the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Inrau's sorcery posted 08 Feb 2006, 10:02 by zarathustra, Peralogue

Thanks for answering all the questions Scott there can't be too many writers that would go to this length. But I have a couple more questions: 1) What sorcery does Inrau use when he is attacked by the Consult? I would have assumed the Gnosis but from the description given of Kellhus' training this would seem difficult as Inrau would have had to have damned himself earlier. It seems to come from a more emotional level like the Cishaurim. 2) Why do the Cishaurim not intervene in the battle outside Caraksand? Related to this is why do the Cishaurim let Acahamian and Xinemus into Caraksand were they under orders from Moenghus? view post


posted 09 Mar 2006, 20:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

Ummm Maithanet was not there when Inrau used his sorcery it was only Aurang, Sarcellus, and another controlled Shiral Knight. If I recall correctly it was Aurang who said "Mandate fool!" One question though from his small amount of time among the Mandate wouldn't he still be damned using small amounts of sorcery, I think it said somewhere in TTT that even in the beginning of learning the Gnosis you would have all the weaknesses of the Gnosis none of the strengths in otherwords vulnerability to Chorae. Can you undamn yourself I mean is there anyway to remove the mark from yourself if you stop practicing sorcery. view post


posted 09 Mar 2006, 22:03 by unJon, Auditor

Yes it does seem that Inrau would either 1) not know how to cast a really damaging Cant or 2) already be damned, given Akka's comments to Kellhus in TTT. Scott has already ignored this question once (further down the list on this forum) so I'm not hopeful that he'll answer it. My hunch is that its an error, unless Scott does let us know some explanation. The only plausible explanation (though a bit far fetched) that I could think of, was that Akka taught Inrau some cants using a different method than the Mandate normally does, after Inrau fled the Mandate. Perhaps Akka woried about his students life (either from the Consult in an off the stage scene of TDTCB, or from the Mandate sometime before the book took place). I still have trouble squaring it with Akka's comments in TTT to Kellhus, however. WP, IIRC, once you cast one single Cant you are Marked for life. That's the impression I got from the Akka/Kellhuss scene with the Doll in TWP along with numerous other places in the books. view post


posted 11 Mar 2006, 21:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

unjon said [quote:3e2x07kb]WP, IIRC, once you cast one single Cant you are Marked for life.[/quote:3e2x07kb] You know Kellhus will be looking for a way around this. view post


posted 11 Mar 2006, 23:03 by Andrew, Peralogue

i think you guys are missing the fact that you can learn both elements of the cant - the utteral and then inutteral (whatever - verbal and mental) phrases separately. You only obtain the sorcerous mark if you actually complete a cant by "saying" both portions of the cant simultaneously (verbal and mental phrase). You can learn both portions without being marked. You can learn to think one phrase and speak another without thereby casting a cant - for example, you could learn to utter an inoccous phrase and think an innocous thought. So for Inrau, it was probably the first time he had ever cast a cant, ie. combined his learned spoken phrase and the learned mental phrase. view post


posted 12 Mar 2006, 01:03 by unJon, Auditor

Andrew, I think what you say might, in theory, be true, but it does not seem to be the way that the Mandate teaches its students. [quote="TTT pg. 137 US hardback":2g1gf6a8]In Atyersus, teachers always started with what were called denotaries, small precursor Cants meant to gradually develop the intellectual flexibility of their students to the prodigious point where they could both comprehend and express arcane semantics. Denotaries, however, bruised students with the stain of sorcery as surely as any Cant....[/quote:2g1gf6a8] So if Inrau could "express arcane semantics" like he seemed to be doing when he cast that BA Cant on the skin spy, then it stands to reason that he should have been Marked given the Mandates normal M.O. view post


posted 12 Mar 2006, 01:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

[b:wlkz1mca]Andrew said[/b:wlkz1mca][quote:wlkz1mca]i think you guys are missing the fact that you can learn both elements of the cant - the utteral and then inutteral (whatever - verbal and mental) phrases separately. You only obtain the sorcerous mark if you actually complete a cant by "saying" both portions of the cant simultaneously (verbal and mental phrase). You can learn both portions without being marked. You can learn to think one phrase and speak another without thereby casting a cant - for example, you could learn to utter an inoccous phrase and think an innocous thought. So for Inrau, it was probably the first time he had ever cast a cant, ie. combined his learned spoken phrase and the learned mental phrase.[/quote:wlkz1mca] Im not missing anything I was just under the impression that that was not Inrau's first time and im almost sure that it says in Darkness that he had cast some minor Cants. view post


posted 12 Mar 2006, 01:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

[quote="unJon":2lwpn2k2]Andrew, I think what you say might, in theory, be true, but it does not seem to be the way that the Mandate teaches its students. [quote="TTT pg. 137 US hardback":2lwpn2k2]In Atyersus, teachers always started with what were called denotaries, small precursor Cants meant to gradually develop the intellectual flexibility of their students to the prodigious point where they could both comprehend and express arcane semantics. Denotaries, however, bruised students with the stain of sorcery as surely as any Cant....[/quote:2lwpn2k2] So if Inrau could "express arcane semantics" like he seemed to be doing when he cast that BA Cant on the skin spy, then it stands to reason that he should have been Marked given the Mandates normal M.O.[/quote:2lwpn2k2] You beat me to it by like seconds unjon. You are completely correct. view post


posted 12 Mar 2006, 02:03 by unJon, Auditor

[b:1jpjag1h]Warrior Prophet wrote:[/b:1jpjag1h][quote:1jpjag1h]I was just under the impression that that was not Inrau's first time and im almost sure that it says in Darkness that he had cast some minor Cants.[/quote:1jpjag1h] I was under the opposite impression, hence my confusion at the apparent paradox. I'll take a skim through TDTCB now and see if I can find a quote. view post


posted 12 Mar 2006, 03:03 by Warrior-Poet, Moderator

When did I become a Prophet? [quote:1tmd9005]Warrior Prophet wrote:Quote: I was just under the impression that that was not Inrau's first time and im almost sure that it says in Darkness that he had cast some minor Cants. I was under the opposite impression, hence my confusion at the apparent paradox. I'll take a skim through TDTCB now and see if I can find a quote.[/quote:1tmd9005] Well anywho I had just posted when I realized i had forgotten about TTT and the expalnation of how Atyersus trained their students with denotaries hence how you beat me to it. However in my other post i also thought i recalled there being some mention of it in Darkness. But you are right with the denotaries. view post


posted 15 Mar 2006, 16:03 by Cu'jara Cinmoi, Author of Prince of Nothing

This question really morphed! Yes, Inrau IS damned. And this is the basis of his conversion. There's always hope that the scriptures just overlooked some kind of loophole, or that by praying [i:3kkxcpk5]real[/i:3kkxcpk5] hard... Part of the problem is that we see Inrau primarily through Achamian, and if you think about it, Achamian tends not to go into the details of his damnation - or that of any of those he loves. For instance, why doesn't he ever wonder about Inrau's [i:3kkxcpk5]soul[/i:3kkxcpk5]? This omission becomes more and more explicit the more implicated Achamian becomes in Kellhus's world. Think of TTT. I wanted this to be the one thing he cannot grasp without the protection of vague intellectual abstraction. view post


posted 21 Mar 2006, 16:03 by zarathustra, Peralogue

When I first read the passage regarding Inrau's death I understood it that his 'damnation' occurred when he uttered the Cant to kill the skin spy. I saw it as his forsaking of a God that had betrayed him or the absence of God altogether so he didn't need to worry about using Sorcery. Reading through it again its obvious that he possessed knowledge of the Gnosis and his 'damnation' has already occurred but it is indeed something that Achamian doesn't dwell on especially as his position as a Shrial priest is absurd. By the end of TTT though I saw the idea of damnation through Sorcery as untenable due to Kellhus’s explanation that Sorcerers being able to remember God plus hints that the Inchoroi had a hand in writing the Tusk. I therefore await with interest to find out how one goes about becoming damned. Kellhus says that Moenghus is damned but I don’t see his crimes as being any worse than Kellhus’s crimes. view post


posted 21 Mar 2006, 17:03 by unJon, Auditor

Scott's answer to the paradox sheds a lot of light on the Inrithi faith. I didn't consider that they'd let a Marked schoolman "take the vows." view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown.