Wayfriend, yes I know he has said that wild magic is the keystone of the arch. And arches aren't possible without keystones. And existence is not possible without time. [However, one wonders how the Arch held up before Covenant brought white gold to the land the first time. Was there white gold elsewhere in the land? If so, why didn't Lord Foul seek it out? Why was it necessary to pull it from another world if it's the very keystone of his prison? But I digress . . . ]
Here's the sentence which I think is new, or at least a new explication of an old idea:
Its unfettered passion anchored the paradox which made finite existence possible within the infinite universe. He has never described it like that before. First, there's the
explicit linkage of unfettered passion to the power of wild magic, which in itself is telling. Secondly, there's the concept that this wild magic
anchors ("holds down, holds steady") the paradox of finte/infinite. In other words, without the white gold, the paradox would spin out of control into chaos. That explains the following quote:
In [u]Lord Foul's Bane[/u] was wrote:And for the keystone of that arch he forged the wild magic, so that Time would be able to resist chaos and endure.[/size]
This quote was always puzzling to me, because I thought
Law resisted chaos, not
wild magic (which itself seems inherently chaotic). A keystone is an elegant piece of engineering, a mathematical construct made tangible in rock. Its power lies in its geometry and shape (which implies Law, not wild magic). But now Donaldson has given us an explanation of that process which was previously confused by the limits of his keystone metaphor. Wild magic is "untrammeled by restriction." It can violate the strictures of time. Because it is itself paradoxical and beyond limits of Law, it can
force (not merely support) reality into a paradoxical state of unstable equilibrium. I like that.
Maybe this isn't new to you. And maybe it's not really new to me, either. I think it's really just a further explication of something that is virtually inexplicable: the paradox of being.
On a side note: while previously we had the image of a keystone--which supports the weight of a stone arch, allowing it to settle upon it in a stable fashion--now we have the image of an anchor, which holds a ship in place by weighing it down. Two different sorts of gravity/engineering metaphors. In the first sense, the paradox of the arch is something that is threatening to "crash down." Yet the keystone holds it up. In the second sense, the ship is threatening to "drift away." The anchor holds it in place by weighing it down.
I like this struggling for new metaphors. In itself, it is a recognition of the limits of the previous metaphor (keystone). It's like coming at the problem from two different directions, noting the incompleteness of trying to describe a paradox from only one angle.
Joe Biden … putting the Dem in dementia since (at least) 2020.