>Yes, I'm aware that the Dara Happans are said not to acknowledge
>the Compromise at all but why would Yelm want his worshippers to
>know he wasn't any better or more powerful than the rest of the
>gods)?
Peter Metcalfe says in response to this:
>Does the Invisible God tell his worshippers that he's bound by the
>compromise? Does Pamalt? Does the Dragon-Emperor? Does the Nidan
>Decamony? Then why do you assume Yelm must know of the Great
>Compromise but chooses not to tell his worshippers? It's like saying
>that Tolat knows of the City of Alkoth where he is worshipped but
>hides this fact from the Amazons of Trowjang.
Why do any of these deities have to tell their worshippers anything? It ain't a lie 'til it's denied.
>The appearance of an divine intellect which one can talk to is an
>artifact of the worshippers IMO. This persona only knows what its
worshippers know.
Personally I don't like this approach to religion. This is IMO a RW philosophical approach to religion and I like to imagine that there actually are deities that were once capable (allowed?) to do great things. I'm certainly not proposing that the nature of a deity is understandable or immutable but I don't think it's entirely dependent on its worshippers either.
> So yes, the Dara Happans do not acknowledge >the Great Compromise but this
is because the known >actions of their god
>translated into human terms does not include participating in any
>such compromise. The chief reason for this is because the Great
>Compromise is a World Council Myth IMO and reflects the New World
>Order (so sue me) in terms of the Interacial Unity that the Monsters,
>er, denziens of the World Council of Friends enjoyed. Thus Orlanth
>makes friends with Elmal, Arangorf and Kyger Litor.
>The Dara Happans view the New World Order in terms of the Sun bringing
>Justice back into the world. Thus Yelm orders his repentant servants,
>Kargzant and Shargash about to remake the world. In effect, they are
>describing the same thing. In practice, the terms that they use are
>geared towards sustaining their social system rather than the truth.
Okay, this I like-same thing, different name, same Gloranthan effects. I won't keep belaboring the point any more. I still think there's some ugly "truths" that Yelm would rather not mention to his worshippers but that's only my opinion.
BTW I think Michael Raaterova and David Weihe are bang on.
Ignoring my rather horrible and hastily written analogy from my last post here's how I see the situation now:
On a related matter in the case of worshippers acting against their deities nature, e.g. Lokymaydon (sp?) being the most notorious example two possibilities present themselves.
It all seems clearer to me now. (And I'm not even Illuminated (I think)-maybe I'd better go tray and join the Catholic Church and the Church of Satan to find out).
Oliver D. Bernuetz
bernuetz.oliver_at_cbsc.ic.gc.ca
End of Glorantha Digest V3 #275
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail