not Rake, by any means. Possibly A'karonys:

Quote

"Tattersail had fallen to her knees. Calot stood over her, chaining words of power over her, his face turned away from Moon's Spawn, fixed on something or someone down below on the plain. His eyes were wide with terror.



Too late Tattersail understood what was happening. Calot was defending her at his own expense. A final act, even as he watched his own death erupt around him. A blast of bright fire engulfed him. Abruptly the net of protection over Tattersail vanished."


The order of Nightchill and A'karonys.

Quote

"She watched as a Kenryll'ah demon arose beneath Nightchill. Laughing shrilly, the towering, gaunt creature tore Nightchill limb from limb. It had begun feeding by the time Bellurdan arrived. The Thelomen bellowed as the demon raked its knife-like talons against his chest. Ignoring the wounds around his head and the blood that sprayed from them, he closed his hands around the demon's head and crushed it.



A'Karonys unleashed gouts of flame from the staff in his hands until Moon's Spawn almost disappeared inside a ball of fire. Then ethereal wings of ice closed around the short, fat wizard, freezing him where he stood. An instant later he was crushed to dust."


Only thing I can think of? They actually happened contemporaneously. I.e. it's told one after the other because we're using words. In actual fact, it occurred at the same time.

BUT. There is also an inconsistency with the description of Hairlock's death - that the wave which cut him down came from the plain - and the fact that it is described as:

Quote

She saw a wave sweep past Hairlock's defences, cutting him in half. His howl was more rage than pain, instantly muted as virulent power washed over Tattersail and she found her own defences assailed by the sorcery's cold [snip] then the assault passed, sweeping on and down the hill to their left.


OK, so it comes from the right. Which is not from the 'plain' at all, per se. It's actually from the other hills, really. However, the wave is described as both virulent and cold. Galain is described prior to this as necrous, which is akin to virulent.

So, Hairlock was taken down by cold-magic, not fire. That completely rules out Tayschrenn, unless he was shunting the magic Rake was launching at him towards the Cadre's hill. Entirely possible, however still a bit iffy - how then did either 'Lock or 'Sail come to the conclusion that it was Tay who betrayed them? Calot, perhaps, but it still doesn't mesh.

Hairlock - virulent cold
Calot - fire
Nightchill - demon
A'karonys - cold

Nightchill/Rake kills Hairlock.
Tay/A'karonys kills Calot.
Tay/A'karonys releases demon on Nightchill.
Bellurdan/Nightchill/Rake kills A'karonys.

It just doesn't make sense. But then, this was the Pale Enfilade. Mage battles are messy, they're not clear-cut and straightforward. Magic was being thrown all over the place, deflected, etc.

The only two deaths Tay is certain to have had no hand in (bar an intentional deflection in the case of Hairlock's demise), is Hairlock and A'karonys's. Both of them died to cold. Tay doesn't do cold magic.

My only reservation is that Nightchill did not die before A'karonys. If her death was at the same time as A'karonys got taken out, it all makes sense, to some extent. 'Cept how Calot died, and who killed Hairlock. XD

I can't believe we're still discussing this after the release of Dust of Dreams. ;)
***

Shinrei said:

<Vote Silencer> For not garnering any heat or any love for that matter. And I'm being serious here, it's like a mental block that is there, and you just keep forgetting it.

0

#25 User is offline   Wotist 

  • Recruit
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 29-September 09

Posted 23 October 2009 - 10:40 AM

I've been looking through Gardens of the Moon (boy, is there a lot of interesting stuff in that book--I had completely forgotten that Lorn is very young and is claw trained) and now have absolutely no doubt that Tayschrenn intentionally wiped out the Bridgeburners and the other mages.

To start with, Tays claim that he placed the Bridgeburners in the tunnel for safety is ridiculous. He could have had just stationed them a few miles away from the battlefield if he wanted to keep them safe.

Quote

"Whiskeyjack, " Quick Ben said, behind them, " they kept us in the tunnels. Do you think the High Mage couldn't have guessed what would happen?


Of course, if Tays had really wanted the BBs to live he might have tried to rescue some of them

Quote

Four of the five tunnels fell in completely. We were in the fifth and dug are way out. Fiddler and Hedge are working on the others, but they figure everybody else's been buried for good. They tried to round up some help....But your master, the High Mage, stopped them.


Quote

nobody had made a serious effort to save them. Some low-ranking officer had delivered Tayschrenn's commiserations on those lost in the line of duty, then had unloaded a wagonload of tripe about heroism and sacrifice.


And the Malazan high command is firmly of the opinion that killing off the old guard is great:

Quote

"Your recruit is showing her powers." Topper said, grimacing. "She's corrupted the Bridgeburners, possibly even Dujek Onearm and the entire Second and Third on Genabackis."


Quote

High Mage, we are all agreed on one thing. The old guard musts disappear. All who stood with the Emperor and still cling to his memory will ever work against us, whether consciously or unconsciously. Duejk is an exception, and there is a handful of others like him. Those we must not lose. As for the others, they have to die. The risk lies in alerting them to that fact. If we're too open we may end up with an insurrection the size of which could destroy the Empire."
"Apart from Dujek and Tattersail," Tayschrenn said, "we've cleaned out everyone else. As for Whiskeyjack and his squad, he's all yours, Adjunct."


After looking at GOTM I think the evidence speaks for itself, but I do think that the evidence is just a GoTMism. Shadowthrone and the Rope's plans, Dujek's outlawing, and the betrayal at Pale are all things that Erikson gives overwhelming evidence for in GOTM. Later on he gives very weak contradictory evidence to these ideas but the characters act as if that evidence is airtight. So betrayal=GOTMISM.

This post has been edited by Wotist: 23 October 2009 - 10:41 AM

0

#26 User is offline   Jack 

  • Recruit
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 22-October 09

Posted 23 October 2009 - 04:33 PM

Can't people just accept that SE might have changed directions between GotM and the rest of the series? That's how I explained the inconsistencies... along with Paran not having the otataral sword etc (until SE fixed that a few books later).
0

#27 User is offline   Urizen 

  • First Sword
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 517
  • Joined: 13-August 08
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 23 October 2009 - 05:37 PM

View PostJack, on 23 October 2009 - 04:33 PM, said:

Can't people just accept that SE might have changed directions between GotM and the rest of the series? That's how I explained the inconsistencies... along with Paran not having the otataral sword etc (until SE fixed that a few books later).


Well I remember an interview(Can't remember where) with SE where he states that the events regarding the Battle of Pale is not a Gotism so unless he's lying...
" Ah, I despair, or I would if I cared enough. No, instead, I will make some ashcakes. Which I will not share."
0

#28 User is offline   Silencer 

  • Manipulating Special Data
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 5,683
  • Joined: 07-July 07
  • Location:New Zealand
  • Interests:Malazan Book of the Fallen series.
    Computer Game Design.
    Programming.

Posted 23 October 2009 - 10:35 PM

Or being careful with his words. SE only acknowledges one or two things as GotMisms, so there could still be another explanation for the event.

He also said that Whiskeyjack wouldn't come back. :)
***

Shinrei said:

<Vote Silencer> For not garnering any heat or any love for that matter. And I'm being serious here, it's like a mental block that is there, and you just keep forgetting it.

0

#29 User is offline   Silk 

  • Master of the Decks -- Spinning round and Round
  • Group: Bridgeburner
  • Posts: 361
  • Joined: 11-September 09
  • Location:London

Posted 24 October 2009 - 11:31 AM

well in a way wiskeyjack isn't back... Iskar Jaruk is back ..... Posted Image
0

#30 User is offline   T'renn 

  • First Sword
  • Group: Malaz Regular
  • Posts: 516
  • Joined: 22-November 08
  • Location:Wizards Tower, Delft, the Netherlands
  • Cussing Forevah

Posted 24 October 2009 - 11:59 AM

View PostSilk, on 24 October 2009 - 11:31 AM, said:

well in a way wiskeyjack isn't back... Iskar Jaruk is back ..... Posted Image



Iskar Jarak
...Every tale is a gift,
And the scars bourne by us both,
are easily missed,
In the distance between us.

-Fisher-


Don't be blind,
Mind,
To be kind,
For you will find,

Kindness has its own rewards,
and each must find his way to heaven

-T.D. Mengerink-
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users