Re: LBQ and souls

From: Alex Ferguson <>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2001 23:40:04 +0100 (BST)

Ben Waggoner:
> One MGF thought on all of the above is that the magic of the LBQ is that
> it doesn't always bring back the person you went after. Sometimes it might
> create a new entity based on the questor's expectations, or in the case of
> one on the course of losing their individuality, reshapes them in the form
> the questor anticipates (or fears). Arkat's ready adoption of Orlanthi ways
> after Harmast's rescue of him might be an example of that. And do we know
> if Talor was laughing before Harmast went looking for an anti-Arkat?

Yeah, I think there's some truth in that: if someone is dead "historically" rather than "recently", then resurrecting them begins to more and more resemble incarnating, heroforming, or simply positively recreating them. Unless other extraordinary magic is at work, the longer someone is dead, the less individuated they become, and the more they become one with their godhead, or even just dissipated into the undifferentiated stuff of the underworld. (Or some unclear combination of the two, arguably.)

OTOH, Sheng was "dead" a good long while, but then again, his Lunar Hell may have been rather more personalised that the generic underworldy fate that most people fall to, so perversely perhaps it was both harder (reaching that place in the first instance) and easier (discovering a relatively "intact" SS once there).

> And on another note, we know that CA resurrection is sort of a lesser
> version of the LBQ. Do we know what the rituals and myths behind
> resurrection is in other cultures that have that power? I'd be very curious
> to know how it comes out from a Yelmic perspective.

Well, from the PoV of Yelm Proper, it's also based on the "LBQ", but t'other way around... (Make your enemies grovel and beg, then Resurrect Self.) In the broader Pelorian/Lunar tradition, though, there are evidently significantly different takes, which I hesitate to speak off the cuff of...

Powered by hypermail