Kevin's Watch

Im starting to think that if I were Lord Foul, and I had done something so stupid as to give my Arch Nemesis (sorry I couldnt resist) both immortatlity, and power over the very thing that imprisoned me (time), in the process putting him out of reach, and making him the keystone of the arch of time, my plan would be fairly simple. I would steal the son of Linden Avery. Trick her into returning to the Land. Manipulate her into further damaging the Law of Time, and again breaking the Law of Death by summoning Covenant. I would make the Arch mortal and kill it.

Mr. Broken wrote:Im starting to think that if I were Lord Foul, and I had done something so stupid as to give my Arch Nemesis (sorry I couldnt resist) both immortatlity, and power over the very thing that imprisoned me (time), ...

I don't know if I agree with your conclusion, but I give you kudos for the way you stated Foul's predicament. I hadn't thought of it that way before. Very interesting way to look at it.

You have to wonder, if Foul knows that he and Covenant are one ... if he has accepted that as Covenant has ... isn't he giving himself power over the very thing that imprisons him?

As for making Covenant mortal ... I can think of a couple of reasons why that's not so big a deal. I think he was a mortal Arch since the apotheosis in the banefire. Killing him then didn't do any harm (that we know about) and in fact it helped (by buring out the venom). I don't see why it would do any harm now. He'll just become one of the Dead again if he is slain, and be back to where he was before Linden resurrected him.

On the other hand, in the GI Donaldson recently said, "Like the Ranyhyn, the Haruchai are mortal. Therefore they have limits."

A mortal Covenant will have limits that a Dead Covenant would not. I think that this is a bigger factor in Foul's plans than the possibility of killing Covenant again. He has limited, reduced, the person who has control of the very thing that imprisons him.

I have hope because there has to be advantages to being alive over being Dead. A mortal Covenant may be limited in some ways, but I feel he must have had some different limitations removed.

Mr. Broken wrote:Im starting to think that if I were Lord Foul, and I had done something so stupid as to give my Arch Nemesis (sorry I couldnt resist) both immortatlity, and power over the very thing that imprisoned me (time), in the process putting him out of reach, and making him the keystone of the arch of time, my plan would be fairly simple. I would steal the son of Linden Avery. Trick her into returning to the Land. Manipulate her into further damaging the Law of Time, and again breaking the Law of Death by summoning Covenant. I would make the Arch mortal and kill it.

Or trick Linden into finally using enough power to rouse the Worm.

wayfriend wrote:As for making Covenant mortal ... I can think of a couple of reasons why that's not so big a deal. I think he was a mortal Arch since the apotheosis in the banefire. Killing him then didn't do any harm (that we know about) and in fact it helped (by buring out the venom). I don't see why it would do any harm now. He'll just become one of the Dead again if he is slain, and be back to where he was before Linden resurrected him.

snip...

I have hope because there has to be advantages to being alive over being Dead. A mortal Covenant may be limited in some ways, but I feel he must have had some different limitations removed.

I think the issue is more along the lines that Covenant will no longer be able act as Timewarden to protect the Arch (or keep the Worm asleep, which might be a different way of saying the same thing)... so anything that Foul, Linden, Joan, Esmer, or whomever does will threaten it much more.

And I agree that there must be a positive side to this too. Though I don't know what it is yet

Relayer wrote:

wayfriend wrote:As for making Covenant mortal ... I can think of a couple of reasons why that's not so big a deal. I think he was a mortal Arch since the apotheosis in the banefire. Killing him then didn't do any harm (that we know about) and in fact it helped (by buring out the venom). I don't see why it would do any harm now. He'll just become one of the Dead again if he is slain, and be back to where he was before Linden resurrected him.

snip...

I have hope because there has to be advantages to being alive over being Dead. A mortal Covenant may be limited in some ways, but I feel he must have had some different limitations removed.

I think the issue is more along the lines that Covenant will no longer be able act as Timewarden to protect the Arch (or keep the Worm asleep, which might be a different way of saying the same thing)... so anything that Foul, Linden, Joan, Esmer, or whomever does will threaten it much more.

And I agree that there must be a positive side to this too. Though I don't know what it is yet

When it comes to protecting the Arch, TC was fighting a losing battle against those Caesures. These act to slowly erode away at the Arch's integrity. If TC has information vital to this quest, then perhaps he was better off alive than "dead."

Didnt Covenant tell Linden that it took Fouls attack on him with his own ring to purge him of the venom, and that if he hadnt wasted his chance at going after the Arch itself by killing him instead that he would have succeeded. Now Im going to have to go through another intensive re-read.

Mr. Broken wrote:Didnt Covenant tell Linden that it took Fouls attack on him with his own ring to purge him of the venom, and that if he hadnt wasted his chance at going after the Arch itself by killing him instead that he would have succeeded. Now Im going to have to go through another intensive re-read.

You are correct...

Mr. Broken wrote:Didnt Covenant tell Linden that it took Fouls attack on him with his own ring to purge him of the venom, and that if he hadnt wasted his chance at going after the Arch itself by killing him instead that he would have succeeded.

Something Broken, you have floored me again. You've made me think of something in a new way.

I would first say, the text is rather ambiguous on the matter of what would have happened if Foul hadn't killed Covenant.

In [u]White Gold Weilder[/u] was wrote:"I didn't know what was going to happen, I was just terrified that he would let me live until after he attacked the Arch."

So it doesn't really say that Foul would have won. It only hints that Covenant feared he would.

But, after having this discussion, I believe that there's something to the notion. Because we talked about mortality and limits above. It may be that Covenant could not have opposed Foul, and have absorbed so much might, had he been mortal. And he could not have survived having the venom burned away had he been mortal.

Now go forward 3,500 years. Joan is attacking the Arch with wild magic, just like Foul did.

In [u]The Runes of the Earth[/u] was wrote:And with each blow, her power lashed out to create Falls, shattering coherent fragments of time until every moment within that fragment was torn apart.

Isn't it arguable that Covenant is, again, protecting the Arch from her blows, just as he did from Foul's? They are weaker blows, to be sure. But still they're serious.

Linden latches onto this idea at one point.

In [u]Fatal Revenant[/u] was wrote:And he's probably been holding the Arch of Time together ever since Joan started her caesures.

So if we put it all together - Joan is attacking the Arch with wild magic, Covenant needs to be Dead to protect the Arch from wild magic - then we have a very grim picture.

Covenant's mortality may prevent him from preserving the Arch from the worst of Joan's attacks.

Mr. Broken wrote:Didnt Covenant tell Linden that it took Fouls attack on him with his own ring to purge him of the venom, and that if he hadnt wasted his chance at going after the Arch itself by killing him instead that he would have succeeded. Now Im going to have to go through another intensive re-read.

Were you responding to me? Anyway, I don't see anything out of order in your synopsis of events at the end of WGW. TC goaded LF into killing him by saying, "Big deal. I could do the same thing—if I were as crazy as you. It doesn't take power. Just delusion. You're out of your mind." Killing TC only made him powerful, and then blasting him with wild magic only increased his power and weakened LF's.

But all this means is that the Arch has a main line of defense in the Timewarden against further attacks of that type. The Caesures, however, are not attacks aimed directly at the Arch, but they do weaken it. TC could not defend against unLawful uses of wild magic which threaten the Arch's foundation but are not directly aimed at it.

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:The Caesures, however, are not attacks aimed directly at the Arch, but they do weaken it.

The way I see things, Joan's wild magic attacks are striking the Arch (which we see represented metaphorically as a wall), obliterating pieces and creating cracks, and that the caesures are the consequences of that damage, or are the manifestations of that damage.

In [u]The Runes of the Earth[/u] was wrote:The raw damaged rocks before her appeared to be chunks of time, discrete instances of the substance which should have made existence possible; woven the world whole. They were badly battered, torn from their natural union with each other by violence or lunacy. Yet they were intact in themselves; and each of them still implied its place in the former cliff.

Once they had formed a buttress against the sea, an assertion of structure and endurance in the teeth of the surging waves. Although they had been shattered, they retained their essential identity, their obdurate granite selves.

... At the same time, a flash of argent fire burst from the ring hanging against a sternum on its chain. Silver anguish blazed and coruscated among the stones, the rent instances, until one of them had been torn to confusion and dust.

... And with each blow, her power lashed out to create Falls, shattering coherent fragments of time until every moment within that fragment was torn apart.

In some way, Joan's blasts strike and shatter the wall, fragmenting it. And create a caesure at the same time. The crasks in the wall are cracks in time, seperating one moment from the next. Caesures are the physical representation of that crack, they also disconnect one moment from the next.

And where was the Timewarden to prevent this from occurring?

wayfriend wrote:

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:The Caesures, however, are not attacks aimed directly at the Arch, but they do weaken it.

The way I see things, Joan's wild magic attacks are striking the Arch (which we see represented metaphorically as a wall), obliterating pieces and creating cracks, and that the caesures are the consequences of that damage, or are the manifestations of that damage.

In [u]The Runes of the Earth[/u] was wrote:The raw damaged rocks before her appeared to be chunks of time, discrete instances of the substance which should have made existence possible; woven the world whole. They were badly battered, torn from their natural union with each other by violence or lunacy. Yet they were intact in themselves; and each of them still implied its place in the former cliff.

Once they had formed a buttress against the sea, an assertion of structure and endurance in the teeth of the surging waves. Although they had been shattered, they retained their essential identity, their obdurate granite selves.

... At the same time, a flash of argent fire burst from the ring hanging against a sternum on its chain. Silver anguish blazed and coruscated among the stones, the rent instances, until one of them had been torn to confusion and dust.

... And with each blow, her power lashed out to create Falls, shattering coherent fragments of time until every moment within that fragment was torn apart.

In some way, Joan's blasts strike and shatter the wall, fragmenting it. And create a caesure at the same time. The crasks in the wall are cracks in time, seperating one moment from the next. Caesures are the physical representation of that crack, they also disconnect one moment from the next.

Dear Watchers,

Maybe Covenant and Foul have more in common with regard to the Arch than we know. I am going to guess that, as Timewarden, Covenant is aware of Joan's doings and is allowing them to happen, or else is waiting for some other event so that Joan's destruction plays into his plans. I don't want to believe that TC is passive here. Remember, both TC and Foul are guiding/encouraging Linden: Foul through manipulation, TC through encouragement ("Trust yourself", "Do something they don't expect."). Both are using possession, as we all know.

If TC and Foul are in the process of merging, then what we may be witnessing is akin to the short-lived series "My Own Worst Enemy." These two sides are aware of each other, but are working against each other. Foul wants to destroy the Earth/Arch/Rouse the Worm. It could be that TC realizes that this is inevitable and is trying to bring it about, only not as a FINAL result. How TC's reaction to his resurrection plays into this is not yet clear.

Good point, SM. Remember how Covenant let Joan draw his blood? I'm sure that he would allow Joan her blasts, even if they are doing harm, because it does in some way help her, release her anguish. And because he is to some degree responsible.

Just a thought but if all else fails, couldnt Linden posess Joan the way she posessed T.C. in the second chronicles?

Broken,

Is there anything left to possess? Mercy for her could only come by either healing her or killing her.

However...

TC learned self-despite through his rejection by Joan. You are right, he has let her hurt him before to comfort her (with blood no less). Now she is hurting Time itself and thus TC. In his position as Time Warden (which he may no longer have) this doesn't just hurt him. It hurts all of the Earth itself. Is it possible that he is once again planning to sacrifice himself?

As far as Joan's current mental state , I dont believe that matters. Linden was able to reach into Covenant at will, even during a venom relapse.

Mr. Broken wrote:As far as Joan's current mental state , I dont believe that matters. Linden was able to reach into Covenant at will, even during a venom relapse.

Events in the hospital at the beginning of Runes support the idea that Joan is in league with Roger. So if possession requires the permission of the one being possessed, I don't see Joan allowing this from Linden.

Anele seems to ge posessedt by Foul, and by Covenant, against his will. I doubt the Croyel gave Jeremiah much choice in the matter, and permission would imply a choice being made,thats the exact opposite of posession .

Mr. Broken wrote:Anele seems to ge posessedt by Foul, and by Covenant, against his will. I doubt the Croyel gave Jeremiah much choice in the matter, and permission would imply a choice being made,thats the exact opposite of posession .

You forgot to mention possession by Ravers. If the will is strong enough a Raver can be refused, as with the Giants. (Linden believes possession to be inherently evil even if the motive for it was good.) Anele can only be possessed under certain conditions. The croyel did not possess Jeremiah, although you're assuming he had no choice in the matter.

I didnt forget to mention the Ravers. I just didnt see the need to pile on. You are however correct about my assumption