Trolls and Chaos

From: Greg Stafford <greg_at_glorantha.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 15:39:00 -0800


Amigos,

The discussion about troll priorities and abstrations are itneresting, but I think that the critical point in my opinion are these:

>If chaos is "cultural"

The reaction against chaos is innate and natural, biological or hard wired, I think. It is loathsome and we react against it instincively. It's not something that we decide on. When a person looks at a corpse or a snake or a desirable member of the opposite sex then we have a biological reaction. Same for chaos, and it frightens and disgusts everything that is not chaos.

>(e.g., if chaos is seen as
>having different aspects in different societies, or
>taking different forms in different societies),

Remember that a lot of things that disgust and strike fear into a person are labelled chaotic by them, whether it is or not.

>this
>and marricide are IMO the #1 prime suspects to be
>labeled "chaotic behavior" by uz.
>For Sartarites, rape, cannibalism and murdering kin
>are all the stuff of chaos. For uz, marricide and
>"live" cannibalism are.

Yep, I agree about that, for trolls.

>The point I have in my own brain, at least, is that
>there are *lots* of bad things out there. A Solar
>disciple frying trolls and a chaos monster both
>bad.
>Neither "category" is "automatically worse" than
>the other.

Agreed, again.
AND THIS IS THE CRITICAL POINT.
What has more importance to the character at the moment? AS A SPECIES certain things provoke certain responses, AS A MEMBER OF A CULTURE, other things provoke certain responses, and AS AN INDIVIDUAL yet others responses are provoked.

SORTING THEM OUT IS THE STUFF OF STORY, and HQ is a STORY TELLING game.
>And frex, because no one noted it: is the Moonbroth
>thing completely non-canon? FWIW, if the freakin'
>Praxians can ally with Chaos, the "All chaos is bad
>chaos" argument seems flawed. But I remember it was
>TotRM, so it may not be canon...

The fact that EVEN Praxians may aly with chaos is one of those story-things! Teh conflict between long- and short-term benefits, or the conflict between ideals and practicalities.

>But I *don't* think Uz say "Chaos should be killed
>before anything else, because chaos is really
>gods-awful and must be slain."

Of course, some would, and mmany would not.

>I think uz say, "Chaos
>is something else we hate, which we hate for these
>reasons, and we kill it when we see it, because we
>don't like it." For *those* reasons, not the "destroy
>the universe" thing. It's *just another foe,* like the
>other foes they *like* to beat up and eat.

I do think that the trolls hae a visceral reaction against chaos, but as you said, two broos are not as much of a threat as an army of Yelmites, most of the time.

>I *understand* Sartarites to basically follow "Chaos
>should be killed before anything else, etc." I may be
>wrong on this, of course.

I think that Heortlings have the same sense of priorities as the trolls. A visceral reaction against chaos, certainly, but many would have to weigh the relative dangers of a few bross versus that army of trolls over there...

>>I don't think that Chaos being realy, realy bad is an
>>amazing, novel discovery that only Sartarites have
>>managed to work out.

I want to make my opinion clear: this is a piece of knowledge known to all non-chaotic things.

>No, but it's not "It's the worst thing in the
>universe, worse than anything else, ew, icky," either,
>which is how I'm reading your posts. It's bad. It's
>really bad. I don't think (for uz) it's the Worst
>Thing Ever, however.

I'll say again, the immediate situation weighs in on their actions. BUT they do, absolutely, have a gut reaction that chaos is icky, is a danger to existance, and is a worse threat than human beings on the long run.

>And Greg Wrote:
>>I am not sure that trolls rarely sweat abstract
>>questions. Perhaps this depends upon the subtle
>>meaning of "abstract" but I know that many
>>trolls DO sweat the abstractions.

>Heck, I may well be wrong, so good to know now!
>I'm going off something Sandy used to say about uz,
>that they tend to look at how something concerns
>*them* and their family, rather than an "abstract"
>quality of a thing. Knowledge is interesting because
>it affects a troll, not for its own quality.

This is a case of the immediacy of the threat.

MY POINT IS that trolls are fully CAPABLE of being abstract, that they do have knowledge and experience in this, and so on. BUTthe desperation of their lives leaves them less time for this, in most cases where they have to spend most of their time feeding their babies.
>To clarify, then, and to shut Andrew and I up
><laugh>,
>is it the canonical statement that most people in all
>cultures in Glorantha do regard Chaos as the Ultimate
>Foe before anything and all else? (And if not, who are
>the exceptions?)

"Regard chaos as..." is a variable thing. They do all have a visceral reaction.
Many folks (Westerners for instance) have had less immediate experience with it and don't perceive it to be as huge a threat as other forces. Again: it's the immediacy of the situation that makes the story.

--__--__--

Powered by hypermail