[Bonecaster]

From http://encyclopediam...ts-and-Religion

Quote

Steven Erikson: are all gods ascendants? If you mean ascendant in the general sense of being very powerful, then yes. If you mean ascendant in terms of progression, then there are exceptions. Most of the animistic ones, for example (the totemic, tribal ones) derived from the act of worship, or the attribution of significance to a particular place. - Q and A with malazanempire No 2 (2003)

I have a tough time thinking of Dessimbelackis as an Ascendant. I'm not arguing it, and a look at http://encyclopediam.../Dessimbelackis shows that he was called "an ascendant" at least once. Maybe more times that just aren't listed there. But he's hardly Dessimbelackis any longer, eh? Is any part of any Deragoth aware of a being named Dessimbelackis?

Anomander Rake is listed as an Ascendant. But I don't remember if he's called one in the text of any of the books. But I guess the idea is that he was "only" a son of Mother Dark, then Ascended by becoming Eleint Soletaken. Same with Silchas Ruin. Andarist never Ascended in that, or any other, way. And Osserc did it, but also became a god, by becoming worshiped.

Treach became an Ascendant by becoming a Soletaken. Or is it because he's an immortal Soletaken? Is Buke an Ascendant? Is he only if he becomes immortal?

Pust made fun of Mappo and Icarium for having been around so long and not Ascending. What could Icarium Ascend to? He can already destroy the world, assuming he's not knocked out right at the beginning.


I was gonna argue that Kellanved and Dancer did die, and that that was the final boost that they needed to Ascend. But they didn't die. Apsalar says the assassination failed. So what was the final boost? Did Kellanved cast some spell that did the trick, doing it just as the assassination attempt happened, so it would look like they died?

This post has been edited by Bonecaster: 08 July 2011 - 09:19 PM

[Kanese S's]

Did you read Night of Knives?

Spoiler

When I read it, I thought that they died pretty much just as they got to Shadow House, but I'm probably wrong

[Bonecaster]

I would argue that they did, indeed, die, if Apsalar - drawing on Dancer's memories - did not say the assassination attempts failed. They knew what Surly had planned, and they went anyway. She and Cutter theorized they wanted to make it look like they were assassinated. If they just Ascended and became gods, they would be gods who also controlled a huge empire, and the T'lan Imass. That much power would likely bring the pantheon down on them.

[Use Of Weapons]

Abyss, on 08 July 2011 - 05:31 PM, said:

Hmmm... we seem to be dancing around just what 'ascension' is...


*snip some useful thinking*

Okay, that makes your position much clearer, and the difference between that and how I conceptualise it can now be clarified.

Correct me if I misrepresent your position, but, summing up the snipped portion above, you are maintaining that ascension is a process, which is engaged in from many different directions and which can be initiated by anyone, whatever their current aspect/power-level/status.

In my concept, ascension is a status, gained when an individual reaches a level of power (in whatever realm of effect) that enables them to have a disproportionate impact on events outside the merely physical. It doesn't matter how that status is gained, or how long it takes, which tallies to an extent with your process-oriented system. But the difference is that, once gained (either by sacrifice, by gaining worshippers, by being born into an extremely powerful race/lineage, by coming into being as the personification of a universal concept: however it happens), it's not a status than can be lost. But it can be made *searches for the right word* obsolete? irrelevant? by further changes in circumstances, such that the fact of a particular individual's Ascendancy is not the most relevant factor when it comes to gauging their impact on events.

For me, it's all about the actions taken by actors in the field of play: actions cause ripples, and those ripples interact in potentially unexpected ways. Ascendants are basically bigger stones, cause more ripples, larger ripples, with a wider area of influence. What is power, after all, but the ability to bring to pass outcomes you desire by the actions you take (or refuse to take)?

[Bonecaster]

OK, more thoughts or bits of information.

There's Dassem Ultor. First Sword of the Malazan Empire. Knight of High House Death. But not an Ascendant. BUT, he gained worshipers, and became a god - Dessembrae, Lord of Tears. NOW he's an Ascendant.


Again, Iskaral Pust to Icarium and Mappo:

Quote

'Look at you two. Both ancient wanderers of this mortal earth. Why have you not ascended like the rest of them? I'll tell you. Longevity does not automatically bestow wisdom. On no, not at all'

Icarium's actions have had extraordinary consequences in the world. He wiped out entire cities. He struck the final blow to shatter a warren. He seems to have created new warrens. He IS a portal to Chaos. Hell, a continent recognized him when he stepped onto it!

Still, he never managed to Ascend in all that time. Never got to drink T'iam's blood. Never became Soletaken in any other way. Never had a spell cast for him, as Kellanved cast one for himself and Dancer. Never became worshiped.

This post has been edited by Bonecaster: 09 July 2011 - 01:32 PM

[Use Of Weapons]

Re: Dassem -- as Knight of Death, he's automatically an Ascendant, isn't he? I'd always thought so, and never seen anything in the books that would contradict that.

Re: Icarium -- the essential component is awareness of the ramifications of one's own actions, and deliberate intervention with specific intent. Icarium lacks that. When it comes to Mappo, his every action is intended to limit the impact of Icarium's rage, so he never has an impact on world events except through Icarium and the extent to which he is successful in his efforts. That's not a recipe for Ascendancy.

Kallor is an interesting case study here. At first glance it seems his existence and actions would make him an Ascendant in my understanding, and how the EG curses operate really don't make any sense. But perhaps that's the point of being an EG, eh.

This post has been edited by UseOfWeapons: 09 July 2011 - 01:38 PM

[Bonecaster]

Excellent thinking on Icarium and Mappo. Difficult to be an Ascendant when you can't remember what you did from day to day, eh?

No, I don't think Dassem was an Ascendant before he became worshiped. I don't think being part of a High House automatically Ascends you. I'm not sure anything contradicts you, but I don't think anything supports you, either. Except Kallor possibly does contradict you. Draconus cursed him to "never ascend", but he was Reaver in the High House of Chains. If the curse held, then he was in a High House, but not an Ascendant.

[amphibian]

Holding a position in a House does not automatically equate to being an Ascendant. Trull wasn't ascended and he was the Knight of Shadow.

Dassem renounced his Knight of Death status and once he was "assassinated", he gained a cult of worship and ascended that way as the Lord of Tragedy/himself.

[Use Of Weapons]

Ah, but Trull didn't know he was the Knight of Shadow, which is pretty much equivalent to Icarium's ignorance, though from a different source. Kallor's status as Reaver is questionable, but I maintain that the curses were already fading -- especially given that K'Rul had returned, breaking one of Kallor's curses on him. It's also possible that the efficacy of Draconus's curse is lessened due to his incarceration in Dragnipur.

Point of all this scrambling is, that there is room for doubt about all of the above. And in that doubt, there's room for my interpretation. AFAIC, there has been no incontrovertible evidence presented to counter it. If such arises, I'd be forced to reappraise the position, but until then...

[Gust Hubb]

Bonecaster, on 09 July 2011 - 09:25 AM, said:

I would argue that they did, indeed, die, if Apsalar - drawing on Dancer's memories - did not say the assassination attempts failed. They knew what Surly had planned, and they went anyway. She and Cutter theorized they wanted to make it look like they were assassinated. If they just Ascended and became gods, they would be gods who also controlled a huge empire, and the T'lan Imass. That much power would likely bring the pantheon down on them.

Plus, don't forget on that night the dead could walk around.

[champ]

I don't think Dassem actually had time to Ascend befoe he became a God due to the interfering T'lan Imass ...

Quote

...'He does not know what he has done in taking for himself the title of First Sword.’
‘In service,’ Logros replied, ‘the T’lan Imass sanctify him—’
‘You would make of him a god?’
‘We are warriors. Our blessing shall—’
‘Damn him for eternity!’'
...
'Onos T’oolan, we cast you out.’
‘I shall speak to Dassem Ultor—’
‘You do not understand. It is too late.’
Too late.'

Then comes the power boost...

Quote

The spilled blood you should have heeded was Dassem Ultor’s, not Kellanved’s. And for all that neither man truly died, but only one bore the deadly kiss of Hood in all the days that followed. Only one stood before Hood himself, and learned of the terrible thing Logros had done to him. They said Hood was his patron god. They said he had avowed service to the Lord of Death. They said that Hood then betrayed him. They understood nothing. Dassem and his daughter, they were Hood’s knives, striking at us. What is it, to be the weapon of a god?

[Bonecaster]

Thanks for the quotes, OOotU.

Gust Hubb, on 09 July 2011 - 06:33 PM, said:

Plus, don't forget on that night the dead could walk around.

That's an excellent point! heh

[Abyss]

UseOfWeapons, on 09 July 2011 - 11:45 AM, said:

Abyss, on 08 July 2011 - 05:31 PM, said:

Hmmm... we seem to be dancing around just what 'ascension' is...


*snip some useful thinking*

...In my concept, ascension is a status, gained when an individual reaches a level of power (in whatever realm of effect) that enables them to have a disproportionate impact on events outside the merely physical. ...Ascendants are basically bigger stones, cause more ripples, larger ripples, with a wider area of influence. What is power, after all, but the ability to bring to pass outcomes you desire by the actions you take (or refuse to take)?

the difficulty with your theory lies in the fact that humans, including but far from limitted to mages, who have NOT ascended can have a massive effect on events.

[Use Of Weapons]

The only human we've seen having a massive effect on events is Tavore. (And, possibly, Kallor.)

[Abyss]

UseOfWeapons, on 12 July 2011 - 12:09 PM, said:

The only human we've seen having a massive effect on events is Tavore. (And, possibly, Kallor.)

Whiskeyjack.

I could go on with a list, but i think the the point is made.

[Use Of Weapons]

Just don't see it. Until Pale, Whiskeyjack had had no major effect outside the Empire and its conquests or frontiers. This may have been earth-shaking for the Empire, but hardly on the scale we're talking about, however much we might like the character. After Pale, I would have to say the same applies. All Whiskeyjack does is move armies from one place to another, befriend Rake, and fall in love.

[Abyss]

UseOfWeapons, on 12 July 2011 - 02:20 PM, said:

Just don't see it. Until Pale, Whiskeyjack had had no major effect outside the Empire and its conquests or frontiers. This may have been earth-shaking for the Empire, but hardly on the scale we're talking about, however much we might like the character. After Pale, I would have to say the same applies. All Whiskeyjack does is move armies from one place to another, befriend Rake, and fall in love.

Whiskeyjack was one of Kellanved's commanders when they formed the Malazan Empire, he CREATED the Bridgeburners, and his decision not to challenge Laseen saved the Malazan Empire. That's aside from how his decisions in MoI affected, oh, i dunno, everything.

It's well established in the series that the actions of 'mere' mortals can have massive and far reaching impact, and there is absolutely no guarantee that those mortals will ascend and become gods, or even live all that long.

[Use Of Weapons]

That's just it though. The Malazan Empire, while the focus of the books, is just another empire. Whiskeyjack's decisions in MOI are hardly the impactful, weighty decisions you portray them to be. They might affect the world, but only in the sense that any action has an effect and propagates via its consequences. The actions of mortals are limited in their appreciation of the causal chain, except for three individuals: QB, Kruppe, and Tehol. QB and Kruppe are both on a pretty obvious path towards Ascendancy (though they may decide to take a scenic route). Tehol seems to lack the will to apply his intellect beyond Lether. Tavore is the only mortal whose decision (and will to see her decision through to conclusion) has had game-changing consequences.

[Abyss]

You're losing me - you seem to be saying that the actions of mortals affect the world but don't have much impact?

Without the Malazan 'just another' Empire there would have been no Tavore Paran and Bonehunters to oppose the FA and free the CG, hence, the world would have been destroyed. That was sort of the point of the entire series.

[Use Of Weapons]

Abyss, on 12 July 2011 - 04:25 PM, said:

You're losing me - you seem to be saying that the actions of mortals affect the world but don't have much impact?

Without the Malazan 'just another' Empire there would have been no Tavore Paran and Bonehunters to oppose the FA and free the CG, hence, the world would have been destroyed. That was sort of the point of the entire series.

Now we're talking about proximate vs. ultimate effects. The chain of causality needs to be more direct for the kind of impact I'm talking about. The view of causality possessed by Kellanved, for example, whose plan it was to engage the CG, and who manoeuvred his friends and allies into places where they would be in a position to fix what he perceived as a problem -- and Ascended as a result of his actions.