Roger and White Gold

[iQuestor]

Thanks wayfriend. that was a good post and response to my question.

[wayfriend]

No trouble. (And I actually used puissance in my explanation. heh.)

BTW, here're the references in the GI that shows SRD changing his own mind on the matter. First 2004, then 2005. (It also shows where SRD supports the idea that Linden possesses Covenant to use the ring.) (And see this thread.)

JP
I have a question about the nature of personal choice as it relates to Covenant's [ring]. Covenant tells Linden that the reason that Foul hasn't simply possessed him with a Raver to obtain the ring is that it has to be given by choice in order for its power to be unlocked. And when Hile Troy is about to use its power, it was given to him willingly by Covenant. Yet:

1) Dead Elena is able to utilize it when it's forcibly swiped from Covenant in Power That Preserves, and

2) Linden is able to "possess" Covenant to use the ring at various times.

Are there explanations that fit these instances into the theory of personal choice?

<sigh> All of this would be so-o-o much easier if I hadn't *forgotten* that Covenant gives his ring to Troy in "The Illearth War" and has it taken from him by Elena in "The Power that Preserves." I tell ya, folks, internal consistency's a bitch.

The key points to keep in mind are "the necessity of freedom" and Mhoram's assertion to Covenant, "You are the white gold." So, taking the questions that have come up from easiest to most difficult:

Troy is able to raise power from the ring because a) Covenant gave it to him, and b) Covenant's will, his volition, supports what Troy wants to do with the ring (save Elena from dead Kevin).

Elena, of course, doesn't actually raise power from the ring, but there are a couple of reasons why she might have been able to do so. (In any case, she isn't bluffing when she threatens the Colossus. She *believes* she can exert wild magic. She has, after all, lost her mind.) Volition is a complex thing: there are unconscious as well as conscious choices. And sometimes the unconscious choices subvert the conscious ones. At that point in his struggle, Covenant must have been feeling a certain amount of "death wish" (why else would he even think about tackling Lord Foul when he believes he has no power?), and his unconscious volition might have enabled Elena to use the ring against him. In addition--on a somewhat more conscious level--Covenant has known for a while that external forces can trigger a response from the ring; and he may have been hoping (volition again) that Elena's use of the Staff would trigger a reaction she didn't expect.

Linden's actions raise even more complex issues (not the least of which is my still fallible memory) (and let's not even mention my unwillingness to spend an hour or two researching each question in this interview). She has an emotional bond with Covenant that goes far deeper than consciousness. And on those occasions when she "possesses" him, she always seeks to control him in ways with which some part of him agrees. He certainly doesn't *want* to destroy Starfare's Gem, and he isn't exactly eager to walk into the Banefire--just to pick two examples that happen to come to mind. In other words, she taps into his unconscious volition (not always wisely, I might add).

It follows, naturally, that a Raver--or Lord Foul himself--could not make use of the ring as Linden does. They don't love him; have no bond with him; share none of his impulses, conscious or otherwise. And so they cannot win the cooperation (if you will), the volition, of any of his complex impulses.

All of these points, as I'm sure you can see, depend on the identification between Covenant and the ring. Which raises interesting questions for "The Last Chronicles." Now that Linden has the ring, is *she* the white gold? Does it truly *belong* to her as it once did to Covenant? As Spock might have said (deadpan, of course), "Fascinating."

(10/02/2004)

Karen

Hello! Hope this finds you well.
I have read a couple of the questions submitted re the machinations of various characters in Chronicles and how essential their 'plots' are to the storyline and the outcome.

The answer I came up with to these questions myself before reading some of your own answers was that these needed to be so complex due to the fact that Lord Foul COULDN'T in fact just muscle in and somehow obtain the ring if it fell into other hands etc, because as stated by Lord Mhorham in TPTP, Covenant IS the white gold. This would mean that the ring simply couldnt be found/stolen by someone else as it would not have the same properties/power. Of course I was then confused in the 2nd Chronicles by the fact that Linden Avery appears to be almost some sort of Demi-God in terms of what she can do with her own abilities and Covenant's ring.
If Covenant IS the essence of the wild magic which is unleashed by the white gold, how is it that Linden then becomes the key character with regards to its useage?

Am I just being very dense here in seeing the explanation?

Thanks!

Regards

Karen

I think the point on which I've failed to be clear is that it's a question of *degree*. White gold is the instrument of wild magic. Any passing stranger with a bit of lore and/or sensitivity could get *some* use out of the ring. And the more lore and/or sensitivity that someone-not-Covenant has, the more useful the ring will be. But only the ring's true wielder, someone who has an organic relationship with that specific ring (Covenant, Joan), can access *all* of the power of wild magic. The Elenas and Lindens of the Land can evoke a LOT of power from white gold; but a LOT is a far cry from the near-absolute power required to destroy the Arch of Time.

Lord Foul has no use for a LOT of power: he needs near-absolute power. Hence the somewhat oblique focus of his machinations.

Does that help?

(10/08/2005)

[Zarathustra]

Damn Wayfriend, I know I've given you a hard time lately (I like to think of it as being a "challenging" participant in these discusions ), but we are on the same wavelength in this particular discussion. I was thinking--again--of exactly the quotes from the GI which you provided. [Onece again, I must marvel at the bountiful gift we've been given in that project.]

Interesting idea, this "unconscious volition." It gets him out of a quandry with Linden, but I wouldn't mind exploring it more generally (where are you Plotinus?)

Wayfriend, I think you are exactly right with this:

. . . could it not be that some Law is harder to break than other Law, or that it is easier to break at certain times, or that, where wild magic is concerned, the puissance involved makes Law look like a pile of twigs?

I think that perhaps the Law of Identity--if we are to accept this idea into the TCTC cannon--is the EASIEST Law to break. Ravers have been possessing people for millennia in the Land, and people have be metaphorically "possessing" other people in our world for thousands of years. SRD has said that rape is his paradigm for evil action, i.e. that every "evil" action we commit against each other or the environment is a form of rape (I'm positive there's a GI response to back this up). So, this particular evil we commit against each other is so easy to commit, that the Law of Identity is broken each time it happens. Just because this particular law has been broken endless times doesn't mean that individuals no longer exist, but rather that the potential for harm is endless. Each person represents an opportunity for violation of this "Law" (here and in the Land). After all, what's the best way to hurt someone who's lost everything? Give them something broken. We are all vulnerable to this particular hurt--we, the alienated human race who have lost everything in our existential alienation--so therefore the broken Law of Identity, and the very ease at which it is continuously broken, hurts us all like our own personal "Joan-being-returned-to-us." In our lives, we are given an identity and freewill, but those around us, especially those who are closest to us, have the potential to spiritually "possess" us at any minute as they override, dominate, or make us feel guilty for our free choices.

[black_grape]

A bit off track from the main thread here but a post by Drew above made me think.

What if the 'Thomas Covenant' that Linden sees at the end of Runes is actually an older version of Roger. I mean, she said that he looked like his dad and with the Caesures all over the place he could have spent some years in a different 'time'. It would also explain the presence of Jeremiah.

Just as an aside - Did anyone notice in the second to last paragraph of Runes that Jeremiah 'shouted encouragement to the other riders' . He's obviously found his voice in the Land.

[Variol Farseer]

Just as an aside - Did anyone notice in the second to last paragraph of Runes that Jeremiah 'shouted encouragement to the other riders' . He's obviously found his voice in the Land.

Or someone's voice has found him, muah hah hah.

[Zarathustra]

Yet another quote from the GI which makes it seem like the Law of Identity is an actual Law, capital "L," in SRD's mind:

1) Sure, Foul can take the ring and use it. Anybody can. They just can’t use it *enough* to break Foul out of his prison. Two Laws prevent it: the fundamental identification of Covenant with his ring; and the necessity of freedom. Only when Covenant uses excessive wild magic by choice will the Arch of Time fall. And Foul is smart enough to know this. But he’s also smart enough to think of more than one path toward his goal. If someone else (e.g. dead Elena) takes the ring and chooses to use it, s/he may eventually damage enough Laws in enough different ways to make the whole system crumble. (Elena certainly got off to a good start by destroying the Staff of Law.) Foul always has more than one plan at work. He’s always trying to create new possibilities. And he’s always eager to capitalize on new possibilities, even unexpected ones. (01/22/2006)

I'm not trying to restart the debate. It's just something I noticed tonight skimming the GI. (I know how to party on a Friday night, don't I?)