|
Post by the bandit on Sept 8, 2009 14:49:46 GMT
This sounds to me like an option of last resort for someone who unexpectedly found himself trapped in a doll, rather than a deliberately planned strategy. Bingo. I mean to say, I agree with this statement and do not think it incompatible with doll by trickery. Note: If Reynardine had responded to Annie's accusation with, "No, I didn't try to kill you, I was going for the doll all along," I'd be less inclined to hold the position that I do. Tricksters never take by consent what they can take by trickery. The only reason Reynardine acts as consent-based as he currently does is because he is beholden to Annie against his will.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Sept 8, 2009 15:42:07 GMT
Note: If Reynardine had responded to Annie's accusation with, "No, I didn't try to kill you, I was going for the doll all along," I'd be less inclined to hold the position that I do. Must... resist... urge... to restate... the obvious... *huff puff puff* I'm notgonnadoit I'm notgonnadoit *rocks back and forth*
|
|
|
Post by Aris Katsaris on Sept 8, 2009 17:12:55 GMT
If Reynardine didn't attempt to possess Annie, then we certainly must discover a reason about why he hasn't claimed it yet, or it will be a plot-hole. We can explain some things in the story as plot-holes or "don't think about it too much, it's just there as a joke", but I really don't think we should treat this point as one of them -- it's too obvious and too basic.
Meta-reasons such as "he couldn't have claimed it, or it would ruin Tom's mystery" aren't sufficient on the non-meta level. We must discuss Reynardine's reasons for his actions as if there was no author writing him.
My own theory is ofcourse that his reason is he didn't want Annie to grow emotionally close to him - that this is consistent with other behaviour of his, where he likes to be seen as useful, but not actually liked.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Sept 8, 2009 18:06:18 GMT
How about hubris?
|
|
|
Post by garlicgreens on Sept 8, 2009 18:25:41 GMT
When I first read chapter 3 I thought that Reynardine had been somehow sucked into the toy, which is what prompted the "damn it!" response from him. Since Surma made the toy I wonder if it is more than just a stuffed animal.
|
|
|
Post by Mishmash on Sept 8, 2009 18:36:18 GMT
garlic, that is a very interesting theory. No idea how accurate it could be but I like the idea a lot!
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Sept 8, 2009 19:44:36 GMT
Wow... the idea that Surma made a doll specifically with the ability to protect her daughter from Reynardine possessing her is... well it's inspired. It would make logical sense too... if something went sour in Surma's relationship to Reynardine. I mean we know that he was in love with her, but nothing's to say she returned the feeling... unless I'm wrong. So she might have been extremely freaked out by his possessing some boy to come and try to get it on with her. Especially if it turned out she knew the boy. That might have changed Surma's opinion of Reynardine to the point that when she found out she was pregnant, she created the doll (perhaps with someone's help) in such a way as it would protect her daughter from him.
It is, of course, very wild speculation and probably belongs in that thread. But it's GOOD wild speculation, as it raises a lot of alternative possibilities. I mean who really knows what kind of game-changing curve balls Tom might throw at us in the future?
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Sept 8, 2009 20:32:51 GMT
Note: If Reynardine had responded to Annie's accusation with, "No, I didn't try to kill you, I was going for the doll all along," I'd be less inclined to hold the position that I do. Must... resist... urge... to restate... the obvious... *huff puff puff* I'm notgonnadoit I'm notgonnadoit *rocks back and forth* I don't think you understand. I mean that if Reynardine had come out and said he was going for the doll, I would not believe him and instead be with those who think he was originally aiming for Annie. I understand your meta-argument, but it is unrelated to my point, which is more about my perspective of Reynardine and my stance.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Sept 8, 2009 21:09:23 GMT
Oh I know... just because I replied to you doesn't mean I was arguing with you.
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Sept 9, 2009 5:46:16 GMT
If Reynardine didn't attempt to possess Annie, then we certainly must discover a reason about why he hasn't claimed it yet, or it will be a plot-hole. We can explain some things in the story as plot-holes or "don't think about it too much, it's just there as a joke", but I really don't think we should treat this point as one of them -- it's too obvious and too basic. My own theory is ofcourse that his reason is he didn't want Annie to grow emotionally close to him - that this is consistent with other behaviour of his, where he likes to be seen as useful, but not actually liked. I think that given the assumption that he did not actually try to kill her, there might be a simpler explanation for his silence about it: he thinks he she won't believe him, and he can't provide any proof. He'd look foolish. She'd think he was lying, and trust him even less.
|
|
|
Post by rhoffman12 on Sept 9, 2009 6:51:43 GMT
She'd think he was lying, and trust him even less. I don't know, Tom has said that Reynardine can't outright lie to her: Annie's current contract of control over Reynardine is only over his physical actions. So she can make him shut up, or start talking, but she can't tell him what to say or think. As an aside, he also cannot lie to her. Would Annie be aware of this condition of their 'contract', or not? If so, wouldn't she accept pretty much anything Reynardine decided to tell her, since it would have to be truthful?
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Sept 9, 2009 14:24:28 GMT
Only as much as she can accept pretty much anything Coyote says, since it would be truthful.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Oct 14, 2009 2:59:15 GMT
Firstly, I would like to point out how little we know about how Rey's possession ability actually works. At first, re-reading the scene where it appears he attempts to take possession of Annie, I wondered why he didn't continue. I mean, all Eglamore did was tackle her.. surely that can't stop him.. but then I realised - he covered her EYES. It is entirely possible that Rey may have been unsure about how much Eglamore knew about how he possesses things - after all, Annie has no tattoo to stop him, and perhaps Rey thought Eglamore couldn't interfere in such a short space of time, or would not have the foresight to do so, after all from what we know so far, they have not had so many problems with him possessing people.. they only mention the one boy, and Sivo, so far... It also makes me wonder, given how much they DO seem to know about how his possession works, and the kind of research/work they've put around it, if there was more than that one boy that Rey possessed in the past. They way he was sentenced, and held at the Court too, also seems to make it sound as though him killing the boy was deliberate, more than just a side-effect of possession. Maybe he thought to possess Annie, WITHOUT killing her, somehow? Coyote has mentioned that he can do this.. We know Rey can't lie to Annie, but what about Coyote? Firstly, he just gives me that whole super-creepy-untrustworthy-stay-the-hell-away-from-me kinda vibe, but he is also a trickster, who admitted making the annan waters, and who knows if he has told the whole truth (or any amount of truth for that matter) about Rey's possession ability. For that matter, we could question further, and wonder that perhaps all the work that went into the anti-possession computer program was not only because of Rey's possession of one boy (They seem to have gotten the tattoos before Sivo..), but perhaps were something to do with Coyote's ability to possess people also... There are so many different routes we can take, for Rey's reasoning or motives of trying to possess Annie, or not possess Annie, that boiling them down to so few, or something so simple, would be greatly underestimating Tom's writing ability. I think though, that Rey truly did try to possess Annie, foiled only by Eglamore covering her eyes, as shown clearly in Tom's artwork... whether this would have killed her, harmed her at all, and Rey's motives behind it are just going one of those questions we will never know the answer to, until Tom decides to reveal it, and personally, given his beautiful artwork, complex characters, and amazing storyline, I hope it's not for a few years yet. It will be truly worth the wait.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Oct 14, 2009 10:50:47 GMT
Jones said that Coyote never lies - but indicated that he can twist the truth. (Apparently the same kind of thing as, say, the three Witches' words to Macbeth; they are telling the truth about how Macbeth will be overthrown, but phrase it in such a way that he thinks he cannot be overthrown.)
Someone once pointed out that Coyote's words to Annie in Chapter Fourteen, "You cannot trust anyone [at the Court]", are such an example. On the surface, it appears to mean that the teachers at the court are untrustworthy - but it could also mean that Annie doesn't trust them because of her own character traits instilled in her from the kind of upbringing she had at Good Hope, which certainly appears to be true.
Equivocation can be more dangerous than straight-out lying.
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Oct 14, 2009 14:24:52 GMT
Firstly, I would like to point out how little we know about how Rey's possession ability actually works. Actually, between the comic and the Word of Tom, we know quite a bit. So much that Tom banned any future questions regarding the nature of Reynardine's possession ability (which, combined with his initial willingness to respond to questions, indicates to me that it's not an important plot element). But I do agree with your conclusion, because naturally we will only ever know as much as Tom allows us to know, and I tend to view entertainment as an opportunity to "wait and see" rather than pick apart and speculate.
|
|
|
Post by wynne on Oct 14, 2009 15:10:06 GMT
Perhaps this belongs in wild speculation, but is it possible that Reynardine kills whoever he possesses because they aren't letting him? What I mean is, if someone, say Annie, gave him permission to possess her, would it be possible that Annie would not die when Reynardine left because she let him be there in the first place? Based on what Coyote told Annie, Reynardine should have been able to leave people as they were before he possessed them. Perhaps, because Reynardine isn't as powerful as Coyote, or because the power of possession isn't really his (as in, he didn't have the power originally, it was "transplanted" by Coyote), there possessed being needs to issue consent in order to survive.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Oct 14, 2009 21:20:13 GMT
Firstly, I would like to point out how little we know about how Rey's possession ability actually works. Actually, between the comic and the Word of Tom, we know quite a bit. Thank you, I wasn't aware this was out there.. I thought from what people mentioned, it was just his responses in various threads. *wanders off to have a read* =D
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Oct 14, 2009 21:37:02 GMT
Jones said that Coyote never lies - but indicated that he can twist the truth. (Apparently the same kind of thing as, say, the three Witches' words to Macbeth; they are telling the truth about how Macbeth will be overthrown, but phrase it in such a way that he thinks he cannot be overthrown.) Someone once pointed out that Coyote's words to Annie in Chapter Fourteen, "You cannot trust anyone [at the Court]", are such an example. On the surface, it appears to mean that the teachers at the court are untrustworthy - but it could also mean that Annie doesn't trust them because of her own character traits instilled in her from the kind of upbringing she had at Good Hope, which certainly appears to be true. Equivocation can be more dangerous than straight-out lying. This makes me think of Aes Sedai in the Wheel of Time books.. They cannot ever lie, but they can twist the truth so perfectly that this oath is more of a help to them, than a hindrance. With what you're saying though... are you presuming that Jones also cannot lie? There really are endless possibilities here..
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Oct 19, 2009 11:13:25 GMT
Jones said that Coyote never lies - but indicated that he can twist the truth. (Apparently the same kind of thing as, say, the three Witches' words to Macbeth; they are telling the truth about how Macbeth will be overthrown, but phrase it in such a way that he thinks he cannot be overthrown.) Someone once pointed out that Coyote's words to Annie in Chapter Fourteen, "You cannot trust anyone [at the Court]", are such an example. On the surface, it appears to mean that the teachers at the court are untrustworthy - but it could also mean that Annie doesn't trust them because of her own character traits instilled in her from the kind of upbringing she had at Good Hope, which certainly appears to be true. Equivocation can be more dangerous than straight-out lying. This makes me think of Aes Sedai in the Wheel of Time books.. They cannot ever lie, but they can twist the truth so perfectly that this oath is more of a help to them, than a hindrance. With what you're saying though... are you presuming that Jones also cannot lie? There really are endless possibilities here.. Well, Jones has the ageless-face trick down quite well, and does the never-breaking-into-a-sweat technique perfectly. Not sure which Ajah suits her best, though... maybe black?
|
|
Pig_catapult
Full Member
Keeper of the Devilkitty
Posts: 171
|
Post by Pig_catapult on Oct 19, 2009 19:16:05 GMT
My thought is, Reynardine knows/should know that Eglamore is very fast. Eglamore had left the room, yes, but he had only just left, less than a page before, when Rey rose his voice to shout "YOUR BODY!". There is no reason to believe that Eglamore was too far away to hear that, since he DID come to the rescue so quickly, and Reynardine had been imprisoned there long enough that it's logical to assume he knows something of Eglamore's habits and abilities.
I propose, then, that Reynardine knew that, if he shouted those words, Eglamore would not only hear, but react fast enough to get to Antimony before Reynardine himself did. As to why he got THAT close to Antimony's eyes, he was counting on Eglamore to save her in time, so he could go into the plushie, but he was desperate enough that, on the off-chance Eglamore was too slow, ending up possessing Annie instead was fine, too, as a secondary option.
This theory also aligns well with both interpretations of the "Don't be so melodramatic" lines, because, while Reynardine wasn't necessarily hoping to kill her, he definitely had considered it an acceptable risk at the time.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by King Mir on Oct 19, 2009 21:49:07 GMT
That's not an unpopular view. You can read the tread to get the full argument against, but here I'll point out that the chance that the Annie drops the toy where Reynardine can reach it seemed low. There was no guarantee she would drop it at all.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Oct 20, 2009 3:55:21 GMT
This makes me think of Aes Sedai in the Wheel of Time books.. They cannot ever lie, but they can twist the truth so perfectly that this oath is more of a help to them, than a hindrance. With what you're saying though... are you presuming that Jones also cannot lie? There really are endless possibilities here.. Well, Jones has the ageless-face trick down quite well, and does the never-breaking-into-a-sweat technique perfectly. Not sure which Ajah suits her best, though... maybe black? I'm thinking white... while there's nothing yet to say she's actually evil, she certainly has the whole cold, impassive logic thing going on. And we both know all Aes Sedai only serve their own means.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Oct 20, 2009 3:58:44 GMT
That's not an unpopular view. You can read the tread to get the full argument against, but here I'll point out that the chance that the Annie drops the toy where Reynardine can reach it seemed low. There was no guarantee she would drop it at all. Would she have to drop it, in order for Rey to possess it? From my understanding, all he needs is access to the eyes, and of course, the object/person being in reach - which I think is the main point here.
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Oct 20, 2009 6:57:15 GMT
That's not an unpopular view. You can read the tread to get the full argument against, but here I'll point out that the chance that the Annie drops the toy where Reynardine can reach it seemed low. There was no guarantee she would drop it at all. Would she have to drop it, in order for Rey to possess it? From my understanding, all he needs is access to the eyes, and of course, the object/person being in reach - which I think is the main point here. The entire point in this scenario would be to get inside the doll undetected. If Annie is still holding it when Reynardine possesses it, either Annie or Eglamore would have definitely noticed. If Reynardine wanted to get into the doll, but didn't care about being noticed, he could have jumped into it directly without pretending to try to possess Annie first.
|
|
|
Post by Charlotte on Oct 20, 2009 9:18:32 GMT
Would she have to drop it, in order for Rey to possess it? From my understanding, all he needs is access to the eyes, and of course, the object/person being in reach - which I think is the main point here. The entire point in this scenario would be to get inside the doll undetected. If Annie is still holding it when Reynardine possesses it, either Annie or Eglamore would have definitely noticed. If Reynardine wanted to get into the doll, but didn't care about being noticed, he could have jumped into it directly without pretending to try to possess Annie first. Annie's eyes were covered, so she couldn't see anything, and if Rey could have predicted Eglamore stepping in, he likely would have predicted Annie's eyes being protected somehow, and Eglamore being much more focused on getting Annie out of harm's way. I'm not a believer in the doll by trickery theory, but there are those possibilies to consider.
|
|
|
Post by todd on Oct 20, 2009 11:08:15 GMT
I still wonder whether the real reason why we argue that Reynardine didn't truly attempt to possess Annie is because he's been portrayed so often since Chapter Three as (while in plush wolf form) comical or (in great white wolf form) a protector. We want to therefore laugh at him while he's in the former state (being caught having a tea party with Kat's action figures, being sent through the washing machine and dryer, tossing out all the classic literature on the shelves to get to Nancy Drew), or admire him in the latter, when he's defending Annie against harm. And we can't feel comfortable doing that if we think of him as having genuinely tried to betray, possess, and murder Annie - especially since he knew at the time that she was the daughter of the woman whom he'd fallen in love with.
I've read that often, if a villainous character is given a great deal of depth and charm, many people in the audience will start excusing, rationalizing, or trying to forget the crimes that he'd committed; maybe this phenomenon is at work here.
It's possible that Reynardine's attempt to possess Annie was just a ruse, and that the comical or protective figure we've come to know since then is closer to his true nature than his act at the climax of Chapter Three. But it's also possible that Reynardine's had to bide his time since being stuck in the plush doll, needing to ingratiate himself to Annie now that she controls his current body (and all the more so since she knows that he tried to possess her), and that if Annie ever lets her guard down enough to provide him with a loophole to leave the plush doll, he'll make another attempt. (Though I don't think that, even if that were to happen, Reynardine would succeed - simply because his possessing and killing Annie would automatically end the story, and raise the question of how Annie can be narrating it.)
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Oct 20, 2009 14:10:55 GMT
The entire point in this scenario would be to get inside the doll undetected. If Annie is still holding it when Reynardine possesses it, either Annie or Eglamore would have definitely noticed. If Reynardine wanted to get into the doll, but didn't care about being noticed, he could have jumped into it directly without pretending to try to possess Annie first. Annie's eyes were covered, so she couldn't see anything, and if Rey could have predicted Eglamore stepping in, he likely would have predicted Annie's eyes being protected somehow, and Eglamore being much more focused on getting Annie out of harm's way. I'm not a believer in the doll by trickery theory, but there are those possibilies to consider. I'll grant you Annie's eyes being covered. But if Eglamore is focused on getting Annie out of harm's way, then he's likely to be focused on the source of the harm. And the doll, if not dropped, is right next to Eglamore. Quite literally within arm's reach. Reynardine would have to be very lucky to close the distance between himself and Eglamore/Annie and get into the doll without being seen by Eglamore. Also, if possessing the doll caused any sound or vibration or expansion & contraction with huge lockpicks sticking out of its back, this would be a dead giveaway if Annie is still holding the doll. When Reynardine possesses the doll, the effect it has on the doll doesn't look like something that would go unnoticed by a person who was holding the doll at that moment.
|
|
|
Post by the bandit on Oct 20, 2009 14:24:48 GMT
If Annie is still holding it when Reynardine possesses it, either Annie or Eglamore would have definitely noticed. Not necessarily. EDIT: Reynardine does not necessarily have to grow the doll upon possession; I go "meta" on that one. Remember, the body is a reflection of his mind, and he can control it. EDIT2: If the transformation is really so huge, then why didn't Eglamore notice it even if Annie dropped the doll? And regarding todd's analysis of the rationalization of the doll by trickery theorists: For a portion of the population, you're probably spot on. And I could countenance the "biding his time" option as you presented. I haven't forgotten that Reynardine once killed a man, and once killed Sivo. But it's since been indicated that he's certainly not a flat villain that kills indiscriminately to accomplish his means. Especially not the daughter of Surma. So for me, at least, it's not that I've come to like the chap and am excusing his poor behavior; it's that I've come to know the chap and the face-value history does not jive with what I know of his character. And given the nature of the story in which we've come to know him (Gunnerkrigg Court), it's easier for me to work under the supposition that he was going for the doll all along than to believe everything we know about his personality since taking the doll is a lie. There's also a third possibility, by the way. He could have been going for Annie, but the nicer Reynardine we know now has been won over by Annie and come to think of her as a friend rather than a foe.
|
|
jon77
Full Member
Posts: 245
|
Post by jon77 on Oct 20, 2009 17:00:28 GMT
If Annie is still holding it when Reynardine possesses it, either Annie or Eglamore would have definitely noticed. Not necessarily. EDIT: Reynardine does not necessarily have to grow the doll upon possession; I go "meta" on that one. Remember, the body is a reflection of his mind, and he can control it. EDIT2: If the transformation is really so huge, then why didn't Eglamore notice it even if Annie dropped the doll? Eglamore and Annie wind up a few meters away from where the doll was dropped, and are facing away. This is why Reynardine isn't noticed when he possesses the doll. Eglamore just saved Annie from a possession attempt. I'm pretty sure if Reynardine had chased after them to try again, Eglamore would have noticed. Well, if Reynardine had chased after them in order to possess the doll which Annie was still clutching, how could Eglamore not have noticed that? The doll's eyes and Annie's eyes are about 30 cm apart. Reynardine is a large glowing yellow cloud. As for the doll transformation upon being possessed, this does not seem to me to be a willful act on Reynardine's part, and is probably something outside his control. After all, even when possessing the doll relatively far from Eglamore, he had no interest in deliberately expanding the doll - it just risks attracting attention to an act he's trying to keep secret. However, it is possible that the doll transformation is merely a graphical representation to make it absolutely clear to the reader that the doll has been possessed, and does not reflect a physical transformation. Even so, I maintain that Reynardine could not have reasonably expected to be able to possess the doll without being noticed while Annie was clutching it. If, for the sake of argument, we accept that he could do just that, then it makes the "Doll by Force" option that much better for Reynardine. Why not just possess the doll while Annie is holding it, without making any threats, when Eglamore is out of the room? This "Doll by Stealth" option gets him everything he could possibly want, with none of the disadvantages.
|
|
|
Post by Casey on Oct 20, 2009 17:13:18 GMT
However, it is possible that the doll transformation is merely a graphical representation to make it absolutely clear to the reader that the doll has been possessed, and does not reflect a physical transformation. This is a good point, and IMO an important one to remember while discussing the whole topic. There are a lot of individual details that can be pointed at to make an argument either way. Another, equally valid and important interpretation, is that Tom deliberately made it look, on its face, like Reynardine was doing one thing, so that he could add depth and intrigue to the story later on by giving us other details that make us question what we thought we knew initially. And clearly this strategy works, because here we are talking about it. So it's entirely possible that everything in Ch 3 was made to look like Reynardine was one thing, so that we could then learn over time that he was actually something else, and we were too quick to judge to begin with. I suppose a terrible example of the same idea would be Darth Vader. Lucas chose to tell the story in the order he did so that our initial impression of Vader was that he was this epitome of ruthless evil. And then as the story unfolded, you learn that he was actually just a confused, scared boy who lost his mother and got corrupted by the true evil (Emperor Palpatine) and in the end, you feel sorry for him and are glad that Luke was able to redeem him before his death. Like I said, probably not the best example given that Rey is nothing like Vader, but it's an example of the storytelling technique of changing your opinion of a character over time by carefully controlling what you see and learn, and when. And yeah, I'm aware that I've largely said all this already in this thread. But then most of the things that have been said in the last couple of days have been rehashes of previous posts too, as the thread is going through its own personal renaissance.
|
|