Kevin's Watch

This is, of course, the first thing that TC as Timewarden says to Liand at Glimmermere in FR. Now we know that Liand was indeed not spared. Did TC as Timewarden know what was going to happen to Liand?

Indeed, did TC as Time Warden know the future of all things? Did he know how everything would turn out? I assume that he did in that he existed at all times simultaneously as part of the Arch of Time. (Unless, we get into multiple/parallel univere type scenarios.)

Of course, TC as Timewarden's advice was actually much like the advice of the Dead in Andelain in TWL ie it was advice designed to be of assistance but also to ensure that the recipient of the advice isn't denied the "necessity of freedom" and doesn't obtain too much unearned knowledge.

(And, of course, the phrase "I wish I could spare you" remains to some extent ambiguous - it could simply mean "I wish I could spare you the responsibility of power". So it isn't necessarily a good example for my question - but it is the one that made me think of it.)

However, the advice of the Dead (as I understand it) wasn't given in the sure knowledge of the future, but simply as a result of a deeper understanding of the likely way in which events would unfold given the characters and situations involved.

Was TC's advice different in that he did know the future but needed to keep it hidden (for much the same reasons as the Dead)? The flaw that I see in this is that if the future as seen by TC as Timewarden was certain, then considerations such as "necessity of freedom" etc become meaningless, as the future would be entirely deterministic.

Or should I just forget about issues of time as just too problematic....

Well, I look at it that time/the past/events have a lot of inertia...which allows a rough outline of the most likely future(s), but few certainties, little specificity [kinda like those hurricane track prediction visuals you always see]...and certain points of leverage, where everything can be shifted/redirected.
In that way, Liands death as it happened might have been a near certainty, OR his death came about in many different ways on many possible paths, so was very likely in general no matter what, though not necessarily precisely as it happened.

Consider how many times Linden warned Liand to not come along, how many times she tried to turn him away,,and yet, if she had succeeded..The blur of right and wrong produces a neither. In that sense, TC being of the Infinite , while not of full memory of it, at least knows the " wisdom", for lack of a better word, of it. Liand, in certain regards represented , naivete'..so,,in some circles, posters since Runes,,made comments that Liand would sooner or later die: There is little room in the Last Chrons for the naivete'...imho.

In that scene where TC is meeting with Berek and Foamfollower and the Theomach and Jerrick et. al. in Andelain in an attempt to devise some defense for the Land...TC says that "I've seen things you haven't." (pg. 545) It was also mentioned that "his was the only soul unconstrained by the strictures of Time." (pg. 543)

It is therefore clear that Covenant knew more than anyone else at that council. The Dead were constricted by Time whereas TC was not. But I still don't buy into fatalism--that is, I don't believe that TC as part of the Arch could foresee exact future events. It was probably more like the way the Insequent or even the ur-viles know of possible needs and events, and take action to prepare for them.

Covenant also said he wanted to spare all of them. What does this tell us? That they're all going to die.

I speculate that one reason the new Giants are rather plain and uninteresting is that Donaldson is not going to spare them either. So he wants to save us (and perhaps himself) the unhappiness of losing another endearing "Foamfollower" character.

As far as advice goes, "I wish I could spare you" is just about the most useless thing you could say to someone. How did that help Liand? How was it supposed to help him? At best, it was self-serving for Covenant; it allowed him to express some regret. But it wasn't advice at all.

As a plot device, it was there to give a sense of the prophesy and mystery. It was there so that when Liand died, we'd think, "...ah, that's what he meant." It predisposed us to accept his completely random and pointless death as something meaningful and ordained. Not a bad payoff for so few words, but it still feels like a cheap trick in the hands of this author.

Zarathustra wrote:As far as advice goes, "I wish I could spare you" is just about the most useless thing you could say to someone. How did that help Liand? How was it supposed to help him? At best, it was self-serving for Covenant; it allowed him to express some regret. But it wasn't advice at all.

As a plot device, it was there to give a sense of the prophesy and mystery. It was there so that when Liand died, we'd think, "...ah, that's what he meant." It predisposed us to accept his completely random and pointless death as something meaningful and ordained. Not a bad payoff for so few words, but it still feels like a cheap trick in the hands of this author.

Is Donaldson above using cheap tricks? The only reason this author amazed me in the beginning was because I was so young, and so his tricks, cheap or otherwise, were new to me. Or so I thought. Nowadays, when I look back, I see a lot of parallels with plot devices used in original Star Trek episodes and Stephen King novels.

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:Nowadays, when I look back, I see a lot of parallels with plot devices used in original Star Trek episodes and Stephen King novels.

What's wrong with Stephen King novels? The man is a much better writer than most people give him credit for (and it's depressing how many bad movies have been made out of his good books).

Rigel wrote:

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:Nowadays, when I look back, I see a lot of parallels with plot devices used in original Star Trek episodes and Stephen King novels.

What's wrong with Stephen King novels? The man is a much better writer than most people give him credit for (and it's depressing how many bad movies have been made out of his good books).

For the most part I like both Star Trek and Stephen King.

Barnetto wrote:Indeed, did TC as Time Warden know the future of all things?

My impression is that the past is completely visible to the Timewarden, and the present. And that his view encompasses all the world. I don't think he can "see" the future.

I also believe that TC, as Timewarden, was comparable to Foul in his capabilities of predicting the future. That is, he's near dead on, except for his "blind spots". After all, he has almost a total picture of the universe with which to base a prediction upon.

My reasons for thinking this way I've posted in the dissection of Chapter 1. In short, I believe that almost everything that happens in AATE was according to the Timewarden's plan.

Specifically, I believe it was the Timewarden's plan for Linden to resurrect him, and then feel miserable and guilty for rousing the Worm and giving him memory problems, and then for Linden to not then know what to do. Because that's the only way that Linden would ever yield the Staff and ring up to the Harrow. The clues that point to this are all in the first few chapters.

Like Foul, he is able to do this kind of plotting, because of his almost infinite insight into what people would do, how they would respond, to certain situations. Just like Foul knew that releasing dukkha Waynhim would lead to the breaking of the Law of Death, he know that by whispering "find me", and letting Roger deceive her, she would run to Andelain and resurrect him and rouse the Worm.

And, because he's not Foul, he doesn't take manipulating people lightly. He didn't want Linden to feel guilty and failed and hopeless. But it was necessary. It was the only way. He had to. And so, he expresses this:

In [i]Against All Things Ending[/i] was wrote:I would spare you the cost of what you’ve done if I knew how.