3372 Divine Tragedy
on August 7, 2020
Problem: Lady Marion’s narrative on the history of Ch’Thier and Ranna has decided that it’s now on a roll and fuck my carefully planned out YAFGC Silmarillion history timeline.
Conclusion: Either my timeline was put together by sadly misinformed YAFGC historians (Trevor must be annoyed) or Lady Marion is full of crap. Interestingly I think both would argue the opposite conclusion but I’m thinking I’m going to side with Marion. My mega-world-history needs to be revamped.
Part of me wonder if either mortals like ork-esque empathetic magic, or combination of role model and senility-equivalent.
"Every few decades"… gosh. That is unspeakably tragic. So it isn’t only that they forgot over thousands of years… they forgot within a span of a mortal lifetime, faster than ordinary people forget. The latent magic of the world, manipulated unknowingly by millions of clueless mortals, robbed two women of their agency and identity. Powerful though they be, Ranna and Ch’Thier were victims of their worlds’ nature. What does it profit a woman, to gain the whole world, but lose her soul?
Hopefully Marion’s story will help them break free of the cycle.
Eliyahu, you are assuming this is the first time she has told them this story.
Yeah. "Every few millennia," I could shrug off as (literal) first-world problems. "Every few decades" makes me sad.
The Gods Must be Senile…
I don’t think they lose their soul. "Just" identity and memories … and, probably not ALL memories, just the ones not compatible with what they followers believed in. Specifically, I think that Ch’Thier forgot Lady Marion so many times BECAUSE Lady Marion always told her something disturbing … and because she was disturbingly immortal.
And… how could a goddess have an aunt who is not also a deity?
Their aunt Marion is the goddess of music, tho. https://www.yafgc.net/comic/3363-the-goddess-falahn/ panel 4. That’s why she is still alive.
She is not a goddess though, she rejected that and chose to be a muse instead
Muses are minor deities. Tomato/tomato, potato/potato.
Just to clarify my point (or at least, my understanding), as that tends to get lost in translation at times: Marion rejected the *mantle* of godhood (and all the crap that comes with it) and chose to be a muse and continue to pass on the ‘magic’ of music
Still looking for facts in fiction? Just enjoy.
(I’ll probably regret posting this but what the hell…)
That was meant to be a reply to NotRichard.
If you meant to reply to the post from two days ago, that was to add to what HKMaly had posted and to explain why Ch’Thier kept forgetting who Marion was (and even who her mother was)
No, to the post immediately above, about 3 hours before. I get people are into the story, but they talk like it’s real. There comes a point where if you take something too seriously then you’re not enjoying it. I’ve never understood why people do this. It’s like exploring the genetic possibility of Humpty Dumpty.
God commit.
God push.
Too bad they pushed all the relevant info to a different branch.
Hmm, Marion mentions that she and Ch’Thier met for the first time many times, no mention if she ever met her other niece… ever
I kinda figure Marion might’ve been killed by Ranna and her followers as a source of joy and hope.
In case anyone wonders *how* they could have ‘pushed out most of the rival gods’? Simple: kill off, or convert, their followers
Or, as Ranna has demonstrated, "eat".
So, is not the first time they have "the talk" and seems like no change. Well, maybe at the one millionth…
Maybe by including some of their followers this time in the history lesson, might help them retain the knowledge (specially with the historians writing it all down)
That should be the idea, but as a muse, she could inspire the true or help another historians to find it out previously. But well, then we wouldn´t have had this history line XD
I don’t think there was ever THIS good opportunity even with Ch’Thier … it’s definitely first opportunity with Ranna.
Fascinating story, I’ve been reading it since the very beginning but just recently figured out you don’t really need an account to post.
If there’s another Hal-con, I might try and slip down to say thank you in person.
That’s very kind! Unfortunately we don’t do Hal-Con much anymore. We used to have a booth setup to sell books in the ‘Artist’s Alley’ section, but after we’d been regulars from Hal-Con 1 for a few years in a row, they decided to start ‘audtioning’ venders. And I didn’t pass the audition. I was bumped out for a bunch of out-of-towner shop mercs. So we just stopped going entirely. A couple of years ago my wife went on behalf of the university as an outreach thing and we attended the event on her free passes which was nice and the kids loved it. So /if/ we do Hal-Con again it’ll probably be as attendees rather than venders.
Unless my unemployment continues and it’s the only way I can try to get some money again, that is. Then I’ll reconsider ‘applying’ again.
Wow. Well crafted, Mr. Morris.
This is a whole different level of creepy… and I don’t see how they’re going to break the cycle.
Well presumably since this story will now be spread far and wide, it will be incorporated into their followers’ beliefs, and they’ll be able to remember it this time.
If only there was a famous historian here writing everything done so it can be passed on……………..
And if only all the followers will be willing to accept the truth as gospel truth, and not bury it beneath the old doctrine…
Well, for one thing they seem to have broken the world enough the magic is going away. That should help keep the mortals from using it to make the goddesses match their beliefs.
The problem with reaching the IPO stage is that "the company" becomes defined by shareholder consensus. The influx of power, in the form of money, is lovely…but what was, say, a widget company yesterday is, today, an investment vehicle in which widget manufacturing plays a role. It is, in many eyes, no longer about the widgets, really, at that point.
There are really two approaches to the problem of a corporate entity — and never has "corporate entity" been a more delightfully layered phrase than in this case — that has lost its identity: reconsolidation of control to a visionary CEO, or a broad appeal to the shareholders to place the company’s interests above their own immediate, short-term interests, and let it "find itself" again, with profit a secondary goal during this time.
I note quietly that Lady Marion is building an environment conducive to either or both approaches. And I smile.
I also smile because, while these are unmistakably Rich’s ideas, messages, and storytelling genius at work here, I can tell from it that he is a man who has indeed Seen The World. And that makes me very, very happy.
Well, there is also the option to do IPO which does NOT sell too big part of company, isn’t it? Seems the goddesses last this option.
Title and strip are in perfect synchronicity for this one.
And it fits like a glove…or in Ranna’s case, possibly a huge iron gauntlet with spikes all over it.
On top of this, it’s indeed tragic…differences of religious interpretation win again. To quote well-known sage and philosopher, Charles Brown: AUUUUGGHHHH!!!!
"How many times do I have to explain it to you over the millennia?" So these two have heard the story many times before, but are apparently incapable of remembering and/or changing. The last time it was settled by removing them from the mortal realm to the spiritual. This time I think it may be more drastic & permanent once the "super spell" is cast…on both of them!
So hear me out. The diminishing magic of the world? Might be beneficial, at least in this one respect. Less magic may result in mortals having less influence over the minds of these deities… or so I hope – this may be a chance for the cycle to end.
Less magic may result in those deities stop being immortal. Actually, it probably did, based on how little is known about this in future. No, less magic is NOT a good news.
Huh. So this is basically an *in-universe* example of retconning! 😀
So… is this the first time it occurred to her to tell the pair of them IN THE PRESENCE OF THEIR WORSHIPPERS?
Because that’s a pretty obvious solution. If changing the beliefs of the worshippers changes the deities, then all you need to do is spread new stories that modify the public perception.
Is that what Marion’s been up to, then? Is that the justification for taking so long? All this time spent on song and poetry and whatnot, just so she could do that? Like Edward and Alphonse’s father in "Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood?"
No, just first time to have ENOUGH of their worshippers around for it to work. Assuming it will work, of course.
Have you ever tried to change the beliefs of a worshipper? Even with hard evidence to prove that the world isn’t they way they want it to be?
Good luck with that.
Plus, even if the worshipper believe the facts as Marion presents them — "OK, the story really did happen this way" — that doesn’t change their moral beliefs. Lady Vanessa will believe as fiercely in good and healing tomorrow as she did this morning, and she’ll still see Ch’Thier as the one who has always embodied and championed those ideals…even if, intellectually, she’ll know that were you to rewind time a million years, things COULD have turned out differently.
The Rannites — the committed ones; what will happen next for the mind-slaves is a whole DIFFERENT question — will still exult in power and conquest, and unless Ranna renounces the role or is stripped of it by force, she’ll still be the goddess they rally around.
At best, convincing both the Twins and their worshippers of the true state of the cosmos will create an *opening* for change and reconciliation, but nothing approaching an *inevitability*. To take full advantage of that opening may prove more than these gods or these mortals are, for now, capable of.
When you have entire generations to work with, it’s a bit more manageable. Catch em young, when they’re listening to the new stories being circulated.
I suppose they could send a world wide email.
That is…extremely tragic. Their poor mother. Her kids forgot her before she even passed.
I wonder if they’re more easily changed by peoples beliefs because they were born as Gods.
I would say that was indeed the case. The other gods (that we have seen so far in this) grew to adulthood and had established personalities and minds before they became gods. So they had some small basis with which to resist being changed by their followers. But the twins were already gathering followers before they were out of childhood, and the beliefs of others changing them started before they were out of their teens, it appears. So they did not have established minds and personalities with which to resist that process, or push back against it. I imagine that made them uniquely vulnerable to being manipulated by their followers. The whole thing is truly sad, especially for their mother.
If they had been raised in seclusion, and not exposed to the belief of followers until they were adults, they might have had a chance, but as it is… in some ways, they are leaves on the strong wind of belief, pushing them in opposite directions. Walling them both off from the world might be the only chance for both them, and the world, to escape this cycle.
Somehow I suspect that there were not so unique, that there were other young goods who ended up the same, except these two were the most powerful.
Remaking actual gods into their own image, or at least what they wanted those gods to be.
I could see it actually.
I really like how the "good" vs "evil" is represented, is more historical than biblical. In fiction usually there is a good and bad side, but in the real world it tends more to be two diferent sides who do things in diferent ways and in the eyes of each band the others are wrong.
I love when a story sounds like something that could or has ocurred in real world, makes everithing more beliable. I know when I am going to like a story when it represent the antagonists as persons, not mooks to be smited by the selfproclamed good guys.
That Ch’Thier made the first direct move against Ranna is, well, logical. Ranna’s cruelty was now overriding her impulsiveness, but she was still chaotic at heart. The Goddess of ADHD before she became imprinted with meanness. Compassion can be a strong motivator, especially if it is still coupled with Ch’Thier’s innate sense of Order, that there’s a certain way things should be.
Ch’Thier (thinking): "I mean, I think I remember meeting *a* Lady Marion before, but this can’t be the same person. Wasn’t she almost my height?"
Ch’Thier became more *holy*.
There’s an interesting word choice for a polytheistic system.
In those monotheistic systems where the god represents or equates to capital-G goodness, holiness would perforce equate to Goodness. But in a polytheistic system, it would seem to me that all gods are holy, even the nasty ones. If the concept of ‘more holy’ were possible, perhaps demigods would be only *somewhat* holy.
But Ranna and Ch’Thier are twins, and therefore, I would have presumed, equally holy, by definition. Ranna eats gods and gets more *powerful,* and it seems that gods with more believers are also more powerful than other gods, but I would argue that power is very different from holiness. Further, Ranna seems to be at this time every bit as powerful as her sister, so power=holiness is clearly not the intended usage.
The Online Etymology Dictionary has this view:
"Primary (pre-Christian) meaning is not possible to determine, but probably it was "that must be preserved whole or intact, that cannot be transgressed or violated… "
which is very interesting because it suggests that the quality of holiness forbids outside tampering, which places the definition firmly within the context of human(mortal) behaviour – a proscribed behaviour which both sides have violated beyond the point of recognition.
t!
> it suggests that the quality of holiness forbids outside tampering, which places the definition firmly within the context of human(mortal) behaviour
Yes.
The Egyptian preoccupation with the Eternal Same as good, the idea that entropy is "evil" and the goal of "divinity" is to transcend the realities of change — the human elevation of the circle of firelight (the imagined-known, the imagined-controlled) over the frightening expanses of dark-and-uncertain outside of it — it is a very human quality, indeed, to vilify change, however natural, healthy, and important it is, because change shatters the illusion of environmental control.
There are so many intriguing consequences to interpreting the Egyptian Book of the Dead, specifically the Osiris/Set story, in light of these themes. I have a feeling that we’re in the middle of that grand story, again…told though the eyes and voice of a narrator able to rise above the "frightened creatures huddled in the firelight" prejudices of the ephemeral, mortal, and fleeting who crave permanence, without truly understanding the gift that being temporary is, and can be.
Rich is amazing. This may well be his finest hour in YAFGC. It eclipses even #480/#481. (Yes, I’m biased and a huge Sphynx of Temshutep fanboy. I know.)
It pleases me no end that you’re all enjoying this so much. It’s a concept I’m muddling through even while I’m writing it. I don’t have a focused enough brain to work it all out beforehand, you’re seeing my processing live, albeit in a strange narrative fiction form.
Well, maybe it’s a "holier-than-thou" kind of thing?
So, catching up from where I left off reading about a week ago… There’s three different pantheons from three different origins in a fantasy world I’ve been working on for a decade, and your Lady Marion explained how several gods in the third pantheon came into existence, through much of the story here.
I’m enjoying this immensely, and don’t even feel triggered- since that’s not a new concept, and since I first wrote it out ten years ago I’ve been introduced to at least one other book series that’s used the concept extensively. I think it’s a core part of how a lot of people understand how faith evolves over time; regardless of whether it is monotheism or pantheon based.
I wonder how many people shuffle Holy as the concept of being ‘good, right and sacred’ into Godly(meaning of god) together as though they are a single thing. I always considered them separate, and whether you do or don’t can explain a lot about your worldviews.
Re: Conclusion
I’m a little confused with what you (Rich Morris) posted in the description. Are you saying that both Trevor and Lady Marion would argue that she’s full of crap, but you believe in Lady Marion’s recitation of events?
And couldn’t it be a touch of both (historians are inaccurate and Lady Marion misremembers some stuff)?
Either way, can’t wait to see what you come up with!
P.S. Is your choice in any way affected by your admiration for the inspiration for Lady Marion? 😉
Trevor wouldn’t ever do such a thing as to suggest that Lady Marion was full of crap. If he were forced to consider differences in the historic accounts and have to say which he thought were more accurate, he would probably confuse you with rhetoric without committing either way because he’s a firm believer that there are different ways to view reality. Rancourt can probably explain it better.
I’d meant to say that historians (less "Trevory" ones) would argue that Marion is full of crap. Marion would argue that the Historians (again, the non Trevoresque variety) are mistaken, and that she’s recorded true events through recitation, poetry, song and personal experience.
Personally I’m inclined to side with Marion, mainly because (a) she was there, (b) she’s more divine than mortal Elf, and (c)it’s a better story than the one I’d scribbled on the original version of the timeline.
My personal respect for Heather Dale here notwithstanding and irrelevant anyway.
I don’t believe Marion is ‘full of shit’, she is just relaying how she saw things, doesn’t mean she got it correct seeing how she wasn’t there for *everything*
My dad was a cop, and he would often say: interview two eyewitnesses to the same event and you will get three different answers
Historians claiming Marion is ‘full of crap’ will most likely be ones who strongly believed one thing and Marion is telling them something else
Trevor is one of the good ones: he just wants to record *everything*, and the more people he can talk to the better his records will be (*he* won’t ‘edit’ the reports to suit an agenda or view)
Ah, so that’s why you defended the cops.
What cops?
…nevermind.
> Rancourt can probably explain it better.
I think you sell yourself short, sir, but I’m happy to weigh in, especially with an invitation as clear and as generous as that!
If I know Trevor, he would gently assure the gentle querent that seeking the truth was a noble, even commendable endeavor, and one quite near and dear to his heart…but that, as one recorded history, one needed to be aware that every voice was "history," including the conflicting ones. Furthermore, he would assert, remembering the disagreement was even more important than forming judgment of which of many dissenting voices was "correct" — as, after all, they all were "correct" in that they expressed the sentiments and beliefs of someone involved. The story of a conflict, of a disagreement, is told *through* the differences in recollection, in the discrepancies, in what one party thinks is "important" and what another party believes is inaccurate. History, he would assert, is not simply a record of what is true, but rather, what was believed, was held dear, what motivated the people of the past, what they lived and died for. "Is it the duty of the chronicler to remember the past only through consensus? I should hope not…"
I think he would be inclined to lend great weight a first-hand eyewitness, certainly…but might very carefully venture that here, we had three *divine* eyewitnesses, and three very different recollections of "how things happened." None of the accounts, not even Lady Marion’s own, can be said to be "complete," as they are — and he would note this observation comes from the deepest respect and deference — perspectivally bound. "The act of becoming an observer itself informs, and also limits the reach of, the narrative of observation…and this," the little librarian observed, "is a glorious and frustrating thing, is it not?"
Yes, I think he would like to speak for himself, to conclude this. I yield the floor, and the "mic," to him.
"And so, you see," he murmured, scaling his favorite ottoman by the fireplace with effort and patience, "I would countersuggest that history is not, in fact, determined by consensus…if historians have anything to say about the matter. And it is not at all that the our Lady Marion of Heatherdale is an unreliable witness in the least! No, no, goodness me, perish the thought!" He made a brief warding gesture against the suggestion. "Simply that there is history in her memories…and in those of both of her nieces. Just as Leland and I heard the same words spoken on the same day…and yet, this manuscript is so much richer for being the superset of all of our recollections, and observations thereupon."
A little sigh, and he concluded with a rustle of waxed paper. "I do believe this is an occasion for hibiscus tea…and perhaps even a piece of crystallized ginger, if you don’t think it too decadent for this early in the day." A ghost of a smile, then he added with the suggestion of a wink, "…and if it is…well, I won’t tell anyone if you won’t!"
Awesome! Thank you Rancourt and Trevor for weighing in! Always a pleasure to have you over.
My thanks as well to the two of you (Rancourt and Trevor), and to you as well, Rich Morris. Not sure that I entirely followed that little exposition, but that speaks more of my limitations than any of yours.
I trust your judgment in determining the quality of stories, and look forward to seeing this one unfold.
And Trevor? My lips are sealed. 🙂
The above was meant to be a reply to Rancourt’s Aug 10 2020 6:29PM entry.
> I trust I trust your judgment in determining the quality of stories, and look forward to seeing this one unfold.
That was for you, Rich.
My understanding of ‘holy’, particularly in the ancient Hebrew times, was more akin to "set apart, different, other worldly". So not necessarily good or evil either, just different from the day-to-day.
Needless to say, if a god is being made to be more and more of a paragon of purity and righteousness by their followers beliefs, they will naturally become more different from the day-to-day experience of life and tragically are more likely to lose connections to that experience, e.g. remembering having a mortal parent…
The memory thing reminds me of the "War of the Gods" experiment, where a researcher told a story to the participants, and noted how their memory of the story changed to match their worldview over time.
The problem I have with this is how the hell does it even happen? We are supposed to believe that the mother of the goddess isn't going to be a central part of her religion? *Especially* while she is still alive! It would be like people forgetting that the virgin Mary existed, and *she's* been dead for two thousand years.