Dangers of the Speech

[Alia Elena]

<LI>A spell always works. If the wizard writes it and performs it, the spell will do something. It may not be what the wizard had in mind, though, especially if they made a mistake while performing the spell. In either The Book of Night With Moon or To Visit the Queen, doesn't Rhiow mention almost being bleached and deafened by a miswritten symbol in a spell? I'm tempted to also mention Nita's subroutines that didn't make it into the Jones Inlet spell; they would have worked, but most likely not perform as she had hoped or planned they would.

<LI>How wizards are chosen: It seems to be a combination of genetics and environment. cf High Wizardry, where it's stated that 1 in 3 Earth types have the potential to be wizards, but only 1 in 100 of the potential wizards are actual, practicing wizards. Of course, I'm assuming "potential wizards", when compared to "nonpotential wizards" (HW's terms), refers to genetics. "Potential" may refer to other factors entirely. Upbringing, personal motivation, other responsibities, what have you.

Who *is* in charge of offering wizardry to potential wizards? One of the Powers That Be, possibly, but which one? Or more than one? Do different Powers offer wizardry to different people? If the latter, it seems possible that the Lone Power gets a say in who gets offered wizardry. Which could get... interesting... there's bits of textev* in The Book of Night With Moon. (Goodness that's a long title.) "...cause wizardry to present itself to a saurian of Its choice, without involving any of the other Powers That Be." So it sounds like it might be a group decision.

<LI>"Evil" wizards: There is at least one example in the canon of a wizard who sided with the Lone Power: the dinosaur in TBoNWM. Not Ith, um... *runs off to find the book* Haath. Who got picked by the Lone Power to be a puppet wizard, who'd finish the saurian Choice the way It wanted it finished. And got totally annihalated by the end of the book. Mess not with angry wizards, folks.

*textev: shorthand for "text evidence", or what the book(s) say. Useful for wild speculation, and the occasional grounding of the really wild stuff. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]

Whoops, went into "overtype" mode there... comments, anyone?

-a

[Alia Elena]

Ethics can be very slippery, and context-based. What works and is legal in one situation may be precisely the wrong action to apply in another. What sort of wizardries require a "no/go" substructure? Kernel- or reality-altering spells? Any wizardry, but usually the context is so clear no one worries about it not working? (Unlikely, based on the books so far, but I had to throw it out.) If certain categories of spells require an ethics check, then the Lone Power may steer away from using them. Or It may have some way(s) of faking the context, so that the wizardry "looks" legal to the substructure, even though it's not. (This is, after all, the Father of Lies, and strongly associated with deception.)

(Wild speculation about the worldbuilding. I love this. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif[/img])

-ae

I think we may be attaching too much weight to the Oath and who gave the wizardry.

In "High Wizardry" Dairine gives an entire race wizardry, without even using the Speech. They swear no Oaths, and are undecided about where they stand as regards the Powers, Lone and otherwise.

Our wizards, human, cat or cetacean, are a limited subset of WIZARD. They swear similar Oaths and have a commen bent of defending the universe.

There are probably other types, those supporting the Lone Power for various reasons, those too afraid to fight Entropy, or even those doing something else entirely, such as studying Wizardry for it's power & joy, ignoring the heat death of the universe.

hmmmm, this sounds like a "We need more books to make up our minds".

[img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

There is no other wisdom, and no other hope for us, but that we grow wise
- Surak of Vulcan

[Caledonian]

Originally posted by Vendalin, Lord Raven:
In "High Wizardry" Dairine gives an entire race wizardry, without even using the Speech. They swear no Oaths, and are undecided about where they stand as regards the Powers, Lone and otherwise.

Technically, Dairine (through her manual)administers the Oath to the planet. The planet then creates the mobiles by downloading its kernal into them and running them separately. The Oath was as binding on the mobiles as it was on the planet (as Gigo pointed out).

And Dairine (through the manual) actually does use the Speech... presumably in its binary form.

Logic is a poor servant, but an excellent master.
-- The Book of Forgotten Things

Originally posted by Aria Elena:
If certain categories of spells require an ethics check, then the Lone Power may steer away from using them. Or It may have some way(s) of faking the context, so that the wizardry "looks" legal to the substructure, even though it's not. (This is, after all, the Father of Lies, and strongly associated with deception.)

What if the Lone Power is internally ethical?
He has a Book in which the universe is his way.
He may have the same spell but with a reverse ethical decision tree.

But faking the context? I think he would have to deceive the wizard. If the Speech were misstated by him the spell would function incorrectly. If he just distorted the perceptions of the wizard, the wizard could Spell incorrectly (pun intended).

and, me too!

There is no other wisdom, and no other hope for us, but that we grow wise
- Surak of Vulcan

Originally posted by Caledonian:
Technically, Dairine (through her manual)administers the Oath to the planet. The planet then creates the mobiles by downloading its kernal into them and running them separately. The Oath was as binding on the mobiles as it was on the planet (as Gigo pointed out).

After a quick riffle through the book:
She thinks she administered the Oath and Gigo agrees with her.
She copied it to them certainly, but as to whether it's binding? It's choice! That she could bind them in an Oath seems to me to be incredibly coercive, denying them choice as to their path. Some of them chose it, like Gigo, but until they did, I'm not at all sure they were bound by it.

They never tested it's limits in more then argument.


There is no other wisdom, and no other hope for us, but that we grow wise
- Surak of Vulcan

[This message was edited by Vendalin, Lord Raven on 23 July 2002 at 21:34.]

[worlebird]

And Dairine (through the manual) actually does use the Speech... presumably in its binary form.

The Speech in it's binary form... I like that.

Kinda like my sig below. I like to think of that as a little deep magic in one of the more pure forms of the Speech. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

Worlebird
------------------------------------
!/bin/perl -sp0777i&lt;X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0&lt;j]dsj
$/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1
lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

[Caledonian]

Dairine does indeed administer the Oath to the planet. Since the programming that was downloaded into the mobiles was derived from the motherboard after it took the Oath, they all took the Oath as well.

The mobiles aren't utterly independent organisms, after all. They're conscious by themselves, but they're also extensions of the motherboard. It's difficult to determine how many 'beings' actually exist; by human standards, it's not clear that there's really more than one. The computer is an entirely different form of life, after all, and I'm not certain how our standards can be accurately applied to it.

Logic is a poor servant, but an excellent master.
-- The Book of Forgotten Things

You're right about the different standards.

I assume (there's a dangerous word) that an Oath would have to be taken by an individual, by free-willed choice. Wizardry does not live in the unwilling heart.

If they are merely offshoots, how do they then have independant wizardly talents? It's clear that we're dealing with a large number of wizards and not one very powerful talent, broken up.

hmmm

On seventh thought, maybe not so clear. [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif[/img]


Diane, any thoughts on how computers & programs take Oaths? (I mean, any that you're willing to share?) [img]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif[/img]

There is no other wisdom, and no other hope for us, but that we grow wise
- Surak of Vulcan

http://www.geocities.com/booknightmoon

[Khendon]

Originally posted by EWizard11:
A spell always works. How can you mangle it? That's what I'm asking.

EWizard11

Actually, "A spell always works" is not true. In WD, Dairine attempts a spell to help her mother (page 154).

"Nita retraced her steps. Slipping quietly into the room, she found Dairine standing there, her back against the wall near the door, looking across the closer, empty bed at the curtained one where there mother lay. In her arms, she was holding Spot - which Nita hadn't noticed Dairine bringing to the hospital in the first place - and the whole room was sizzling with the electric-air feel of wizardry on the ebb, either newly dismantled or incomplete."

Later (page 159), Nita confronts Dairine about it.

"Were you crazy, doing a wizardry right there?" Nita whispered as she caught up with her. "And you bombed, didn't you? You crashed and burned."

And finally (page 161), Carl confronts Dairine about it.

"...But something went real wrong, didn't it?"

"It didn't work," Dairine said softly.

"There are only about twenty reasons why it shouldn't have," Carl said, sounding dry. "Inadequate preparation, no concrete circle when so many variables were involved, insufficiently defined intervention locus in both volume and tissue type, other unprotected living entities in the field of possible effects, inadequate protection for the wizardry against 'materials' memory of past traumas in the area; shall I go on? Major screwup, Dairine. I expect better of you."

Those scenes also go to show that throwing sheer power at a problem isn't going to always solve the problem. Sometimes a scalpel is better to use than a sledgehammer - but you'd better have gone to medical school first before you try to use that scalpel, or you'll probably cause more harm than good.

The fact that wizardry is *not* infallible - and that it can't do everything is part of what makes these books more believable and enjoyable.

[Em]

...I think what EWizard11 was trying to say is that a spell always works, but not always the way it was intended to. That was a quote, somewhere. *Searches through pages of all the books* I could do that for hours, but the point is that, EWizard11 was right: A spell does always work. Spells are made to work in some way, yet they don't always work the way the performer wanted them to. For example, Dairine's spell for her mother did not work in the way she intended it to, but that doesn't mean it didn't work. That spell, for example, could have punctured one of her mothers kidneys (incredibly random, I know, but that is the best I can think of right now), causing great damage to her physical health. That is why, I think, Carl got so mad. That one spell, without the proper preperation, could have destroyed Dairine and Nita's mother completely. So the correction I would make to EWizard11 statement is that a spell always works, but a spell doesn't always work right.

Dai,
~Em~

[dmsherwood53]

Hi I thoughtr I'd add the thought that Professiional Philosophers (in R/L like) occationally play about with the concept of a language like TRUE SPEECH there's an article in MIND(the trade magasine of the Philosophers in the OK ) headed ADAMATIC SPEECH that plays about with the paradoxes thus caused. Unfortuately its written in such a dense style,undoubtedly to protect those unready for such dangerous wisdom, thus it might as well be in Wizards speech for all of me.
As to using the power to warp reality Diane gives too answers wizards who embrace the dark side are held back from tearing reality into pieces by the massed will of the good wizards & also there is some thing in turning away from the one and one's oath that rots the part of oneself that can do magic. The power fades and soon the very fact that one ever was a wizard becomes a game one used to play before one grew up. Presumably the Lone Power is immune to this effect- this is consistant with the doctrine that the Powers are what they are & are immune to change repentance and betrayal. That is a human burden. [This is modified by the action of Nina's brat of a sister who in HIGH WIZARDRY gave the Lone Power the capacity to repent}

[EWizard11]

Em-One of the quotes about 'a spell always works'
From, "So You Want to be a Wizard"
"'But, Kit,' she said, turning, 'where's my pen? And where's the power you were after? Didn;t the spell work?'
'Spells always work,' Kit said. 'That's what the book says. When you ask for something, you always get back something that'll help you solve your problem, or be the solution itself.' He looked entirely confused. 'I asked for that power aura for me, and your pen for you-that was all. If we got a white hole, that means he's the answer-'
'If he's the answer,' Nita said, bemused, 'I'm not sure I understand the question.'"
So there you have it.

*Ella*
"The *light* shone in the darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not..."

[Em]

Oooh...Thanks EWizard11. See, Khendon, a spell does always work. Here is printed proof. So EWizard11 (and I) are right.

~Em~

"Before you judge someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them and you have their shoes." Frieda Norris