[Randomander]

Nothing too deep, just struck me now on my third re-read that Dassem wasn't fighting Rake to win - he was fighting him to die and find Hood in Dragnipur.

[worry]

Can you change the thread title to something more neutral?

[Grief]

I got it. Topic titles show up on the home page of the forum where anyone can read them so we try to avoid putting spoilers in the titles. Cheers!

[worry]

Also, there's nothing better than a read (or reread) that gives you one of those a-ha moments!

[Puck]

Wait, that wasn't in-your-face-obvious?

[blackzoid]

Nah, it wasnt obvious to me. And still isnt after multiple rereads. If Dassem wants to lose, why doesnt he just let Rake kill him? And does Dassem even know that Hood is dead, there was no mention of Hoods headless corpse just before the fight started, it might have been moved or disappeared. And once Rake is dead, why doesnt Daseem give himself a paper cut on Dragnipur to get into the warren if he wants to strangle Hood with the wagon chains or whatever?

I still find the motivation of both characters for that Dassem/Rake fight to be unfathomable.

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 11 January 2019 - 10:02 AM

[Gorefest]

It is an interesting idea, but as far as I know, when Traveller confronts Rake, he doesn't know that Hood is inside Dragnipur. This is clearly shown from the conversation he has with Rake ("Where is he?" he demanded. "I can feel – he's close. Where is he?"). He senses Hood nearby but he thinks that Rake is shielding/hiding him.

Furthermore, before Traveller confronts Rake he is stopped in the street by Cotillion. We don't know what is being said, but afterwards Traveller seems very troubled when he marches on. My interpretation was that Cotillion told Traveller that Rake is protecting Hood and that the only way to get to Hood would be through Rake. This information is a terrible burden for Traveller, because he cannot stop his search for Hood but he now also knows that he will have to kill someone he holds in very high esteem, or die in the attempt and thus fail his quest. If Traveller at that point would have known that Hood was actually inside Dragnipur, in my opinion he would not have reacted in such a way because he would not expect to have to kill/immobilise Rake, but actually 'die' himself. In the latter case, I would expect Erikson to show Traveller going towards Rake with grim determination, not with terrible grief.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 11 January 2019 - 04:33 PM

[Gorefest]

As far as Rake's motivation goes (i.e. why does he use Traveller as an instrument to get inside Dragnipur instead of, for instance, just cutting himself), my theory is that this is linked to the nature of Dragnipur and - vitally - Traveller's sword Grief/Vengeance.

Grief/Vengeance was Rake's brother's (Andarist) old weapon, which has special properties. We learn in HoC that it cannot be broken even by much heavier weapons (e.g. Dragnipur). So it is one of the very few weapons in existence that would be able to 'turn' or deflect Dragnipur instead of simply shattering upon contact. I will spoiler the next section as it may contain spoilers for later books (i.e. Kharkanas Trilogy):

Spoiler

We know that the sword was originally made and wielded by Rake himself. If I recall correctly, Rake had made the sword as a wedding gift to his brother, but Andarist had refused it after the events that unfolded in FoD. We know that it is empowered in a way that it cannot be defeated if the wielder has a singular will (i.e. Dassem at the time of confrontation in TtH). Rake knows Vengeance and its abilities better than anyone, being the one who commissioned and owned it. So he will also know that it is the only weapon that can reliably triumph in a fight against Dragnipur.


My suspicion is that, if/when we learn more about the forging of Dragnipur by Draconus, we will probably learn that the owner/wielder cannot deliberately sacrifice themselves to be relieved of its burden nor hand that burden on to another. That could be to ensure that the wielder will not be tempted to run when the burden of 'feeding' Dragnipur becomes too much. That would explain why Rake cannot just stab himself with it. The only way around this may already have happened before (i.e. Kharkanas), when Rake bested Draconus and obtained Dragnipur. One would assume this happened in a duel between the two. We know that after Rake obtained Dragnipur, he handed Vengeance to Andarist.


So Rake knows that Vengeance, if wielded by a good swordsman with a singular purpose, is able to defeat him and send him inside Dragnipur. On top of that, by doing so any curse on Vengeance/Grief may be laid to rest as well because its original owner is dead. Thirdly, in this case I feel that as an author you have every right to call on fate / convergence to put together such a delightfully tragic (or wicked) moment: the epic hero ultimately bested by the sword he made for his brother hundreds of thousands of years ago in a setup eerily similar to how events unfolded before (Rake - Draconus battle) in the precence of the Lord of Tragedy himself, who is the guiding hand of Vengeance.


It is a glorious setup and a huge pay-off. If true.

[Not Noto]

I have never accepted that Rake lost on purpose. He wouldn't do that.
And in my Malazan world Dass rage killed Rake when he realized he couldn't get to Hood.
Simple as that.

[worry]

But it's not a 'loss'! It's what the whole meeting at the beginning of the book was about: shoring up everyone's place in ST's conspiracy, including this very duel. It's why he has those elegiac talks with Spinnock and Endest. It's what Hood was actually having second thoughts about (at first glance, and to great gallows humor effect, you naturally read it like he's referring to his own death, but subsequent events should realign that). And it's what Karsa means by "Cheated!" But again, Rake didn't really lose, since his goal was giving Mother Dark a reason to finally show her face. Besides, what would putting Dassem in the sword do other than screw up the battle against Chaos by having a gnat swatting at Hood the whole time?

[Gorefest]

Not Noto, on 11 January 2019 - 07:51 PM, said:

I have never accepted that Rake lost on purpose. He wouldn't do that.

Of course he would, if it serves a bigger purpose. We have seen him do before. He retreated from Pale because hanging around would have cost more lives. And the whole point of his clash with Traveller was to get inside Dragnipur. So really he didn't lose at all, he reached his objective.

This post has been edited by Gorefest: 14 January 2019 - 12:17 PM

[WhiskeyJohn]

The conversation between Hood and Draconus makes it clear the whole thing was planned and premeditated between Hood and Rake.

I think you need to be defeated by the sword to enter the Warren properly. Else you'd just be the unchained like Paran. So he needed a proper combat and defeat. Only Dassem can provide that, hence the deception. Anyone else may be tempted to take the sword themselves.

[Not Noto]

Is it a proper combat if he lose on purpose? I think not.
It doesn't make any sense to me. Why Dassem if anyone could've done it?
They needed someone they knew would beat Rake in combat.
Not fake beat.

This post has been edited by Not Noto: 16 January 2019 - 02:40 AM

[WhiskeyJohn]

Not many could beat Rake in combat. All Elder Gods excepting Errant are passive and won't get into actual combat and Errant won't take on anyone face to face. So who else? Brood is the only active combat ascendant left and he won't fight Rake.

Anyway I think there requirement is 'inte t to defeat/kill' and not fair combat. Dassem is capable, weilds a legendary sword and has intent.

[Adhara]

Now in my head pops a question: why Rake entered Dragnipur unchained? Something to do with him being the bearer? It can't be, we have seen Draconus in chains. Is it because he is oh-so-awesome-Anomander? (fangirl mode off). Or is it my memory just messing things?

This post has been edited by Morgan Lefay: 17 January 2019 - 06:08 PM