From: Peter Metcalfe (P.Metcalfe@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz)
Date: Sat 06 May 1995 - 11:11:44 EEST
>>Arkat =/= Chaos? He destroyed half of Genertela in his crusade. If
>>that's not Chaos in action, I don't know what is.
> I don't think destuction by itself is necessarily chaotic, otherwise
>Zorak Zoran, Shargash, Orlanth or Humakt would be considered chaotic gods,
>and the Jrusteli destruction of the Waertegi or the Dragonkill Wars would be
>called chaotic wars as well.
We know that Arkat's practice of slaughter shocked the Humakti and sent Harmast upon another lightbringer's quest to seek the Council of Gods' Complaints Department ('ere, this hero oo sent us ess no goood! We want ours moneys back!') so I don't think pointing to Humakt as a god of destruction is productive. As for Zoran Zoran, when did Arkat turn into a Chaos Monster?
>Arkat did rebuild in many of the areas he
>conquered, Dorastor being the notable exception.
_After_ he fought Nysalor. Surely that should tell you something about Arkat?
>> Exactly. Also, note that more than just Arkat the Deceiver
>>used chaos, if you concur with the secret wisdom that he was
>>illuminated, or even Gbaji himself.
> I understood that Arkat the Deceiver was Gbaji, by definition.
IFAIK, the Cult of Arkat the Deciever insists that Arkat was evil. The myths it tells about Arkat is Arkat doing wanton butchery, massacring innocents and all that. Thus he was a tool of Gbaji, they argue.
>> Arkat's entire adventure and life was defined by chaos.
>>Whether you classify him as anti-chaos or pro-chaos, chaos was the
>>one fact of his existence.
>You [Sandy] define the
>others by central aspects of their personal power, rather than by what
>they opposed. Though many of Arkat's powers derive from Illumination, I
>don't accept that Illumination is necessarily chaotic.
IMO, Sandy was consistent in his list.
-Peter M. on Gunda and Aelwrin
> >But given the psychological make-up of a hero (ie independant leaders,
> >loners etc), I think precludes forming a bond of friendship to or
> >becoming a sidekick to another hero.
> I don't see this. The hero has achieved a transformative experience.
> They are part of, but yet beyond the normal mortal experience. A
> superhero has gone even farther and is like a living, but unpredictable,
I must caveat here and say I don't believe in a real difference between Heroes and Superheros.
> Others accept them as leaders, but undoubtedly fear them in some
> fashion. Further, because the normal mortal has not undergone such an
> experience, they may find it difficult to be a friend. Only another
> hero can truly understand what it means to be a hero (particularly from
> a psychological point of view) or a superhero.
> If Harrek is the superhero of Death (which I agree with), doomed to
> bring loss to all, then it seems reasonable that only a hero who has
> experienced loss (such as Gunda whose ability to love was killed) at a
> similar level (ie in becoming a hero) could hope to be a friend to
So (digging from Moorcock coz I just failed my Glorantha score), Cymoril or Zaroona could never be loved by Elric because they did not understand what it was like to carry the Stealer of Souls? I don't think so. Otherwise the Gods would never be able to apprciate mortals and then glorantha would really be screwed.
> -Nick on Alkoth
> >but the impregnable Citadel of Alkoth surely never fell. That would
>> be...well... *unmythical*, dammit! They'd never live it down.
> My thought is that the Ring (ie the great green circular wall) of Alkoth
> was never broken. Sheng and his allies may have raised the Ring,
> lowered the Ring, dug under the Ring, flown over the Ring, or magically
> transported themselves within the Ring, but were never able to actually
> physically damage it.
Or perhaps the City of Alkoth sprawls outside the Green Walls of Alkor and Sheng only managed to conquer these bits.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:51:26 EEST