[Dragaera] Iorich ***SPOILERS**** First impressions

[Philip Hart]

On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Alexx Kay wrote:

>>
>>
>> On Mon, 11 Jan 2010, Alexx Kay wrote:
>>
>>>> 0
>>>> 1
>>>> 2
>>>> 3
>>>> 4
>>>> 5
>>>> 6
>>>> 7
>>>> 8
>>>> 9
>>>> 10
>>>> 11
>>>> 12
>>>> 13
>>>> 14
>>>> 15
>>>> 16
>>>
>>> and a bit more spoiler space...
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> A) Practical: Crime is an inherent part of human (and Dragaeran) society.
> having it be at least somewhat formalized and under Imperial jurisdiction
> is better than the alternative.

See my reply to Jon.

>
> B) Tradition: They've been around since the beginning of the Empire.  If
> the Empire is to override such an old tradition, what traditions remain
> sacred?
> C) Mystical: They're part of the Cycle.

Ok, I agree that the existence of the Jhereg is a necessary evil, but that 
still doesn't get to the question of whether their actions to the pretty 
clear detriment of the Empire should invoke the duty clause that comes up 
repeatedly in _Iorich_.

>
>>>> doesn't call in the Jhereg and say, "Vlad will die of being an
>>>> Easterner soon enough, in the meantime if any of you kill him every
>>>> single Jhereg will testify under the Orb that they weren't involved and
>>>> any who are will be handed over to Vlad's friends."
>>>
>>> Are you, by chance, an American?
>>
>> Are you, by any chance, familiar with the state of the Cycle?
>
> All the Houses are vividly aware that it *is* a Cycle -- and that they
> will spend their own time at the bottom of it.  This would make them, I
> think, very reluctant to allow such a precedent.

This is a fair point, but on the other hand there are other precedents 
being set - that the house at the top can be bullied by those at the 
bottom, that individual interest is more important than group interest.
I haven't argued this point before, but the context of _Iorich_ makes a 
big difference.


> Some of the gods support her under some circumstances.  We have evidence
> that the gods have a degree of loyalty to the Empire -- but not
> necessarily to the Empress, personally, nor to any specific policy of
> hers.  Nor are the gods monolithic, they have factions and disagreements,
> too.

I'm not seeing this in Paarfi at least post-interregnum.  Esp. since we're 
talking about Zerika protecting Vlad.


>> Sethra Lavode
>
> Again, loyal to the Empire, not the person in charge.  She's clashed with
> Emperors in the past.

Seems to me she's going to put the existence of a GW wielder and her most 
useful tool over the customs of the house at the bottom of the cycle.

>
>> and all of the top Dragons,
>
> All of whom have very strained relationships with her as of _Iorich_, and
> most of whom have shown willingness to defy her when it suits them.

But not Vlad, certainly not in the let-him-get-morgantied sense.  And 
those strains are due to the machinations of the Jhereg, as they are 
aware.

> Who has resigned from her service multiple time to express his extreme
> displeasure with her decisions.

And joined back up afterwards.  And who should understand the value of a 
Vlad.


>> to bring in the Tiassa representative and ask her how the
>> prophets in the house feel about allowing Vlad to be killed.
>
> I take issue with this phrase "allowing Vlad to be killed".  One of the
> fundamental laws of assassination (as presented in these books) is that,
> in the long term, it *cannot* be prevented.  She can (indeed, has) attempt
> to exert political pressure, but she can't actually stop them from
> eventually succeeding.

Ok, maybe here's a nexus of disagreement.  Afaict Zerika is doing nothing 
to protect Vlad - well, she does ask Laszlo to help at this late date, but 
as Empress she's not raising a finger.  That's "allowing" to me.  It may 
be a hopeless case (which I don't believe) but she could try.


> The question we've been debating is not "should she prevent Vlad's
> assassination" but "how should she *respond* to Vlad's assassination".
> Investigating is certainly called for, and if she catches the assassin (or
> even a reasonable patsy), she's allowed to execute him.  Harrassing and
> humiliating the entire *House* is another matter entirely.

I'm not saying she should do anything now except threaten the council, and 
I suppose the LH.  For that matter she can just remind them of the law, 
and remind them who Vlad's friends are and which side she and the Orb and 
the Phoenix guard and the army will take.

> The Lyorn would want there to be a traditional investigation to such an
> event.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is traditional.  Zerika's predecessor 
apparently was willing to act as judge, jury, and DA while not allowing 
free testimony by the accused, and I don't recall anyone raising a peep.

>> (ok, he's an Easterner, but at least he's not sleeping with one)?
>
> Actually, they would have no problem with Vlad sleeping with his own kind.
> His recent love affair with a *Dragaeran* might well reduce their
> sympathy for him.

This was just a joke.


>> Are the Dzur going to back the Jhereg
>> against a lone hero, who they hate preciesly for his heroism?  They're
>> going to screw the person who rode off a cliff for her convictions (on
>> behalf of someone who climbed down that cliff to help save someone he had
>> never met)?
>
> Valid points.  To the left, Dzur care a lot about their public image, and
> the precedent of humiliating an entire House would trouble them.

Do they think the Jhereg can be stained?  Well, ok, weigh that against the 
damage that Vlad personally prevented happening to them.


>> And is now going up against the CW?
>
> CW?  I miss the reference.

Sorry, "conventional wisdom".  Basically I'm saying that if you believe 
your argument the Dzur should disagree.


>> And perhaps you've forgotten Mellar, but they surely haven't.
>
> I am unconvinced of which way that memory would incline them to act.

Against their honor?  Do we have precedent?


>
>>> If Zerika were to do as you suggest, not only would the Jhereg scream
>>> (and
>>> likely perform) bloody murder, but every other House would see it as a
>>> completely unacceptable precedent.  Given the haughtiness and pride of
>>> the
>>> Dragons, it is almost inevitable that they would see this as proof the
>>> Cycle had turned
>>
>> Here I think you've got the sign wrong (that or A, M, and N aren't running
>> the house and whoever is doesn't mind setting a precedent that the Jhereg
>> get to have things their way)
>
> I don't know that A, M, and N would necessarily lead or join such a
> movement within the House.  But I am dead certain that such a movement
> would form within the House.  If the current heads didn't cooperate, there
> would be attempts to replace them.

Still seems to me that House Dragon doesn't exactly care much about what's 
good for the Jhereg, esp. after they got Aliera jailed.  How's that for a 
precedent?  They should be taking out the head of the council right now. 
I can't see the top people backed by Sethra not keeping the 
pressure off for Vlad's natural lifetime, at worst.


>> but if not, how is this an argument that
>> would or should sway Zerika?  If she's not running the Empire - if she
>> can't protect the guy who's saved her bacon three or four times in the
>> last few years - it's probably time for a change.
>
> You seem, again, to equate 'running the empire' with 'absolute power'.

I'm not claiming she had absolute power - I think she gets to say, Go 
about your business but you can't have x, I need him.


> Zerika seems to honestly want to serve the Empire to the best of her
> ability.  That doesn't involve pushing the limits of her power in a way
> that could easily lead to civil war.  She wants to (and apparently,
> eventually does) do as much good as she can, for as long as she can, then
> hand over power in an orderly fashion.

If she's been paying attention lately, Vlad is infinitely more useful to 
the Empire than the leadership of the Jhereg, which has in the last few 
years been willing twice at least to start a civil war itself.


>>> and they would probably get support from several other Houses.  Lyorn
>>> and Dzur for sure, possibly even Iorich (since this would be a big
>>> breach of normal applications of justice).
>>
>> Whereas allowing the Jhereg to use an illegal weapon with impunity on
>> someone with an Imperial title is normal justice?
>
> There's a *wide* gap between "with impunity" and "round them *all* up."
> Neither is normal justice.

First off, there's no justice with the Iorich at the bottom anyway, and no 
one expects it.  Second, see before.

> Your proposal (I argue), would lead to a revolt on the *highest* levels of
> society, a different matter entirely.

After _Iorich_ I (so far) disagree.


I should note that Vlad agrees with you - he believes, or says he 
believes, or says he says he believes, that having the Empire owe him 
doesn't help his problems.