[JohnO]

The part I don't understand is everyone seems scared by the potential for the return of Tiam. She seems the big bad - able to take out korbas where hundreds of others failed. Ut then we wee told in earlier books that others have banged the killed Tiam. Eg rake, osserc, lots more. So if they could off her, why not Dracous (hasn't he done so once already?) mael, etc.

[worry]

Reigning theory (to me) is that Tiam is all Eleint combined, hence the multiple heads and stuff, but giving birth to dragons -- which kills her, only to be reborn -- lessens her. So the more Eleint there are in the world, the more she's birthed and died and returned. Hence T'iam, written with the break in it. So she was much smaller, probably, when Rake got to her, for instance.

This post has been edited by worrywort: 24 April 2011 - 08:55 PM

[busy monster]

worrywort, on 24 April 2011 - 08:54 PM, said:

Reigning theory (to me) is that Tiam is all Eleint combined, hence the multiple heads and stuff, but giving birth to dragons -- which kills her, only to be reborn -- lessens her. So the more Eleint there are in the world, the more she's birthed and died and returned. Hence T'iam, written with the break in it. So she was much smaller, probably, when Rake got to her, for instance.

T'iam is p. important wording, actually-- T'lan Imass v. the Imass. The T', if I remember right, implies broken.

The funny thing is, I didn't realize this until JUST now. The T' was the kicker.

[worry]

I ain't the one who came up with it, mind you, it's just the theory proposed here that makes the most sense to me.

[Studlock]

busy monster, on 25 April 2011 - 04:34 AM, said:

worrywort, on 24 April 2011 - 08:54 PM, said:

Reigning theory (to me) is that Tiam is all Eleint combined, hence the multiple heads and stuff, but giving birth to dragons -- which kills her, only to be reborn -- lessens her. So the more Eleint there are in the world, the more she's birthed and died and returned. Hence T'iam, written with the break in it. So she was much smaller, probably, when Rake got to her, for instance.

T'iam is p. important wording, actually-- T'lan Imass v. the Imass. The T', if I remember right, implies broken.

The funny thing is, I didn't realize this until JUST now. The T' was the kicker.

I always thought the T'lan Imass were the Imass after the Tellan Ritual. Sorry off topic

[dawnkiller]

I think the major threat is that T'iam is the embodiment of Chaos. The Ancients were persuaded to aspect themselves, having bargained with K'rul for that conclusion, and thus become somewhat controllable by imposing order upon them(I think there is an old line about Kurald Gallain and Starvald Demelain being the twin chambers of his heart, and thus fueling the warrens). Combine the eleint, and the entire structure disintigrates -- the death of Korabas (and subsequent negation of her role in the hierarchy) being the literal outcome, since the death of Korabas would mean the death of the warrens; Korabas' aspect was what justified the existence of all the others etc.

Another aspect is that T'iam's manifestation ate ANYONE with eleint blood. Silchas, Korlat, Nimander, Silanah, everyone. They had no choice but to join, like the mega version of Gruntle's tiger-veering. The Mane of Chaos apparently endangers your sense of individuality as well as sanity, since it was remarked several times that Ancients or early drinkers of draconic blood could compel the actions of their younger kin (hence why the Tiste were cautious about veering), and of that T'iam is the ultimate expression. It's entirely possible that after T'iam was done destroying Korabas, and consequently the Malazan world, she would then have had access to KG at the very least -- and it T'iam was holding the realm's heirs at the time this may have been incredibly problematic. On top of that, chopping up T'iam would probably have risked killing the aspected Ancients that embodied the order of the Warrens (like how slicing up Gruntle when veered sheared off the soldiers fused with him), so while it was likely a doable proposition it could have left the warrens, if not damaged, then seriously contested in the aftermath. Shadow alone had what, five potential eleint usurpers? It could have been messy. (And even with T'iam dissipating fairly benignly, in the aftermath it literally rained dead dragons.)


Edited for explanatory quote (bold mine):

TCG, p. 466 (between Errastas, Sechul Lath and Kilmandros):

Quote

"(Korabas) is the heart of sorcery! Without the Eye of Abnegation, there can be no magic!"
"What?"
"It is not as simple as that."
"What isn't?"
"Now that she is freed, the Eleint must kill her. They have no choice. Their power is magical, and Korabas will kill all that magic depends upon. And since she immune to their sorcery, it must be by fang and claw, and that will demand every Eleint - every storm, until T'iam herself is awakened. And as for K'rul, well, he can no longer refuse the Errant's summons - he was the one who harnessed the chaos of the dragons in the first place."
"They have to kill her!"
"If they truly kill her, Errastas, then the storm dies. But you knew this - or at least guessed the truth. What you seek is the death of all sorcery bound to laws of control. You seek to create a realm where no mortal can hurt you, ever again. A realm where the blood is sacrificed in our name, but in truth we have no power to intervene, even if we wanted to. You desire worship, Errastas, but one where you need give nothing in return. Have I guessed right?"
"They cannot kill her-"
"But they must! I told you! I will see them all destroyed! The meddling gods - I want our children dead!"

This post has been edited by dawnkiller: 30 April 2011 - 08:05 PM