now that i am halfway through the illearth war i have notice lines like....
"coals of the fire"
"troy threw an armful of kindling on the fire"
"troy piled wood on the fire so that he could see better"
even LFB mentioned something about campfire embers...
am i missing something? did i misread all those years ago?
thanks ahead
confused about something in the first trilogy
Moderators: kevinswatch, Orlion
I missed (or just don't remember) those items.
My impression is that the company would not use any Lore or Earthmagic as so
not to draw any attention from the Ur-viles or Ravers.
(Burning wood? Oh, how horrid that would be to the Lords! But it IS survival.)
My impression is that the company would not use any Lore or Earthmagic as so
not to draw any attention from the Ur-viles or Ravers.
(Burning wood? Oh, how horrid that would be to the Lords! But it IS survival.)
Have you hugged your arghule today?
________________________________________
"For millions of years
mankind lived just like the animals.
Then something happened
that unleashed the power of our imagination -
we learned to talk."
________________________________________
If PRO and CON are opposites,
then the opposite of PROgress must be...
_______________________________________
It's 4:19...
gotta minute?
________________________________________
"For millions of years
mankind lived just like the animals.
Then something happened
that unleashed the power of our imagination -
we learned to talk."
________________________________________
If PRO and CON are opposites,
then the opposite of PROgress must be...
_______________________________________
It's 4:19...
gotta minute?
Maybe it's a gaffe...
But the Lorewardens, Lords Mhoram and Amatin, and High Lord Elena were there, too. Would they allow a consuming fire to take place? My opinion is that this is a misunderstanding of the scene.
Allow me to counter your assumption with mine: yes, there is a fire--but I assume it's a smokeless fire. The wood gives heat and fire without being consumed. That's what the wood-lore is for. As for Troy throwing wood onto the fire, well, I don't think that changes anything. I compare it to graveling: if more heat and light is needed, one throws more into the mix.
But the Lorewardens, Lords Mhoram and Amatin, and High Lord Elena were there, too. Would they allow a consuming fire to take place? My opinion is that this is a misunderstanding of the scene.
Allow me to counter your assumption with mine: yes, there is a fire--but I assume it's a smokeless fire. The wood gives heat and fire without being consumed. That's what the wood-lore is for. As for Troy throwing wood onto the fire, well, I don't think that changes anything. I compare it to graveling: if more heat and light is needed, one throws more into the mix.
-
[Syl]
- Unfettered One
- Posts: 13020
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2002 12:36 am
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
I have to agree with dlb's post above. It's deadwood. For one thing, not everybody in the Land could know wood or stone lore, and being that dependant on others for survival would not lead to the relatively happy, free society that we see in the Land. No, I assume that all burnt wood would be dead wood.
I think the more likely gaffe was Covenant's astonishment at seeing wood burn in the 2nd Chrons without knowing if it was cut from a tree or not.
I think the more likely gaffe was Covenant's astonishment at seeing wood burn in the 2nd Chrons without knowing if it was cut from a tree or not.
"It is not the literal past that rules us, save, possibly, in a biological sense. It is images of the past. Each new historical era mirrors itself in the picture and active mythology of its past or of a past borrowed from other cultures. It tests its sense of identity, of regress or new achievement against that past.”
-George Steiner
-George Steiner
Good points from dlb and Sylvanus. But does this mean that wood-lore and stone-lore were the exception in the Land, not the rule? I had thought all who had returned to the Land after the Desecration knew lore, because they relied on it to survive the years in exile. Maybe I'm mistaken. Were things like wood-burning fires actually more common in the Land than I thought? This would give me a picture of a citizenry that was not as innocent and special as I had thought. Time to take off my rose-colored lenses.
Sergio, ultimately it's up to SRD to say whether or not he made a gaffe here. I recommend you ask him directly in the Gradual Interview at his website.
Sergio, ultimately it's up to SRD to say whether or not he made a gaffe here. I recommend you ask him directly in the Gradual Interview at his website.
i did, can only hope it gets selectecSergio, ultimately it's up to SRD to say whether or not he made a gaffe here. I recommend you ask him directly in the Gradual Interview at his website.
"Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come."
-
Grimmand Honninscrave
- Woodhelvennin
- Posts: 71
- Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 4:49 am
- Location: St. Paul, MN
I agree. Not everyone in the land knows about lore. What about the Haruchai. They are not Bloodguard so they would have to eat. What would they use to cook meals since they do not beleave in weapons or the use of lore? I think they would have to use wood to make fires to cook meals. So the burning of wood would have to be possible in the land.
-
Sunbaneglasses
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 2460
- Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2004 5:39 am
- Location: Jasper Alabama
plenty of dead wood laying around.
I was a Boy Scout and we were only allowed to build our campfires out of the dead wood we could find in the area,and we never went without a fire.
Perhaps this is right. Wood is only burned when people have no recourse to the “earthpower technology” that allows them to use wood to produce heat and light without destroying it. Kind of like using an outhouse is for us: something that only happens on rustic camping trips or at outdoor festivals.I got the impression that burning wood was a rarity in the first series.
This may imply that only certain people (the lillianrill?) had the lore to produce non-burning torches, and it took some effort so that even the Lords could not simply whomp one up while camping in the woods on a quest.
-
variol son
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 5777
- Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 1:07 pm
- Location: New Zealand
It is said during the quest to Seareach that the lillianrill rods will decay without a Hirebrand to care gor them, and both Lord Shetra and Lord Hyrim were along for that ride.
Sum sui generis
Vs
Sum sui generis
Vs
You do not hear, and so you cannot be redeemed.
In the name of their ancient pride and humiliation, they had made commitments with no possible outcome except bereavement.
He knew only that they had never striven to reject the boundaries of themselves.
In the name of their ancient pride and humiliation, they had made commitments with no possible outcome except bereavement.
He knew only that they had never striven to reject the boundaries of themselves.
Okay, now I'm really hoping SRD some day answers Sergio's query on this issue (though SRD is about 200 questions behind in the GI because he's working on Fatal Revenant). You people are overturning some of my basic assumptions about the people of the Land here--which can be a good thing, if I've been completely wrong all these years. But I have to say, I disagree with the "dumbing down" view of lore in the Land that seems to be taking place here. You're giving me visions of Landfolk as clueless, lore-challenged scavengers, with only a few experts around who knew what the heck they were doing. 
How is this any better than the Sunbane era, then?
How is this any better than the Sunbane era, then?