>1) What is surprising about this quest, given traditional concepts about
>Orlanthi vs Pelorians?
There are several 'traditional concepts' that come to mind, but I have to say that the ones that you are _probably_ referring to are the ideas of 1) Orlanthi as freedom-loving innovators and devotees of change, as expressed by the mythic importance of Movement and Storm as agents of change and 2) the Pelorians as the hide-bound lovers of stability and social immobility.
In the quest as described, the Orlanthi is the one who fears change and the (perceived?) entropy that it brings, while the Lunar embraces change bravely, and without fear.
>2). Who won?
This one is harder for me to answer.
Kerad, I think, didn't completely understand Second Son, as he acts out of his fear. Since Second Son was killed by Chaos (Correct?), I lean toward the idea that what he is trying to teach to those he initiates is bravery to face one's fate without fear, and the evil that such a fear engenders.
So from this point of view, Kerad loses, no matter what the Lunar has or has not accomplished.
>From a practical point of view, Kerad wins. He has power now. The power to
distinguish between right or wrong, good and evil. He also lives, while the
Lunar dies. That's power expressed in its purest form: the power to survive.
The Lunar can be said to win because she gets to experience the great cycle intimately - perhaps more intimately than she had planned. In any case, the barbarian proved his inability to become enlightened. Then again, if the Lunar was compassionate enough, she would see this as a failure of her own.
So I guess the answer is Kerad doesn't win because he thought he did, while the Lunar lost, because she won.
Does that make any sense?
DWRT
Powered by hypermail