> Interesting, can you give a more detailed view on that one.
Probably not, really; the first depends on how the ritual of the Egi (first time, and/or all the other times) works, which I'm very vague about. My current guess is that some of the Egi, especially the first time, but to an extent every time, get 'magimixed' into the new Mask; other Ehi, I get the impression, particpate in a less direct way.
As far as the second point goes, I'm basically just saying that there's doubtless some Lunar mystery to the effect that the 7 Parts of TakenEgi can 'fully' fill more than 7 roles, to wit his Antirius portion is fully identified with Yelm, _and_ performing double-duty as whichever 'pure Lunar' port that also is (Veritherusa, right?), without contradiction. (i.e., with a bleedin' obvious contradiction, but one that doesn't bother the RE or said philosophers.)
> >Of course, outside of the DH worldview, and the DH-derived Lunar worldview
> >(and whatever bits of the Pelandan worldview survive worthy of the name)
> >all this guff about 7 (or 6 or 5) soul-parts is just so much lowlander
> >mental masturbation, as I'm quite sure the Carmanians, the hill barbarians,
> >the Char-Un, and whomever else will gleefully tell you, so take all
> >this viewpoint-itis with a pinch of salt...
> Though they to require the Emperor to take on the aspect of rule and that
> will require a soul part or magical commitment.
Yes, but the Char-Uns won't care which 'bit' of TakenEgi is being deployed in their rites, it's crucial only to people who have that sort of 'take'. i.e., the Dara Happans bang on about how it's his Vrimak portion that enacts such powers (say), while the CU's quoth "Whachutalkinbout, you toga-wearing puffs?"
> One of his soul parts
> (political!) might be Pelandan. Any thoughts on that?
The Pelandan soul-parts can likely be made to correspond to the DH 6 and the Lunar 7, in some loose sense, so a Pelandan account would be on those lines, I think. The Pelandans might have a view on which of 'their' five parts is the 'real core', which would be the one most 'identified with' their rites, if there's one left that he bothers with. (As opposed to the Pelandan traditions that have been hoovered wholesale into the Lunar religion itself.)
> >You keep saying that, and if you know precisely what it means, then I
> certainly
> >don't know what you mean by it, to grossly paragraph some movie or other.
> That
> >he's unique? Obviously.
> THANK YOU! You say obviously but I have seen no evidence of this being
> acknowledged at all by anyone. That is what I mean by singular. He is
> unique. He is one. He is alone and is not of a race or a people or a spirit
> group, he is a singular demigod and as such cannot be measured by purely
> human standards, which seems to keep happening.
I think he's entirely measurable by human standards, and is 'very big', is all... However, what bothers me is that we seem to have a large amount of 'semantic leak' from this sense to the possible other one, while I don't think they follow at all.
> By having a human part of
> him so prevalent, I think that this misses out the alienness of the Emperor
> to his subjects and for _me_ this is NOT MGF at all.
Any sufficiently powerful and sufficiently Illuminated 'mere human' cannot be readily distinguished from stuff sufficiently weird that some might use words like 'alien', perhaps, so I can't get exercised about this alleged distinction.
> >That he's an unchanging continuum? Obviously not, surely.
>
> Obviously not but it is not obvious enough that it doesn't need exploration.
> If he is not unchanging is he a continuum?
In a word, yes. The fallacy implicit in much of this discussion, IMO, is precisely that identity is a discrete commodity, and therefore whether 'Mask A is the same as Mask B' has a 'crisp' true/false answer.
Can Moonson bathe in the same river twice, as it were?
> I believe he is a continuum and this is a product of his singular nature.
Doesn't help me at all, sorry. He's unique: so what does this prove about him, exactly?
> I have believed in the past that the RMM model was based on the idea of
> mortal men taking on the mandate of heaven (sorry, of the moon) and becoming
> Emperor, the mandate being a set of powers that the Emperor gains but having
> little or no impact on his behaviour.
> They seem to be saying that that is not how it was at all. However, I've
> been told that all of this was GAG. It therefore perplexes me as to how I've
> managed to miss this GAG and see a different view expressed or implied, even
> though I've been on the digest five years and writing for Gloranthan product
> for 4.
I think the 'RMM GAG' is deeper than you present it as being, though when I assert something to be 'Obviously' true, you can attribute this to be down to my charming natural arrogance, rather than any insight into the RMM position...
> >You seem very keen to state in definitive terms what's not so in many cases
> >(not a noble, not a gestalt), if you're not certain what _is_ so.
>
> Yep, if you can define what he isn't then it really helps narrow the field to
> what he might be.
True, at least on some Holmesian level, though in this case the 'blowback' certainly seems to have exceeded any possible benefit...
> I do have to defend my position till argued out of it. I won't accept a POV
> unless it makes sense but if it makes more sense than mine, then I'll toss
> mine happily.
Fair enough. I'm just saying that if you flag the distinction between what you know you know, what you think you know, and what you know you just think, you may get people getting less Eastern Front on yo' ass... ("He has an entrenched position, men. Better bombard it with Katyushas for several days straight.")
> >As Martin
> >says, Imperial Succession isn't likely to be much of a HW theme, though
> >perhaps Imperial Seccession might be.
>
> Nicely put. Exactly right. Greg wants the Emperor rule to be percieved as
> continuous over the near 400 years of Empire so that when the collapse comes
> it will be the biggest disaster it can be.
Well, it's continuous, if you ignore the occassional 'minor Sheng incident', and the like... I don't think this materially affects how 'unchangeably ever-changing' the RE must be. Obviously the book shouldn't exactly 'play up' the uncertainty of what each Mask does, beyond the 'fortuity' of just the _right_ one coming along at any given moment... ("Sure he's the same Emperor, but he's so wildly different each time, he might as well not be!" "Lean closer, callow youth. *thwap*")
> >If we get a decent description of the role(s) of the Egi, and some hints as
> to the >Funky Complications that _could_ occur (or may have occurred) I'll
> be more than >happy.
>
> That will be about all there will be on it.
Sounding good to me, at least.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail