MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 231 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Companions and mindspeech by "Sanna Koulu" 2) Re: reality by AnneS3832-+AT+-aol.com 3) Re: reality by Rosario Holsen-Baker 4) Re: Blue Eyes by Irene Chen 5) Re: mindspeech revisited... (technical complaints) by Anne Cross 6) Re: Companions and mindspeech by Anne Cross 7) Re: Companions and mindspeech by Tammy Harris 8) Re: Van's bardic gift by Heather Mina 9) Re: Talia's Empathy by Heather Mina 10) Re: Van's Bardic Gift by Heather Mina 11) mind-deafness by Heather Mina 12) rules of mindspeech and how we know them by Heather Mina 13) Re: bardic gift by Heather Mina 14) Re: mindspeech revisited... by Heather Mina 15) Re: Companions and mindspeech by Heather Mina 16) Re: Van's Bardic Gift by Heather Mina ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:10:57 EET From: "Sanna Koulu" To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: <1217BC37751-+AT+-otdk.helsinki.fi> Jerry wrote: > > Therefore we > > might say that in all the cases of different culture Mindspeakers > > there has been enough common language to dress the transmitted idea > > in words. > > Or of course, if you give me enough proof to the contrary, I'll even > > believe you... > > > > > > -Seanna > > OK - how does your theory explain Eldan's Gift of animal mindspeech? > and that's *mindspeech* not *empathy*, and they *do* know the difference. Hmm? You mean there's a specific Gift called animal empathy? My theory is, Empathy is primarily emotions, but pictures and words are also transmitted, if they are tied to emotion. Mindspeech is primarily words/ideas, but it can also transmit pictures and emotion, though not as well as Empathy. Remember how Savil described the "apple-feeling of laughter" in Lendel's mind-voice in MPawn (page hundred-something). Animal mindspeech transmits just the ideas -not words-, since the animals generally don't have anything resembling a human language. Animal empathy (if that's what you meant) would transmit emotions, not ideas or words. > Since I can't see how there can possibly be any common language between > a herald and forest animals, that looks like strong evidence that > language is not a relevant factor in mindspeech How so? I theorize that language is being used in human-human (or kyree or Need or whatever) Mindspeech, but that it's also possibe to transmit just the ideas. Therefore animal Mindspeech would just be restricted to the image-level. (I'm thinking here of Darkwind and Vree, who used a lot of images in conversation even though Vree was smarter than a normal falcon and probably knew some Tayledras.) I think the theory works perfectly well. > and that (speculating > somewhat) it's bypassing the meaning-to-sound and sound-to-meaning stages > and transmitting meaning directly - which would typically provide identical > results to normal speech between people using the same language. > (word->meaning->meaning of same word). I disagree here. Even two speakers of the same language don't use the words exactly alike. (In other words, the meaning-to-sound transfer is different for different people). And, all languages don't have concepts for the same things. To simplify, you'd say that transmitting poetry is impossible? (to take my example) Since you couldn't send the words. If meaning was transmitted directly and then rephrased into words in the receiver's mind, there wouldn't be any misunderstandings, right? I can't remember any specific examples, but I think there's been situations in which the receiver has understood the message (slightly) differently than the sender meant, or has had to ask for clarification. One related instance is in SW when Karal is talking to the painter; he remarks in Mindspeech to Altra that "sebeline is not a valdemaran word". How could he make a statement about the word "sebeline" in Mindspeech, if Mindspeech didn't transmit the word itself but only the meaning (blue-white pigment)? -Seanna ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 06:51:06 -0500 From: AnneS3832-+AT+-aol.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: reality Message-ID: <951115065103_84761112-+AT+-mail06.mail.aol.com> reality?? ::looking about, under table, in closets:: sorry, nothing like that hanging about here . . . . . ::Oh, STOP that, Chosen- they will think you unbalanced:: yeah, like they won't eventually . . . . . :) Anne |\ _,,,---,,_ /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ annes3832-+AT+-aol.com |,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-' '---''(_/--' `-'\_) "Shared pain is lessened, shared joy doubled"- S. Robinson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 07:41:45 -0500 (EST) From: Rosario Holsen-Baker To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: reality Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995 AnneS3832-+AT+-aol.com wrote: > reality?? > ::looking about, under table, in closets:: > sorry, nothing like that hanging about here . . . . . > ::Oh, STOP that, Chosen- they will think you unbalanced:: > yeah, like they won't eventually . . . . . > :) > Anne |\ _,,,---,,_ ::See, Chosen? Now will you stop complaing at me?:: Only if you stop messing with my mind! ::...All right. All right. I suppose if Sayvil can break the rules, so can I.:: Thank you! ::Though I'm still not going to tell you any of the things you forgot before...:: Lavaan! ::Just a joke, Chosen. :: Razzum frazzum... |-------------------------------<>-------------------------------| | "So, so you think you can tell/Heaven from Hell | | Blue skies from pain/Can you tell a green field | | From a cold steel rail/A smile from a veil | | Do you think you can tell?" | |------------------------------------------------------------------------| ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 08:11:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Irene Chen To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Blue Eyes Message-ID: > Just another thought, who here has seen Aladin? And who here has Thought I'd stick in an unsolicited opinion here about Pocahontas which leapt to mind: it sucked. Now THAT was a horrible movie. About the mindspeech/empathy debate, I tend to think that all of the Gifts are really just different ways of channelling mind-magic energy, not necessarily different and discrete kinds of energy, so there's a lot of overlap in terms of what can be done or communicated through each Gift, since the Gift is just the "tool" for what's done by the mindmagic/power of the Gifted person. So depending on the peculiarities of the individual, mindmagic may better channeled in some ways than in others, giving rise to superficially distinct Gifts. Fair skies, Irene lintball ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:02:18 -0500 (EST) From: Anne Cross To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: mindspeech revisited... (technical complaints) Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Melanie Dymond Harper wrote: > Sanna said: > > 1) I'm very new to this mailing-list thing, but still, I think > > conversation would be a lot easier if people, when reading long > > postings which make a lot of different points, would answer each point > > (or subject) with a different posting. Oh no, please don't do that. PLEASE don't do that... I'd have to drop off the list if you did that and then I'd be really unhappy... Lots of posts in my mailbox that are one liners makes me go through and delete -everything- without reading it and that's not good or fun. It also makes me irritable and frustrated. > Nonononono. Please. > (One-liner posts in general are a Bad Thing.) Very Bad Things. (Somewhat tired because the Play isn't over yet and I'm not going to have any free time until next January...) ____________________________________________________________________________ | Anne Cross | "How many witches does it take | | juniper-+AT+-fledge.watson.org | to change a lightbulb?" | | http://www.watson.org/~juniper/ | "What do you want to change it into?" | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:08:16 -0500 (EST) From: Anne Cross To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Sanna Koulu wrote: > Jerry wrote: > One related instance is in SW when Karal is talking to the painter; > he remarks in Mindspeech to Altra that "sebeline is not a valdemaran > word". How could he make a statement about the word "sebeline" in > Mindspeech, if Mindspeech didn't transmit the word itself but only > the meaning (blue-white pigment)? Sebeline is the name of a specific pigment, and do you translate your own name? If it is something like Firesong, your thoughts my convey and image of (pardon me) a singing fire, but if your name is something mundane like, oh, Anne (;), you wouldn't translate that into Lady, would you? Because the name Anne is really a particular sound that, when spoken about me, means "Anne, the woman at Wellesley with the really long hair who does theater a lot and..." and so on from there. It doesn't mean anything but me, but you cannot translate me into a single word. ____________________________________________________________________________ | Anne Cross | "How many witches does it take | | juniper-+AT+-fledge.watson.org | to change a lightbulb?" | | http://www.watson.org/~juniper/ | "What do you want to change it into?" | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 10:52:07 -0500 From: Tammy Harris To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: <5F8B89B06E3-+AT+-medicine.dmed.iupui.edu> Hi All! On Wed, Nov 15, Seanna Koulu wrote: > No we haven't. I still disagree. Strong Mindspeakers can bespeak > whoever they want to, and if Rolan doesn't bespeak Talia, then he > either cannot (too weakly Gifted) or will not (which I think is > illogical and stupid). So there :) I disagree that Rolan was a weak Mindspeaker. He was able to Speak with Gwena when she was in k'Sheyna vale. When Vanyel was in Forst Reach, he contacted Haven via Mindspeech. I don't have the quote, but, IIRC, it was a definite stretch of his abilities, and he was a *very* strong Mindspeaker. The vale is considerably further from Haven than Forst Reach, so it stands to reason that since Rolan was able to reach the vale, he was a strong Mindspeaker, not a weak one. You could make the argument that I'm comparing a human and a companion, but Mindspeech is Mindspeech. Seanna also wrote: > How so? I theorize that language is being used in human-human (or > kyree or Need or whatever) Mindspeech, but that it's also possibe to > transmit just the ideas. If transmitting just ideas is possible, it negates your belief (in an earlier post) that Mindspeech requires a common language. And even if a common language were needed (and I'm not saying it is), I don't think it makes sense to learn Tayledras when the kyree in question live north of Valdemar. [BTW, specific quotes, while very helpful, are not always possible. I have to do my posting from work, and I can't keep all of Misty's books sitting on my desk (much as I'd like to : )).] tammy "It's time to ask yourself what you believe." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:26:50 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Van's bardic gift Message-ID: <9511151627.AA27882-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Mikkel Larsen writes: >The taken must obviously be Tylendel. In comparison the Bardic Gift would be >a pittance, but there is no mention of relative strength. True, but the taken is also Van's youth (squandered at trying to be what he was not) and Van's opportunity at becoming a Bard. It seems to me that Van and the other Herald-Mages would be far too busy to allow themselves the luxury in training themselves in control of the Bardic Gift, so I don't see Vanyel ever getting to the Bardic Collegium for training. >I wonder too. Did he ever use the Bardic gift????? I don't remember any >mention of it, in Highjorune he poses as a minstrel *not* as a Bard and >minstrels does not have the Bardic Gift. There is never a guarantee whether a minstrel - especially outside of Valdemar - has or does not have the bardic gift. Someone with a mindgift, or someone very sensitive to mindgifts, would have to hear the minstrel perform and see him exercise his gift to know. But I don't think Misty ever definitely says that Van uses his bardic gift. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:26:53 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Talia's Empathy Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27883-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Alice wrote: > However, in Talia's case, I think her empathy alone (whether she >has mindspeech or not) COULD let her "hear" words. It seems that her empathy >is more than just receiving emotions...it is more like her living the other >person's life from their perspective, a walking in their shoes kind of thing. > Therefore, part of that perspective is words, and when she is strongly >receiving, really one hundred percent there, like with the Neave scenario she >was caught up in or Ylsa's death, it is as if she were really there, tasting, >smelling, hearing, feeling everything from the other. Including what speech >they hear. This would also explain why she would want to trance down with >Rolan. Were she in trance, she wouldn't hear him speaking, but it would be >as though his thoughts were hers, she would experience a situation from his >perspective and fully understand (as with scene in AoQ when she first >discovers Rolan in her mind, off in Companion's Field, when her vision >changed and she could see what he saw and feel what he felt). What do the >rest of you think? I think this is an elegant and well thought-out contribution to the discussion. I think that maybe we should all hit our dictionaries and see how 'empathy' is defined... Heather +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:26:41 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Van's Bardic Gift Message-ID: <9511151627.AA27881-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> >On Tue, 14 Nov 1995, Sanna Koulu wrote: >> Indeed, that's just what I've been talking (ranting?) about. I prefer >> to think Misty made a mistake in that, rather than think that the >> books (or Vanyel) are less than perfect. I mean, if Vanyel did have >> the Bardic Gift, the books should have told us how he felt about it, >> how it affected his reaction to Medren and so on. and Chonni replied... >It's entirely possible, given Vanyel's despair at not becoming a Bard, >that after he developed the gift, he subconsciously blocked himself from >using it. This was my point. Van's bardic gift is tied up in far more pain than the other ones, with the combination of his abuse at the hands of his father and Jervis, PLUS the added pain at the death of his lifemate. This is why I subscribe to the theory that Van never consciously realized that he had the Bardic Gift, and may have used it without conscious control. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:26:58 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: mind-deafness Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27884-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Alison wrote: >Maybe most of the people we think are minddeaf actually do have a trace >of the gift, even if their "deafness" is stated flat out. They may not >have enough of the gift for it to make any sort of difference to any but >the most powerful mind speakers. As an analogy, maybe it's like the >difference between being blind and being "legally blind". So a person >could be pronounced minddeaf but have a teeny tiny bit of "hearing" anyway. Good point, and one that I had been trying desperately to make, but just didn't have the words. (And I apologize if you are a 2-L Allison instead of a 1-L Alison. I had already deleted everything before I typed your name back in...) +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:27:07 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: rules of mindspeech and how we know them Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27902-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> In response to the following questions from jenneke, I am laying out what I have learned about the "rules" governing mindspeech (and magic in general) in Misty's Velgarth texts. >>As for mindspeech being a device, of course it's a device. The question >>is whether it's a poorly or inconsistently used device or whether there >>are consistent rules which can be deduced from the way in which it >>appears in the novels. Upon what basis do you expect the use of >>mindspeech to be other than what appears in the novels? Where does it >>say that Companions *can*not (not do not) speak to those without >>receptive mindspeech? Is your insistence that Misty's use of the device >>is inconsistent based upon material in the novels or preconceptions from >>outside the novels? I claim that mindspeech has ben defined somewhat, although not completely in Misty's novels. In order to deduce the "rules" for mindspeech, we must look at what we know from the texts. The first thing we have is the actual language Misty uses in referring to mindspeech. So we have the terms "mindspeak", "farspeak", and "thoughtsense". Just the existence of these terms implies at least two flavors of projecting one's thoughts (mindspeak would be a normal conversation; farspeak would be projecting one's thoughts over a great distance), and at least one flavor of receiving thoughts from other people. Then we must analyze the terms used so that we know what those terms entail. The term "mindspeech" implies two ideas. The first is "mind", so we know that this is not out-loud communication, but something shared with the minds of the people involved. The second is "speech", which implies words and mutual understanding of language. The term "farspeak" is similar to "mindspeak", but with different implications. The "mind" idea is not there anymore, but since farspeaking is a mindgift, we can infer that it still takes places within the mind. The "far" part implies that we are covering some significant distance, and the fact that farspeaking and mindspeaking are two different things implies that not all mindspeakers can necessarily cover great distances in their communications. The "speak" part again implies words and language. The term "thoughtsense" is much more vague. Thoughts have never been clearly defined, and could be argued to include words, feelings, and physical sensations. And sensing does not necessarily mean active participation, but could just be passive participation in the communications. I "sense" my clothing, although I am not actually reaching my hand out to feel it. Likewise, when a thoughtsenser senses somebody's thoughts, it may or may not be a deliberate action. The second thing we know about mind communications is how it is presented in the text. Typically, when characters in Misty's books use mindspeaking techniques, she utilizes the : delimiter, rather than the " delimiter. Therefore, when a character does this :Hi, my name is Heather:, we know that was projected using mindspeech, as opposed to "Hi, my name is Heather", which was said out loud. This is important, because absolutely EVERYTHING placed with the colons is speech, in a specific language (down to idiomatic expressions in OTHER languages, like the term 'ashke', which flavors Savil's, Lendel's, and Vanyel's speech throughout the Magic trilogy). This supports the idea that "mindspeaking" utilizes actual language, as well as the idea that a thoughtsenser would have to know the same language as the speaker. If there were translation (as postulated in another post), then we would never see the foreign idioms popping up; these would be translated as well, so "ashke" would always be something like "dear". (In fact, I believe that emotions and pictures were represented with < and >, although that might be a different author. Can anyone look it up in a text for me?) The final things we pick up about mind-to-mind communications are things that Misty says in her expositions, and things the characters think or say. We know the following things from the text: 1. Companions typically speak mind-to-mind (exclusively) with their Chosen. We also know that Companions can speak mind-to-mind with other humans and non-humans, as well as amongst themselves. 2. Some mindgifted humans (and non-humans - although nobody has raised the possibility that mindspeaking and/or thoughtsensing might be inherent characteristics of a nonhuman race) can speak mind-to-mind. There are many examples of gifted humans mindspeaking other mindgifted humans (and nons), as well as a few examples of gifted humans (and nons) who mindspeak other humans (and nons) that either claim to be non-gifted, or we don't know are non-gifted. 3. It is implied (but definitely far from proven, no matter how beautiful the idea is) that Companions and firecats are spirits of deceased Heralds and priests of Vkandis. It is outright stated that both Companions and firecats are sent by their respective deities to help the worthy mortals to protect their people. It is implied that all Companions and firecats have mindgifts, at least of communication, maybe the mage-gift as well. (Caution: this is a broad generality, meant to apply to all Companions and firecats. This is not meant to say that an individual cannot have the mage-gift, just that we cannot know from the text that ALL of them do). 4. Rolan and Talia both complain about their lack of actual mindspeaking. (However, we know that her empathy provides a very elegant and efficient means of communication, which only really differs from mindspeech in that it does not use actual words). 5. Mind-gifts are sought out and trained only in Valdemar. (Well, we don't really know about Iftel). Many mage schools seem to be uncomfortable with mindgifts, and some nations even forbid their use. 6. The Herald-Companion bond strengthens gifts of all sorts. Since Kethry actively sought a familiar to strengthen her mage potential, it can be postulated that strong spiritual bonds of any sort (lifebond, twin bond, she'enedren bond, goddess bond, soul bond, mage-familiar bond) strengthen gifts. (Note: again, I said "postulate", not "prove". This means that there is probably textual evidence to support this theory, but I am not prepared to look it all up and give it to you right now). 7. Using any mindgift or magery is extremely tiring for the user. The Companion bond passively provides some additional energy to the gift-user (again, it could be postulated that any strong bond could do this), and the Companion can actively channel energy to his Herald if he chooses to do so (likewise other strong bonds, maybe). A further deduction from this is that there is a definite limit to the amount of use an individual's gift can take before s/he must stop and recharge. This limit can be extended if several individuals are working together or channeling energy to each other. 8. "Blood magic", the killing or causing pain to a creature in order to utilize the energy released in such acts, is also possible. There is textual evidence that supports the use of blood magic for channeling energy to feed a mage-gift. Since a Herald would never perform blood magic, we do not know whether blood magic can give energy to a mind-gifted person. Well, my mind is getting tired now, so I will get off my soapbox and let you all contribute your ideas. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:27:15 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: bardic gift Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27904-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Seanna writes: >"Talent" in that meaning means ability to sing and play; it's >"mechanical" and can be practiced. Talia has also that; she is said >to have a "true" voice, and can play the pipes... actually I think >she has more than "just a trace" of that kind of talent. I think >"Talent" here is used in a different meaning, since AotQ was written >first. So I still think "Talent" here means "Gift", especially since >the root meanings (and the capitalization, which Misty uses to >connote magic!) of the words are the same. Remember that the three prerequisites for entrance to the Bardic Collegium are Talent, Creativity, and Gift. You have to have two to get in, unless you are the heir to a noble house (as Van was), in which case you must have all three. Therefore, Talia has Talent, but no Gift. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:27:03 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: mindspeech revisited... Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27901-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> jenneke's counter-arguments: >I would respectfully suggest that you reread the sections you're >referring to, as you've come up with several wild theories that have no >basis in the texts. Sorry, but I take most of my ideas from a broad view of Misty's texts as a whole. Since I don't keep them all on my desk at work (that would look pretty strange to my manager, don't you think?), I don't have them with me to cite references. But, having read all of the books at least three times, I have a very good idea of common themes and threads throughout all the stories. Maybe you should adopt a big-picture view, while you attempt to listen to my ideas with an open mind? >She doesn't have to trance down to get words, either, if the carrying >emotion is strong. Or do you deny that she got words, as well as images >and emotions, from both Nevan and Ylsa? In both cases, she was in trance. When Talia experiences Ylsa's death, she was in her room in a trance sending her mind around the outside world. In class, Ylsa had her in at least a partial trance, so that Talia would be more receptive to thoughts/emotions coming in. >Also, Ylsa says that Talia has >at least a trace of thoughtsensing, and there's never any evidence that >she doesn't, aside from your assertion that those who don't mindspeak >with their Companions have no trace of the Gift at all. Ylsa ASSUMES that Talia has the thoughtsensing Gift, because projective empathy like Talia has is practically unknown among Heralds. Therefore, her statement that Talia has thoughsensing must be taken with a grain of salt. (Example, a child who has been in a hospital room all his life sees the white ceiling above him, and assumes that the sky is white as well. So when he tells his nurses that the sky is white, it is a perfectly valid statement *based on his assumption*, in spite of the fact that it is incorrect). Now I am NOT saying that Ylsa was completely wrong; I'm just saying that her statement is based on a faulty assumption and therefore must be considered in light of that assumption. My assertion that Talia does not have thoughtsensing is based on the fact that she cannot receive thoughts from outside when she is blocking out emotions (see earlier posts about words being part of an experience Talia is sharing with her empathic gift), and Rolan's continuing frustration about not being able to communicate verbally with Talia. >Not "mindspeaking your Chosen," but "mindspeaking your Chosen if s/he >doesn't have more than a trace of the Gift in non-emergency situations." >Is it really so difficult for you to comprehend that the Companions, >especially the Companion from whom the rest take their direction, might >have abilities that they don't exercise in the normal course of events? But Rolan does not even mindspeak Talia in emergency situations! It would seem that, even if it is possible for them to share words, the price of this (Talia in a trance, Rolan expending *lots* of energy to accommodate for her lack of receptiveness) would be too much to pay - ESPECIALLY in an emergency situation where attentiveness and time are crucial. >> Rolan doesn't mindspeak Talia because she can't hear him. Now mindspeaking >> other people who are not your Chosen (like, oh, Dirk and Elspeth) is just >> 'not done' unless there is a grave need. But Rolan does this anyway. He's >> not so tradition-bound that he would be bound by 'just not done'. >I believe you're the only one who insists that everyone who can hear the >projections of a projective MindSpeaker *must* have the receptive Gift. >Further, from what *I've* read, Rolan is quite tradition-bound, stepping >out of 'what's done' only in the direst of emergencies. And that's exactly what I said. My question arises in where the tradition comes from that dictates that you don't mindspeak your chosen in ordinary situations. >> >Bzzzt. Kyree communicate with Vanyel via mindspeech, in spite of the >> >fact that they don't share a language and the fact that the kyree >> >language isn't even close to Valdemaran (or Shin'a'in). And the theory >> Bzzzt back at you again! The kyree communicate with Stefen, and not through >> mindspeech!!! I did not mean to imply that the kyree were former human > >Sorry, the last five times I've read it, it sure *looked* like MindSpeech >to me. But perhaps you're reading different books than I am. I apologize for that one; I was incorrect. >You may be able to understand a howl, but not to the extent of picking up >sarcasm, unless you're much more gifted than I am, and we have repeated >instances of Warrl's using sarcasm and Tarma having no difficulty >understanding him, even early in their acquaintance. Further, although >you have difficulty with the idea of MindSpeech being at a more basic >level than verbal speech, I don't. Especially given the "pre-echo" as >Kero calls it, I can easily imagine that MindSpeech is closer to the >level of ideas than of words. The difference in thought patterns between >speakers of different languages are more likely to result in the sorts of >assumed understanding that we see, while complete inability to understand >would show up in confusion which we *never* see. Listen to me very closely here. Mindspeech is called mindSPEECH for a reason. It would be called something else if it did not involve words being strung together into ideas for another person to hear directly in their mind. This is one of the rules that writers learn. If you are going to use a word, then you think carefully about its implications to your story, especially when you are defining how magic works in your story. Misty does not call it "thoughtcasting" , but "mindspeech". Now, she does call the receptive form "thoughtsensing", which I would place at a more basic level than "mindspeech", since thoughts and speech are entirely different things. However, most of my thoughts involve language. The ones that don't are things like frustration, love, anger ---> emotions. What about you? (Come on, I think you can open your mind enough to at least consider this point) And as I recall it, Kero's pre-echo is someone forming the words in their mind that they are about to say out loud. Now, while some people I know may not think before they open their mouths (or type on their keyboards), I do. >> Sorry, but you're making a bad assumption. We are never told that the >> "spirit" of the Monarch's Own Companion is the same one throughout the >> years. What are you using as your basis for this assumption? >This came up months ago. The general gist was that we have no idea how >many MOCs there have been, and, since Companions can "go around" more >than once (reference: Florian in _SR_), there's no reason why there would >have to be more than one, except prehaps the spirit's frustration at >having to deal with thickheaded humans without beating them over the head >with their stupidities. Again, I don't see why there is any reason there should be only one! I can see a spirit getting very tired from existing in a corporeal world, and needing to rest after the long lifetime of serving as the Monarch's Own Companion. But, speaking of wild ideas with no basis in the text, this is one. There is no textual basis for your assertion that there is only one spirit serving as the Monarch's Own Companion. While there is also no textual basis for my assertion that there might be more than one, I claim that it only makes sense that the same MOC would be very tired and even ineffective after serving for several centuries. >> No, I'm simply saying that WE DON'T KNOW whether they have a gift or not! >> Most people on this mailing list assume that there is some miracle going on >> where there is mindspeech with ungifted individuals. My point is that WE >> DON'T KNOW whether these people are mindgifted or not. Keep in mind that >In some of the cases you cited, we do know, or we have strong evidence, >that the person in question does not have any more MindSpeech than Talia, >whom you insist is utterly minddeaf. As far as I can tell, most people >who've been contributing simply think that the projective gift doesn't >require the receptive gift to function. This would be far more >consistent with the other Gifts we've seen than the situation you're >advocating. After all, Empathy, Healing, the Bardic Gift, the Mage Gift, >and Fetching at least don't require the corresponding Gift in their >subjects, even when the subject is another human. But communicating is different from fetching. An object has only to exist to be fetch-able. However, a person has to be intelligent (as opposed to having no faculty for conscious thought), has to be able to hear, and has to be able to form coherent thoughts and ideas in order for communication to take place. The only evidence we have about Kethry, for example, is her own statement that she does not have mindspeech. However, she also lives in an area where mindgifts are not developed or trained. So, my question is, how could she possibly know that she is not mindgifted? >> Valdemar is just about the only place where mindgifts are freely accepted, >> tested for, and trained. Mage schools are uncomfortable with them. > >No, they just don't concentrate on them, because without the amplifying >effect of a Companion, strong mindgifts are rarer than the magegift and a >lot less versatile. I've never seen any evidence that the mage schools >we've been exposed to are any more uncomfortable with the mindgifts than >the average musical school is uncomfortable with painting. They don't >teach it, but they don't dislike it or disdain it or fear it, either. But there is evidence. Kethry tells us that her mage school left mindgifts pretty much alone. >I haven't read this section recently, but the strong implication that I >read was that she didn't have any trace of any Gift which would normally >allow mental communication. Also, she comments repeatedly that she's >uncomfortable with Warrl "in her head", which would hardly be an apt >description of the situation if she was projecting her thoughts to him. Again, Tarma lives in a place where mindgifts just are not touched. Not having shown any indication of the mindgift, the shamans of her clan would never have tested her for mindgifts. Besides, my point is that Tarma has three deep spiritual bonds (with Kethry, Warrl, and the goddess) that probably encouraged the development in mindgift tendencies in Tarma. Remember that the Companion bond encourages gift development, why not the goddess-bond? >> And these inconsistencies, where she does not tell us who has gifts or >> doesn't, support this theory. > >It's only an inconsistency if you insist that the projective Gifts >require the receptive Gifts to be useful, a theory of which you seem to >be the only proponent. After the evidence in the Vanyel series where Savil discusses projective versus receptive mindspeech, yes, I insist that (at least in human <---> human, or human <---> nonhuman (who is not a god-sent being, as Companions and firecats are) communications) both projective and receptive mindspeech must be present in order for the two parties to communicate. Otherwise, it would not be called "mindspeech", but a term more descriptive of broadcasting ones thoughts to anyone within range (which is sort of how empathy works). >Yes, Need has both the projective Gift and the receptive Gift. What she >does when communicating with Nyara (or any other minddeaf person) is drop >her thoughts into their mind and skim off the thoughts they think in >response. The former is the essence of the projective Gift and the >latter of the receptive Gift. Good work, this makes some sense! I would go so far as to postulate that Need has at least some trace of Empathy, or she would not be able to send Nyara into the dream-scapes. It would be the empathy, more than the mindspeech, I think that allows what you are describing. I bring this up because of the difference in communications when Need speaks to mindgifted individuals, like Elspeth. Elspeth and Need have elaborate conversations, involving actual speech. >To me, positing that the receptive Gift is so incredibly common that >everyone to whom a Companion, firecat, or non-human might have to >communicate will have it is more extreme a stretch than to believe that >non-humans (and probably strong humans, as well, but that's just >conjecture) don't require the object of their projective mindspeech to >possess receptive mindspeech. Certainly those with receptive mindspeech >don't require those they're listening to to have projective mindspeech, >or Kero would have had no chance of needing to build herself a crude >shield to keep other people's thoughts out and Eldan would have been >unable to spy on the Karsites. You are misinterpreting what I have said. It would seem that you are doing this intentionally for the sake of prolonging the argument. I have just stated that the rules for mindspeech could be entirely different for spiritual beings (such as firecats and companions) who have been god(dess)-sent to assist humans in the mortal world. In these cases, I would be willing to admit that it is entirely possible for such a being to mindspeak to someone without receptive mindspeech gifts. You are over-generalizing this very specific case, and this is leading to some confusion on your part. However, for human and mortal nonhuman (gryphon, kyree, tervardi, etc.) communications, both projective and receptive mindspeech must be in attendance. This is *not* to say that people with receptive mindspeech can't "hear" the surface thoughts of those around them, but that to intentionally carry on a conversation via mindspeech, both participants must have both forms of the mindspeech gift. >As for mindspeech being a device, of course it's a device. The question >is whether it's a poorly or inconsistently used device or whether there >are consistent rules which can be deduced from the way in which it >appears in the novels. Upon what basis do you expect the use of >mindspeech to be other than what appears in the novels? Where does it >say that Companions *can*not (not do not) speak to those without >receptive mindspeech? Is your insistence that Misty's use of the device >is inconsistent based upon material in the novels or preconceptions from >outside the novels? I am in the process of providing my answer to this one which will be in a separate post. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:27:12 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27903-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> >On Tue, 14 Nov 1995, Heather Mina wrote: >> I don't agree with your assertion that if (Companion <---> human) mindspeech >> can't be equal in nature, then there can be none. While I will agree with >> you that Companions do seem to go through many convolutions and contortions >> to keep the Heralds (and everybody else) from knowing what is going on with >> them, I don't think they have that rigid a code on mindspeaking. jenneke replies: >I did not say "can not". I said "do not". Why do you not think they >have that rigid a code on mindspeaking? They seem to have that rigid a >code on talking about personal matters and on giving aid unasked, why not >on mindspeaking at all? We are outside the realm of things which can be proved textually here. We do not know much about the Companion code of ethics except for two things: 1. Companions do not involve themeselves in the personal business of their Chosen Heralds, unless the Herald has asked for their help. 2. Companions must keep secret (the god(dess)(es) only know why!) their origin and the mechanism for their existence. Beyond these things, most other issues seem to be matters of tradition, rather than express rules. >> I see it more as a matter of tradition. For one thing, the Companions are a >> vastly superior race of beings in comparison to mere mortal humans. >> Snobbery aside, I can't really seeing a Companion *wanting* to talk to a >> person, mind-to-mind or otherwise. However, it has been ordained by some >> god(dess)(es) that the Companion choose and bond with a single human (with >> the exception of the MOC, who could potentially choose and bond with many >> people over a lifetime); thus the Companion may be forced to speak to that > >Why do you think this? Are they any more above their Heralds than their >Heralds are above non-Heralds? They make mistakes, factual errors, goof >ups. They grieve, they feel joy, they desire revenge. Most tellingly, we >have pretty good evidence that they are reincarnated Heralds themselves, >so why should they be so superior to ordinary humans that only the decree >of a god or gods could force them into existing at all? Frankly, I have >an entirely different picture of them, myself. Namely, that they are >fallible, if powerful, spirits, many of whom were Heralds themselves in >previous existences, who choose to become incarnate out of a desire to be >useful, helpful, or return a favor in a general sense. YES! Heralds are superior to non-Heralds, in the sense that Heralds have mindgifts and non-Heralds do not. Likewise, Companions (as vastly gifted spiritual beings sent by some unspecified deities to assist in the corporeal world) are greatly superior to Heralds. Just speaking genetically and in terms of ability, yes! This is like asking if humans are superior to mice. This is not to say that Companions (and Heralds) are not infallible, just that they are physically and mentally superior as a race. And, umm, if Comapnions are former Heralds, then where did the first three come from? I think it would be valid to say that foaled Companions (that is, NOT Grove-born) are likely the spirits of deceased Heralds. However, we do NOT have that much evidence that Companions are deceased Heralds (again, it is a beautiful idea, and I subscribe to it myself; it just can't be PROVEN textually), but we DO have textual evidence that Companions are a gift from some deity/ies to Baron Valdemar, whether a willing gift or not. >Can it be any more clear that >Companions, at least, don't require receptive mindspeech in their target >to get their meaning across? YES - I HAVE SAID THAT! WHY WON'T YOU LISTEN TO ME????????? As spiritual beings who have been sent by some deity/ies, it is certainly a valid assumption that Companions could have more powerful gifts than your everyday Herald. > >> >IMO, in this case, Occam's Razor argues for Rolan *choosing* not to >> >MindSpeak Talia, not being unable to, regardless of the reason for his >> >supposed inability. >> I think we've all pretty much agreed that any "inability" would not lie on >> Rolan's side but on Talia's. > >If you are deaf, then I am unable to communicate audibly with you. This >does not mean that the cause of the inability lies with me, just that it >exists. If you are hard of hearing, then I am able to communicate >audibly with you, even if it takes great energy expense. If I do not, >then I am choosing not to, not being unable. And that's exactly what I have been saying. Thank you for making my point so concisely. >I see. You solve the problem of Misty never showing a mindspoken >language barrier by assigning the blame to inconsistency on her part, >while I solve it by assigning the blame to my (and RL human in general) >imperfect understanding of how thought becomes verbal speech. I see >little problem in having the translation occur (not necessarily >perfectly, we do see some misunderstandings between people of different >cultures) in the process of transmission. In other words, if we speak >different languages, you send in your language, but I pick up the signals >in mine, and vice versa. This may not work in, say, computer >communication, but I don't think we have enough knowledge to say that it >can't in ESP. Come ON! Everyone here has probably watched enought Star Trek to see the problems with universl translation! Why do we see foreign idioms popping up in mindspeech? Why is it called SPEECH at all, if it is pre-language, and therefore not SPEECH? And why is mindspeech presented as WORDS, instead of pictures and emotions (as empathy is)? Think about it a little here... +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:27:18 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Van's Bardic Gift Message-ID: <9511151628.AA27905-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Seanna writes: >And no, I just don't swallow the suppression theory. Van wasn't >_that_ hurt after Lendel cured him from the Bardic obsession. Even >MPawn said, talking of Van's Gifts (page 215) "...as if the gods were >offering a pittance as compensation." implying, I think, that for the >boy whose lifebonded just suicided, the Bardic Gift just ain't that >important. Vanyel is strong enough to handle it! Actually, Van is NOT strong enough to handle it, which is why he tries to commit suicide. But Savil says outright that Van has the bardic gift blasted open with all the others. I think that nobody ever told him he had it, since the bardic gift (or lack of it) has caused him pain and abuse HIS ENTIRE LIFE, not just when Tylendel died. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ End of MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 231 *********************************