| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 00:36:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I never got the impression it was rape. Joelle charmed practically everyone around her, but I don't think she used the charms on Arietta to the extent that it could be considered rape. Arietta had genuine feelings for Joelle, so it was consensual. I don't remember all the details from the book, but I think if it had struck me as rape, it would have stood out to me.
Please explain how you think consent was even remotely possible while Arietta was under a Chosen-empowered charm spell?
In no way was it consensual.
Everything about Joelle involved classic predatory behavior, down to her ultimate goal of wanting to manipulate ANY victim to commit suicide in the supposed name of self-sacrifice. Joelle only turned to Arietta at the end because she had tried her charm on everyone else except Malik - it didn't work on Kleef, and it wouldn't have worked on Malik, because they were Chosens. It did work on Arietta because at that time she wasn't a Chosen. This was a primary theme in the book.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 00:42:55 |
 |
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 00:45:32
|
I said the charm spell she used wasn't to the extent that she completely had Arietta under her spell, so to speak, and she could have, being a Chosen. She left enough room for Arietta to make up her own mind, and Arietta chose Joelle.
However, like I said, I don't remember every detail of the book, so maybe if I were to reread those parts, I would see it differently, and I would agree with you. But it didn't scream rape to me the first time I read it, and I think I would remember it if it had been rape, because it would have bothered me. I think Joelle manipulated those around her, yes, and manipulation can lead to rape, but as I said, I think she left enough room for Arietta to make up her own mind. I don't think Denning intended for it to be viewed as rape. I think it was more seduction than anything, though there can be a fine line between the two. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
Edited by - CorellonsDevout on 19 Feb 2015 00:51:58 |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:02:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
I guess you don't read George R R Martin then.
-- George Krashos
In GRRM's books, rape is overtly violent and brutal. It's quite clear when a rape is happening, usually from all the blood and screaming that happens. It's not glossed over.
What transpires between Joelle and Arietta is glossed over, because it's acquaintance rape (by a supposed friend) and because there's no overt physical violence. There is, however, the undeniable fact that her reason was overwhelmed by magic (no different than use of a date-rape drug), the fact that she was confused afterwards, and had no romantic feelings or intentions toward Joelle until they were magically forced onto her. And, because Joelle's true goal (get her victim to commit suicide) is stated over and over again: Joelle is clearly engaged in predatory behavior.
Many women who have been date raped by people they once considered friends do not report their rapes precisely because their rape didn't leave any evidence of physical violence. This book unfortunately feeds into the "rape denial" culture that silences many women who have been attacked.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 01:04:23 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:08:37
|
Hmm...I haven't read Martin's books (I have had my reservations about them, and now have another one).
I've been thinking a lot about this topic, however. I really don't think Denning meant it as rape, and I seem to remember Joelle letting Arietta decide for herself whether she wanted to...get involved, shall we say. I do remember thinking when I was reading that their relationship seemed rather sudden, so maybe there was more coercion than I initially picked up on. I'm on the fence about this now. Hmmm... |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:16:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
Many women who have been date raped by people they once considered friends do not report their rapes precisely because their rape didn't leave any evidence of physical violence. This book unfortunately feeds into the "rape denial" culture that silences many women who have been attacked.
But again, that's one big thing that's still missing from your argumentation: Arietta never expressed any kind of repentance or disgust from what happened.
You've decided that it was rape so you interpret everything in a way to support your conclusion. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:18:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I do remember thinking when I was reading that their relationship seemed rather sudden, so maybe there was more coercion than I initially picked up on. I'm on the fence about this now. Hmmm...
Oh it was indeed rather sudden, but so was everything in the book. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:24:26
|
Okay am confused. Lets say there was rape in the book . Rape does happen, what part are you rejecting to. That no negative reaction happen to the rape, or that the character felt no remores or punishment. Was the rape glorified in some manner?
Stop arguing over if it happened or not, and please tell me a bit more on how it was handled and why that offended you. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:25:09
|
| I think there was some manipulation/seduction going on, but I don't think it was to the point of rape. I think Arietta was allowed to make her own choice. But I could be wrong, and the more I think about it, the more I am on the fence about it. It just didn't seem like rape to me, and rape is a passionate subject for me, so if I had felt it had been rape, I think I would have noticed when I read it. Both Kleef and Arietta were "charmed" by Joelle, but they also shook off the effects, so to speak. She couldn't get them to do everything she wanted. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:31:13
|
| On a different note, and back to the original topic, I remember someone here mentioning more novels wouldbe a good way to aattract new readers/players. I agree. Even during 4e, when people were angry overcchanges in the edition, there were more novels being released. Maybe they didn't sell as well, and WotC is scared of trying that again, but it is clear the novels are a big part of the Realms experience for many, as is evidenced by how often we discuss them here. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 01:31:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
Many women who have been date raped by people they once considered friends do not report their rapes precisely because their rape didn't leave any evidence of physical violence. This book unfortunately feeds into the "rape denial" culture that silences many women who have been attacked.
But again, that's one big thing that's still missing from your argumentation: Arietta never expressed any kind of repentance or disgust from what happened.
You've decided that it was rape so you interpret everything in a way to support your conclusion.
I haven't "decided" anything. I am, however, quite aware that many women who have gone through acquaintance rape (or even drug-induced date rape) may not immediately express disgust or even sadness until much later.
How soon, and exactly what, raped women experience after the fact is highly variable. We do know Arietta experienced definite confusion over the act and even shock over the lesbian part of it. Some women do not experience disgust, fear, or anger until hours, days, or even weeks after their rape.
Not having those feelings immediately, not reacting with anger after the Chosen-empowered charm ended, isn't something that should be taken as evidence in any way whatsoever.
Please educate yourself about both consent and the often delayed reactions of victims - delayed reactions in rape are quite common.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:02:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer
Okay am confused. Lets say there was rape in the book . Rape does happen, what part are you rejecting to. That no negative reaction happen to the rape, or that the character felt no remores or punishment. Was the rape glorified in some manner?
Stop arguing over if it happened or not, and please tell me a bit more on how it was handled and why that offended you.
Beyond the general lazy writing, poor plot and character development, it was a greatly downplayed encounter that will just confuse people. It puts Joelle, who is ostensibly a good character serving a good goddess into the position of manipulating people to the point of rape with the ultimate intent of homicide (which are both evil). Remember: Joelle didn't care if it was Kleef, Arietta, or someone else who committed suicide, she wanted anyone who would do it "for" her because of the Chosen-empowered charm effect.
The fact that it's a good character (or at least a neutral one) serving a good goddess - who is committing the manipulation and rape - is bad.
The fact that it's mostly off page, yet has the ultimate intent of manipulating someone to commit suicide, and then extremely downplayed, is bad.
The fact that it's so downplayed many people won't recognize it for manipulation and rape - is bad.
The fact that it's a lesbian encounter with NO prior development of lesbian feelings, is bad.
If it's meant to be provocative, or truly LGBT-inclusive, it fails miserably in both arenas.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 02:05:16 |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:09:04
|
And again, you're making the interpretations that you want to fit your view while completely dismissing the possibility of other explanations.
Arietta not feeling remorse immediately after being "raped" isn't absolute proof that it wasn't rape, but it certainly does raise the possibility that it wasn't. Your interpretation of the story is that Joelle's Charm abilities could force people to do stuff that they would never do. That was not my interpretation of her powers.
And please, drop your ridiculous "if you don't agree with me you're a rapist too" stance. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:17:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
The fact that it's a good character (or at least a neutral one) serving a good goddess - who is committing the manipulation and rape - is bad.
Chosen are just that: Chosen. What they actually do does not necessarily have to follow the precepts of their patron god. See the cases of Farideh and Havilar for a good example.
One of the themes of the book was how people didn't know what exactly a Chosen is. It was because of this that Arietta was able to convince herself that she was a Chosen of Siamorphe.
It's very likely that when Sune gave Joelle her task she just told her that for the ritual to work someone had to sacrifice themselves for their loved one. Joelle probably interpreted this as having someone die for her because she herself did not want to die. I wouldn't be surprised if Sune had always intended for Joelle to sacrifice herself. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:25:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
And again, you're making the interpretations that you want to fit your view while completely dismissing the possibility of other explanations.
Arietta not feeling remorse immediately after being "raped" isn't absolute proof that it wasn't rape, but it certainly does raise the possibility that it wasn't. Your interpretation of the story is that Joelle's Charm abilities could force people to do stuff that they would never do. That was not my interpretation of her powers.
And please, drop your ridiculous "if you don't agree with me you're a rapist too" stance.
I am interpreting nothing here.
I am also not calling you or anyone who disagrees with me a rapist. It was another person who claimed this, but I am absolutely not doing this.
I have repeatedly stated that in our culture, rape denial is common when there is limited or no obvious evidence of physical violence from the attack. Because of current societal beliefs about acquaintance rape, denial of the truth is quite common when people don't consider anything other than overt physical violence.
Lack of bruises, lack of physical trauma, is irrelevant when it comes to rape.
Lack of an immediate response from the victim is irrelevant when it comes to rape.
Also, it was repeatedly stated in the novel that Joelle's Chosen-empowered charm could not be resisted by mortals, unless they were another god's Chosen or immensely powerful. This is not an interpretation or belief on my part, it's stated quite clearly.
I'm not making any interpretations at all, I'm looking at the actual events and what was stated in the novel in terms of both the power of Joelle's charm and her own ultimate goals.
No interpretation needed or required.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:25:26
|
I would think that the powers of a Chosen (or perceived Chosen) would vary based on the alignment of their respective deity. Had Joelle been the Chosen of say, Bane, then her "charms" would be more likely to have led to rape and full-on manipulation.
However, Farideh and Havilar are the Chosen of Asmodeus, and they do not use their powers for evil. They try and help others, so maybe my above argument doesn't always stand. As Fari said "they're Chosen, not Choosers". I do not think however that Sune would have allowed for Joelle to use her spells for rape, since that goes against her precepts. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:37:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I would think that the powers of a Chosen (or perceived Chosen) would vary based on the alignment of their respective deity. Had Joelle been the Chosen of say, Bane, then her "charms" would be more likely to have led to rape and full-on manipulation.
However, Farideh and Havilar are the Chosen of Asmodeus, and they do not use their powers for evil. They try and help others, so maybe my above argument doesn't always stand. As Fari said "they're Chosen, not Choosers". I do not think however that Sune would have allowed for Joelle to use her spells for rape, since that goes against her precepts.
The nature of the Chosen's granted powers will typically be in line with the deity that grants them, I agree there.
But as both you and Tanthalas have pointed out, once a deity creates a Chosen it's not always the case that they have any control over those powers and abilities. A priest might be denied certain divine spells if a god is unhappy with their priest, but the same doesn't seem to be true of many different Chosen over the years. Once Chosen power is invested, the Chosen might keep in line with their granting deity's tenets and morals, but there have also been clear cases when Chosen go against what their god would have hoped they'd do or become.
I also agree that rape would be something the goddess Sune would be highly against, considering that it's violent and evil - even if it's only violent in a psychological sense.
Was Joelle going way, way outside of Sune's intentions with all the manipulation and the rape? Perhaps. But the reality is that the writing was so lazy and muddy on this and other plot points that we can't know for sure one way or the other what Sune really wanted or intended for Joelle to do (versus what she did do).
Personally, I do not think Sune is a goddess where the pragmatism of needing a sacrifice would override her more essential purview of love and goodness.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 02:42:51 |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:46:41
|
This discussion has been had before. Frankly, I'm more inclined to lean toward the depiction of ancient greek deities, in that rape does not mean the same thing to gods as it does to mortals (especially when the implications of the Sundering are taken into consideration).
The Sundering was a stressful time for the gods. They honestly believed that their portfolios were in jeopardy and Sune - being the Goddess of Love - would've been extremely worried that love itself would be under threat and willing to take extreme action to preserve it. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
Edited by - hashimashadoo on 19 Feb 2015 02:48:54 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 02:54:00
|
| Very true. The gods were in a panic and trying to make sense of things as much as the mortals were. However I don't think Sune would have approved of Joelle using rape, since rape is the opposite of love. Even if the gods view rape differently, Sune, as the goddess of love, would know how a mortal would see rape, and therefore not want her followers to do such an act of evil. Even though the gods themselves act in a mysterious and confusing manner, they have dogmas that are made for their followers to understand. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 03:00:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
This discussion has been had before. Frankly, I'm more inclined to lean toward the depiction of ancient greek deities, in that rape does not mean the same thing to gods as it does to mortals (especially when the implications of the Sundering are taken into consideration).
The Sundering was a stressful time for the gods. They honestly believed that their portfolios were in jeopardy and Sune - being the Goddess of Love - would've been extremely worried that love itself would be under threat and willing to take extreme action to preserve it.
Perhaps.
But as has been stated, what was "truly" intended by the gods is something mortals may not be ever fully understood - either in the scope or the nature of what's ultimately important from the deity's perspective.
That doesn't mean, though, that a rape and excessive manipulation didn't happen in the mortal arena. Joelle may have completely misunderstood Sune's words, but that doesn't excuse what she did. It may explain it, somewhat, but it doesn't excuse her predatory behavior or her evil acts.
And ultimately, mortals who live in the real world are reading these books. Muddying various moral questions certainly make a book "gritty" or "darker" than usual fantasy fare where good and evil are black and white. But downplaying a violent and criminal act isn't just "gritty" - it's sloppy writing that has an impact on the reader. If people don't recognize manipulation and rape in a novel, they may not recognize it or believe it's happening in real life either.
Consider the young teen D&D player who reads this book, then in role-play decides to charm a tavern wench into having sex against her will - and because the DM is inexperienced too, it's allowed. It's allowed because it's titillating and because it all happened in a novel - so it "must be okay" when it's absolutely not okay on any level. If you raise any objection, or question the player's alignment, is he entirely and totally wrong saying "Sune allowed it in that novel"? Kinda muddy, isn't it?
Just saying. Sune and the other gods may have been frantic about portfolios and a host of other things mortals wouldn't usually think about. But who cares? What the gods "really truly think" or want in no way excuses or justifies Joelle's criminal, evil behavior in the mortal world.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 03:08:32 |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 03:29:33
|
I'm not saying it's an excuse.
Look at the comic character Constantine: He can't access Heaven, partly because he lacks faith - he doesn't have faith because he knows for a fact that God and Satan exist - they've spoken to him and therefore he lacks doubt. I see the FR deities in much the same way in regard to their Chosen.
Since the Time of Troubles, a god's power has revolved around the faith of their followers. If their favoured servant - their Chosen - has a direct line to their god, and therefore lacks faith, they either do as they're told or they rebel entirely.
Sune instructed Joelle to gain a lover, Arietta, so they could be used as a sacrifice to empower the ritual to grant Grumbar the Eye of Gruumsh and thus save Toril from Shar's machinations.
I'm not advocating rape, but if you thought that rape, on the orders of the goddess of love - that you have a direct connection to - would save the world, would you not do your best to save the world? Especially since the person you would rape would not actually see your actions as rape but as an act of love. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 03:36:36
|
Okay, we're deviating into the treacherous bleed between real-world situations and fictional settings.
Let's try to keep this chatter focused back just on the Realms, eh? And remember that this is a family-friendly site.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 03:39:03
|
quote:
hashimashadoo
Since the Time of Troubles, a god's power has revolved around the faith of their followers.
Interestingly, this implies that before the Time of Troubles, a deity's power was not significantly related to the faith of its followers.
I suppose this means that relative power levels between deities was stagnant, unchanging, a Lesser Power would simply remain a Lesser Power indefinitely regardless of any activity or inactivity taken by it or its followers?
Or was it instead dynamic, gods could slay gods and usurp or subjugate each others' power ... yet, somehow, they inexplicably always behaved themselves or, somehow, destructive echoes of all these divine power conflicts never seemed to much affect (and certainly didn't crater) the Realms for many ages?
[Edit]
Ah, I never really realized or appreciated how profoundly spoiled (and unspoiled) the Realms truly were back in the formative AD&D Grey-box era! |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 19 Feb 2015 03:45:33 |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 03:43:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
I'm not saying it's an excuse.
Look at the comic character Constantine: He can't access Heaven, partly because he lacks faith - he doesn't have faith because he knows for a fact that God and Satan exist - they've spoken to him and therefore he lacks doubt. I see the FR deities in much the same way in regard to their Chosen.
Since the Time of Troubles, a god's power has revolved around the faith of their followers. If their favoured servant - their Chosen - has a direct line to their god, and therefore lacks faith, they either do as they're told or they rebel entirely.
Sune instructed Joelle to gain a lover, Arietta, so they could be used as a sacrifice to empower the ritual to grant Grumbar the Eye of Gruumsh and thus save Toril from Shar's machinations.
I'm not advocating rape, but if you thought that rape, on the orders of the goddess of love - that you have a direct connection to - would save the world, would you not do your best to save the world? Especially since the person you would rape would not actually see your actions as rape but as an act of love.
We don't know that Sune instructed Joelle to do what she did. What we know from Joelle about Sune is quite limited. It's extremely muddy.
Personally, because of who I am, I would question any deity that told me that I needed to engage in a thoroughly evil act in order to save the world.
If the communication was hazy, or unclear, I would question what I thought I heard. If the communication was clear, I would question whether or not the deity had gone mad, or if it was perhaps another deity pretending to be Sune.
I would not engage in an evil act that violently harmed another person, even if I had no question that it would "save the world" -- because the world saved would be one in which good and evil had no meaning. It would not be a world worth saving, because committing evil for a supposed "greater good" is simply offensive from a moral standpoint.
Finally, do you even remotely see how "commit a rape in order to save the world, trust me that the victim will see it as love" is so incredibly messed up as a plot concept that, seriously -- I can't even. It's ridiculous and stupid, and outright bizarre.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 03:57:31 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 03:46:35
|
Having faith doesn't mean a lack of knowledge. You can know something exists and still have faith in it. The gods are an active force in the Realms (whether the dynamic of how they interact with mortals changes or not), and the majority of Faerunians acknowledges the gods exist. Some people choose to defy them or ignore them, but they acknowledge their existence.
Being faithful to a god in the Realms is based on following the dogmas of that deity. A follower of X deity knows X deity exists, but their faith is based on following X deity and what they stand for.
This is not to say however that some followers won't twist the precepts, or that two followers of the same deity won't disagree on certain things and how to go about doing things |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 04:14:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
Having faith doesn't mean a lack of knowledge. You can know something exists and still have faith in it. The gods are an active force in the Realms (whether the dynamic of how they interact with mortals changes or not), and the majority of Faerunians acknowledges the gods exist. Some people choose to defy them or ignore them, but they acknowledge their existence.
Being faithful to a god in the Realms is based on following the dogmas of that deity. A follower of X deity knows X deity exists, but their faith is based on following X deity and what they stand for.
This is not to say however that some followers won't twist the precepts, or that two followers of the same deity won't disagree on certain things and how to go about doing things
I agree completely with all of this.
Faith sometimes refers to belief in the absence of proof, but just as often it can mean having trust or confidence in a being or a situation that is known to exist.
In many ancient cultures, I think we can arguably say that most people absolutely believed in the existence of their gods. Their faith was more about trusting they were doing the right things to please their deities and get favors or interventions.
It's only more recently the case that people have questioned the existence of divine beings.
In the Realms, I think it's pretty clear also that the deities only give little signs and symbols of their approval - and that direct, clear communication is extremely unusual even for high priests.
Unless you're Elminster or the Seven Sisters. In which case Mystra shows up regularly for dinner, pretty frequently.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
Edited by - Eltheron on 19 Feb 2015 04:15:47 |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 04:14:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
I'm not saying it's an excuse.
Look at the comic character Constantine: He can't access Heaven, partly because he lacks faith - he doesn't have faith because he knows for a fact that God and Satan exist - they've spoken to him and therefore he lacks doubt. I see the FR deities in much the same way in regard to their Chosen.
Since the Time of Troubles, a god's power has revolved around the faith of their followers. If their favoured servant - their Chosen - has a direct line to their god, and therefore lacks faith, they either do as they're told or they rebel entirely.
Sune instructed Joelle to gain a lover, Arietta, so they could be used as a sacrifice to empower the ritual to grant Grumbar the Eye of Gruumsh and thus save Toril from Shar's machinations.
I'm not advocating rape, but if you thought that rape, on the orders of the goddess of love - that you have a direct connection to - would save the world, would you not do your best to save the world? Especially since the person you would rape would not actually see your actions as rape but as an act of love.
We don't know that Sune instructed Joelle to do what she did. What we know from Joelle about Sune is quite limited. It's extremely muddy.
Personally, because of who I am, I would question any deity that told me that I needed to engage in a thoroughly evil act in order to save the world.
If the communication was hazy, or unclear, I would question what I thought I heard. If the communication was clear, I would question whether or not the deity had gone mad, or if it was perhaps another deity pretending to be Sune.
I would not engage in an evil act that violently harmed another person, even if I had no question that it would "save the world" -- because the world saved would be one in which good and evil had no meaning. It would not be a world worth saving, because committing evil for a supposed "greater good" is simply offensive from a moral standpoint.
Finally, do you even remotely see how "commit a rape in order to save the world, trust me that the victim will see it as love" is so incredibly messed up as a plot concept that, seriously -- I can't even. It's ridiculous and stupid, and outright bizarre.
It is a messed up plot concept, I'm not debating that at all. However, it's the concept that was presented to us, as the readers - and therefore, the implicit demand of the goddess of love.
Joelle, as far as I'm aware, was not ordered to abuse another sentient being. However, her divine mistress would have convinced her that sacrificing a lover (without specifying how she obtained such a lover, though the charm abilities of her Chosen status implies a methodology that Arietta could exploit (though I agree she shouldn't have)), should be an essential tool to saving the entire world from another god whose ultimate goal is the world's (as we know it) destruction.
Edit: In regard to Eltheron's post, I must assume that any Chosen, not just a Chosen of Mystra, has a similar connection to their god. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
Edited by - hashimashadoo on 19 Feb 2015 04:19:12 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 04:25:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
Having faith doesn't mean a lack of knowledge. You can know something exists and still have faith in it. The gods are an active force in the Realms (whether the dynamic of how they interact with mortals changes or not), and the majority of Faerunians acknowledges the gods exist. Some people choose to defy them or ignore them, but they acknowledge their existence.
Being faithful to a god in the Realms is based on following the dogmas of that deity. A follower of X deity knows X deity exists, but their faith is based on following X deity and what they stand for.
This is not to say however that some followers won't twist the precepts, or that two followers of the same deity won't disagree on certain things and how to go about doing things
I agree completely with all of this.
Faith sometimes refers to belief in the absence of proof, but just as often it can mean having trust or confidence in a being or a situation that is known to exist.
In many ancient cultures, I think we can arguably say that most people absolutely believed in the existence of their gods. Their faith was more about trusting they were doing the right things to please their deities and get favors or interventions.
It's only more recently the case that people have questioned the existence of divine beings.
In the Realms, I think it's pretty clear also that the deities only give little signs and symbols of their approval - and that direct, clear communication is extremely unusual even for high priests.
Unless you're Elminster or the Seven Sisters. In which case Mystra shows up regularly for dinner, pretty frequently.
Exactly. I think it depends on the deity, too. Some are more likely to give direct signs of approval or disapproval, and others are more subtle (though with 5e I think all deities will now be limited to communing with their followers indirectly). |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 04:28:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
It is a messed up plot concept, I'm not debating that at all. However, it's the concept that was presented to us, as the readers - and therefore, the implicit demand of the goddess of love.
Joelle, as far as I'm aware, was not ordered to abuse another sentient being. However, her divine mistress would have convinced her that sacrificing a lover (without specifying how she obtained such a lover, though the charm abilities of her Chosen status implies a methodology that Arietta could exploit (though I agree she shouldn't have)), should be an essential tool to saving the entire world from another god whose ultimate goal is the world's (as we know it) destruction.
It's certainly what Joelle believed. But there were enough little oddities and a lack of direct verification, that I don't think we as readers can absolutely take it as being -definitely- what Sune wanted or even exactly what Sune told Joelle.
It would've been slightly better (but only slightly) if something in the epilogue would've explored the "twist" that Sune might've been wanting Joelle to learn love and self-sacrifice all along. But even so, none of that really explains why a sacrifice was needed in any way. Or how it had any impact whatsoever on the outcome at either a mortal or divine level. We got nothing, other than "stuff is fixed, and uh, Shar was sorta defeated" and both the orcs and Netherese just were sorta there but dispersed.
The entire book was an exercise in lazy, haphazard writing IMO.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
Caolin
Senior Scribe
768 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 05:11:21
|
| Wow, this thread was taken in a dark direction. |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2015 : 05:42:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
Wow, this thread was taken in a dark direction.
Perhaps we should ask the novelists for stories that focus less on Shar, Cyric, Gruumsh, and world-ending murky plots.
I highly doubt we've seen the last of cataclysmic and gritty storylines, though.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Am scared about the written future for this
