Active Users:938 Time:26/11/2024 08:34:16 PM
Just disagreeing Etzel Send a noteboard - 04/05/2010 11:15:44 AM
Your interpretation of the Prophecies doesn't fit the wording: Alivia simply doesn't help Rand in a direct and specific way to die, like Elayne wouldn't simply because she gave Alivia the medallion. Following your theory one would rather have to say that Gawyn "helps" Rand to die. Of course, this is also not correct, since he doesn't want to "help" Rand, but just wants to kill him in your opinion.

Following my theory, Gawyn kills Rand, and Alivia helps by giving Gawyn access to the medallion. That fits the definition of 'help' just fine; it simply doesn't fit your preconceived notions of what sort of 'help' Alivia will be giving.


That's simply no direct help by Alivia for Rand's death, because Gawyn has to take the medallion and Alivia - being dead - can't control that. It's just a random event.

Similarly the Aelfinn's answer suggests that Rand has actively to do something, namely "dying", in order to live. That implies that simply being killed isn't enough, but that Rand has to find a way to be dead and alive at the same time. The solution to this is a state where Rand appears dead - is even basically dead because the processes of his life are temporarily shut done - but is actually still alive, like in a coma or stasis, and can be revived.

But he's not dead in that scenario, so it doesn't fit. Also, the extra meaning you're applying to the Aelfinn's words is based on your preconceived notions of how Rand will be dead and alive at the same time. It's not in the text itself. He asked them how to survive. They said, 'to live, you must die'. All that says is that he has to die.


Yeah, but of course it only makes sense to connect it to the other Prophecies about Rand's "death" to figure out its true meaning. And if you look at everything, the fake death theory makes the most sense to explain the Aelfinn's riddle.

The problem is that your theory relies on too many such on the whole unsupported assumptions.

Not really. It only relies on the supported assumptions; it doesn't presume to know how every detail will play out.


There are too many assumptions, just because Gawyn announced that he will see Rand die (he might see it, but not kill him; and many other characters said that they will kill Rand), and because it's allegedly based on myths (of course, the fake death theory is based on myths as well).

Why can't Rand be spun out directly again, if the Pattern needs the Dragon?

Because Rand would be a baby?


But we know that the Pattern can create certain direct effects, e.g. at Falme. If Rand would actually die (which I seriously doubt the Pattern would allow anyway), the Pattern would probably immediately try to counter it by bringing Rand's soul back to his body, without having someone rip him out of TAR.

But the Heroes in TAR are dead, basically ghost or souls, as e.g. the Prophecy of the Horn shows. They aren't alive, even if they can interact with you (like e.g. the dead Hopper with Perrin).

Sorry, but I have a quote from the book to show that dead Heroes are 'not dead as others are dead', no matter how you choose to see it. You don't have anything from the books to support your idea that Rand faking his death somehow counts as death; in fact, I have evidence from RJ that it won't count, since Mat's near death at Rhuidean didn't count.


But this quote doesn't say that the Heroes in TAR are alive. It just says they are dead, even if not as dead as others. And again, Mat's situation was different, because the Aelfinn told him his future that he will die and live again, while Rand asked how to to survive and they answered him with the seeminly paradox riddle "to live, you must die", which must mean something different, namely most likely that Rand will be put into a dead-like but still alive state and pull of a funeral to make the world/the Shadow believe that he died.

Actually Mat was also never dead at all, because of the balefire.

He did die, though. We actually saw him, dead. The balefire erased the event - made it to where it was AS IF it had never happened - but it still happened.


See above.

In any case, Rand's case is different because contrary to Mat he will be dead and alive at the same time. This only works with a coma. And as said, if it could fulfill a similar Prophecy in Dune, I'm certain that the explanation for being dead and alive at the same time could be a coma in WoT as well (though still a bit different of course, because Alivia will assist by putting Rand into a coma with the OP). This is also based on several myths.

Forgive me for using evidence from WoT to support what counts as living and what counts as dying, rather than using Dune.


See above.
Reply to message
My new 'loony' theory - 03/05/2010 11:09:52 AM 2241 Views
Hehe, yeah, we can also discuss it here... - 03/05/2010 12:04:57 PM 1130 Views
Good deal. You're still being prejudiced, though. - 03/05/2010 12:20:00 PM 1258 Views
Of course, I prefer my theory.... - 03/05/2010 01:01:07 PM 990 Views
I suppose it's better than Beslan - 03/05/2010 01:19:52 PM 1170 Views
He, Beslan being Berelain's man in white was a most brilliant theory! - 03/05/2010 01:55:07 PM 1120 Views
See, this is why I am right and you are wrong! - 04/05/2010 03:56:31 AM 941 Views
In my view - 04/05/2010 10:07:02 AM 882 Views
Still prejudiced, of course... - 04/05/2010 10:24:53 AM 994 Views
Just disagreeing - 04/05/2010 11:15:44 AM 970 Views
And repeating yourself. But I have evidence. - 04/05/2010 12:24:06 PM 949 Views
Well... - 04/05/2010 01:10:17 PM 872 Views
This is getting silly - 04/05/2010 01:27:56 PM 870 Views
Mat's reasons for giving up the foxhead ter'angreal - 03/05/2010 03:53:43 PM 1056 Views
Why only the gholam? - 04/05/2010 04:00:18 AM 937 Views
Re: My new 'loony' theory - 03/05/2010 04:27:12 PM 1031 Views
cool people change the subject line - 04/05/2010 04:14:18 AM 1072 Views
Re: cool people change the subject line - 04/05/2010 06:43:01 AM 861 Views
Re: cool people change the subject line - 04/05/2010 07:32:24 AM 927 Views
Re: cool people change the subject line - 04/05/2010 08:31:47 AM 1071 Views
Re: cool people change the subject line - 04/05/2010 09:27:51 AM 1013 Views
oops *NM* - 04/05/2010 09:28:11 AM 604 Views
Re: cool people change the subject line - 04/05/2010 03:17:42 PM 1006 Views
I dont claim to be but didnt you say cool people change the subject line? - 05/05/2010 02:41:49 AM 953 Views
Yes. What of it? *NM* - 05/05/2010 03:22:34 AM 618 Views
Re: My new 'loony' theory - 04/05/2010 04:44:28 AM 1032 Views
what comments by Brandon, and what flaws? - 04/05/2010 04:49:29 AM 1002 Views
Re: what comments by Brandon, and what flaws? - 05/05/2010 02:34:33 AM 1141 Views
Thanks. - 05/05/2010 03:21:53 AM 1035 Views
No go. *NM* - 03/11/2010 03:14:13 AM 527 Views
Who draws it out shall follow after - 04/05/2010 12:33:56 PM 1059 Views
I don't think.... - 04/05/2010 01:22:21 PM 966 Views
Gawyn promised not to raise a hand against Rand - 06/05/2010 12:59:47 AM 803 Views
Indeed he did. - 06/05/2010 07:23:44 AM 1184 Views
But... - 06/05/2010 08:52:04 AM 996 Views
Just because it makes more sense to you doesn't make it more likely. I have evidence! - 06/05/2010 09:57:52 AM 829 Views
Well... - 06/05/2010 11:12:42 AM 935 Views
*sigh* - 06/05/2010 01:41:03 PM 1030 Views
I'm still hoping to dissuade you from this crazy idea! - 06/05/2010 02:07:54 PM 988 Views
You won't. - 06/05/2010 02:11:42 PM 956 Views
Gawyn agreed that he would talk with Elayne about this topic - 06/05/2010 02:32:55 PM 1053 Views
Reading comprehension issues. *NM* - 06/05/2010 02:43:28 PM 580 Views
Ah, come on, it's fun to discuss! - 06/05/2010 02:49:01 PM 866 Views
the problem there - 07/05/2010 05:45:23 AM 893 Views
more to the point - 07/05/2010 04:45:40 AM 927 Views
considering Rand won't hurt Elayne - 07/05/2010 05:46:23 AM 857 Views
wow - 06/05/2010 01:46:22 AM 981 Views
thanks! - 06/05/2010 07:25:25 AM 806 Views
Re: thanks! - 12/05/2010 10:50:50 PM 895 Views
Nice theory ... - 07/05/2010 06:25:29 PM 1022 Views
Or Elayne could just give it to Gawyn. - 07/05/2010 07:34:44 PM 929 Views
True, but I prefer the idea that he'll steal it because ... - 07/05/2010 08:32:29 PM 881 Views
Thanks - 08/05/2010 07:56:17 AM 879 Views
Nice! But how about.... - 12/05/2010 01:58:00 PM 1107 Views
They'll kill each other - 12/05/2010 02:22:18 PM 796 Views
Also - 12/05/2010 09:06:25 PM 906 Views
Re: Also - 12/05/2010 10:49:51 PM 898 Views
Actually - 12/05/2010 11:50:26 PM 1022 Views
Take two - 17/05/2010 07:33:35 PM 885 Views
Re: Take two - 17/05/2010 11:45:08 PM 921 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 12:52:10 AM 973 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 01:35:46 AM 1039 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 01:45:24 AM 968 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 03:22:37 AM 1091 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 06:32:57 AM 929 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 07:11:08 PM 807 Views
Re: Take two - 18/05/2010 10:07:36 PM 863 Views
From DomA's World Con report - 18/05/2010 10:42:48 PM 854 Views
Yeah, we knew that... - 19/05/2010 08:25:04 AM 1091 Views

Reply to Message