MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 232 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Re: Companions and mindspeech by Heather Mina 2) Re: Companions and mindspeech by Heather Mina 3) Canadians by ajc6-+AT+-ukc.ac.uk 4) Innocence... by ajc6-+AT+-ukc.ac.uk 5) mindspeaking companions by kcovert-+AT+-wvnvm.wvnet.edu (Kathy Covert) 6) Re: bardic gift by Jennifer Broekman 7) Re: Companions and mindspeech by Jennifer Broekman 8) Re: mindspeaking, Companions, and all that jazz by Jennifer Broekman 9) Re: rules of mindspeech and how we know them by Jennifer Broekman 10) Re: bardic gift by Jennifer Broekman 11) I apologize for any misunderstandings... by Heather Mina 12) Re: mailing list poll by "James T. Yardley" <73201.745-+AT+-compuserve.com> 13) Re: Casting by Jean Morrill 14) hmmm. by Catherine Osborne 15) Re: bardic gift by Adrienne York 16) Re: Casting by AnneS3832-+AT+-aol.com 17) the Mind and Mindspeech - was Re: Companions and mindspeech by h-wilfehrt-+AT+-nwu.edu (Helen M. Wilfehrt) 18) Re: bardic gift by Amy Mason 19) Re: rules of mindspeech and how we know them by Rosario Holsen-Baker 20) Re: Dragonlance (off topic) by Amy Mason ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 11:27:26 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: <9511151629.AA27910-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Jerry writes: >OK - how does your theory explain Eldan's Gift of animal mindspeech? >and that's *mindspeech* not *empathy*, and they *do* know the difference. > >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, 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). Since animal mindspeech is a separate gift, and entirely different from the "regular" mindspeech gift, I would say that it needs a new name, like "animal communication" that does not imply actual speech. But animal communication would occur at a lower mind-level than mindspeech, I think, and be more related to empathy, with its use of image and emotion to get an idea across. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | 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 11:27:42 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: <9511151629.AA27932-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Seanna writes: >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)? THANK YOU!!! This is one of my arguments for mindspeech involving language. We also see instances of "ashke" in mindspeech, which would sound like "dear" to the mind-hearer. +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | 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 16:31:15 gmt From: ajc6-+AT+-ukc.ac.uk To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Canadians Message-ID: <9511151631.AA26878-+AT+-crane.ukc.ac.uk> > > Thanks for the reply. I live near Vancouver(but Canadian > standards.) I just finished the Canterbury Tales. > > Amberdrake Hiya Amberdrake Whereabouts near Vancouver? I used to live in Coquitlam, but most of my friends are in Burnaby now. I haven't been back since 1982. Wishes and Dreams... - Andromeda ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 16:38:41 gmt From: ajc6-+AT+-ukc.ac.uk To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: Innocence... Message-ID: <9511151638.AA27286-+AT+-crane.ukc.ac.uk> Hiya Wyvern > I was just looking > for a few penpals and *now* look at me. Communication corrupts, but > not as bad as the Net. I have no idea what I am doing in here ( other than looking for elves). I have to confess I am a technophobe, have no idea what I am doing, and am doing it only because I can't seem to get out of here again. It is easier to stay put and just deal sith it than attempt to make a break for freedom. It is making me very anti-social...the dog hasn't heard a word from me in weeks!!!! What I really need is a good-looking elf who knows how to get out of here...before it's too late!!!! Wishes and Dreams.... - Andromeda ps. I didn't pick up my messages for couple of days and there were 472 of them when I finally got around to it!!! It is not easy to deal with when each one is terrifying....where's my analyst??!!??!? :-) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 12:57:58 -0500 From: kcovert-+AT+-wvnvm.wvnet.edu (Kathy Covert) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: mindspeaking companions Message-ID: <199511151757.MAA04578-+AT+-names.telcom.wvu.edu> Seanna "Sanna Koulu" said... >Well, Rolan Speaks stiltedly, implying he's not accustomed to it. It >seems he doesn't Mindspeak much. I don't think there's any proof >that all Companions are terrific at Mindspeech. I always assumed that *all* Companions communicated among themselves by MindSpeech/MindHearing. I can't quote books (still not returned by my friend and I'm at work in any case...) but I think Karal refers to Companion's Field/Stable as "oddly silent" (compared to a horse stable). Also, there are several references to "catching the edge of 's sending" as a warning/notice that another Herald+Companion was approaching. (I imagine a Companion "broadcasting" at low power...."Hi, it's Rolan and Talia here, just passing through on state business, anything going on that I/we need to know about?" continuously on some sort of semi-automatic process) And certainly Rolan and Gwena are communicating...long distance.. presumably by MindSpeech/MindHearing...in WoC and WoF. This long-distance effort required Gwena to trance--and the trance was what gave the communication away. As to Rolan' stiltedness, I'd chalk that up to circumstances- Rolan was exhausted, his Herald was in mortal danger, he had to speak with someone he had (presumably) never spoken to before *and* he was interceding when such intercession was an extraordinary event. I'm not surprised he wasn't fluent and at ease. Dirk was exhausted from trying to Fetch Talia, his lifebonded was in mortal danger... no wonder he wasn't MindHearing very well. I assumed ML wrote it like that to emphasize the extraordinary-ness of the event, and perhaps to emphasize that this was a difficult communication to establish. After the initial contact, : Man. Herald, Dirk.:, the link was made, and the communication got more meaningful (I can't quote, but there something like--I will help you. We all will help you. Together we may be strong enough....) Kathy Kathy Covert (kcovert-+AT+-wvnvm.wvnet.edu) Chemistry Department West Virginia University (304)293-3435 x4442 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:05:29 -0500 (EST) From: Jennifer Broekman To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: bardic gift Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Alison Schiff wrote: > study (so to speak). Since the bards have a whole collegium devoted to > learning the proper use of the gift It probably isn't as simple as just > one more gift learned at the same time as all the rest. Note that I I beg to differ. The Bardic Collegium teaches far more than just the use of the Bardic Gift. Students at Bardic have one, two, or three of the Talent (to play or sing music well), the Creativity (to write new music), and the Gift (to make their listeners feel what they want them to through their music). (And Misty does capitalize all three in _MPawn_, either when Bard Breda is talking to the other Bard about Vanyel or when Savil is explaining to Vanyel.) Therefore, the Collegium must teach all of the things taught at real world musical schools (Julliard, Eastman, whatever), as wells as the techniques associated with the mental Gift. If a Herald had the Bardic Gift in addition to others, learning control of it would not require the same study as would be required of a Bard learning to use it properly in conjunction with his/her playing. -jenneke jsb-+AT+-phantom.com new .sig in development ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:08:49 -0500 (EST) From: Jennifer Broekman To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Sanna Koulu wrote: > Let's do a thought experiment: If I recite poetry by Mindspeech, what > will you hear? The meaning of the poem? But I might not understand > it. The words of the poem? but how could they be translated? > Translating poetry is _hard_ and you'll still lose some of the > original meaning. Or both? Do we know that poetry doesn't get horribly garbled by transmission via MindSpeech? I'd be inclined to think that it does, because much of poetry is music, which is bound up in sound as well as words. -jenneke jsb-+AT+-phantom.com new .sig in development ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:25:57 -0500 (EST) From: Jennifer Broekman To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: mindspeaking, Companions, and all that jazz Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Sanna Koulu wrote: > Jenneke wrote: > > Being inconsistent in some respects doesn't mean that all explanations of > > other respects are the same inconsistency. > Huh? I don't think I understand that, sir. You mean that even if > Misty is inconsistent in some things, it doesn't follow she's > inconsistent in everything? That's very true, but Misty _is_ > inconsistent on the Mindspeech issue. How is Misty inconsistent on the MindSpeech issue, other than the topic at hand (whether strong MindSpeakers can Mindspeak the non-gifted)? > > I think that we have many, many examples of the Companions doing things > > in roundabout, convoluted ways to prevent their Heralds from becoming too > > dependent on them or figuring out what they really are and very few > > examples that would even *hint* that a Groveborn Companion could possibly > > have too weak a Gift to Mindspeak his Chosen. > Well, Rolan Speaks stiltedly, implying he's not accustomed to it. It > seems he doesn't Mindspeak much. I don't think there's any proof > that all Companions are terrific at Mindspeech. I don't see any > reason why one couldn't be weak, even though he's GB. Being a spirit > doesn't mean you are perfect (take Gwena!). We've seen Rolan MindSpeak once, to someone other than his Chosen, under great stress, and when thoroughly exhausted, after not having Mindspoken a human in years (at least 6, by my count). I always took the stiltedness of his :Man...: to be due to exhaustion, 'breathlessness', and trying to gather his thoughts. After all, he was reasonably eloquent to Talia when he Chose her. > Just btw, I don't think they are "rules", as such. More like > tradition. Anyway, if Rolan had Thoughtsensing, he could pick up the > thoughts off her surface mind, the way Need does. I don't think there's any doubt that he *could*. I just don't think that he *would*, certainly not on a regular basis. > > All mindspeech > > communication would be one-sided in nature, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY CONTRARY > > TO NORMAL COMPANION PRACTICE. Because it couldn't be equal, there had to > > be none, except in the event of a dire emergency. > I don't think Need's way of communicating was that unequal. It was > just that Nyara was dependent on her. Besides, I don't think keeping > all those secrets even from your Chosen is all that equal either. Well, then we have a difference of opinion, because I think that Need's methods are often highly unequal.:-) Also, while keeping secrets isn't equal, it also doesn't foster dependence on the Companion's abilities, which one-sided mindspeaking might. > > Even if Rolan had the > > strongest MindSpeech Gift alive on the planet, I don't think he would > > have spoken to her, except maybe when she was in Ancar's dungeon, and > > perhaps not even then, if he thought that his energy was better reserved > > for getting her Fetched back to the cmap (ie., he foresaw a greater need > > for her than that she'd already fulfilled) or if Ancar's shields were as > > strong as is implied. > It would have been beneficial to Speak her and tell her not to take > argonel. The argonel may have kept her alive by preventing her from overloading on the pain. After all, she burned off almost all of it herself before they got her back to the camp. In any case, Rolan might still have felt that he needed what was left of his energy for getting back to the camp and Fetching Talia, rather than trying to shatter Ancar's shields and tell Talia to hang on. > > 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. > Explain how? Why is it simpler to assume Rolan chooses not to Speak > Talia? That creates a whole new can of worms (like, why does he then > talk stiltedly, why do they all choose not to bespeak their unGifted > Chosen, what's the harm in it, what of all the possibly fatal > situations in which he doesn't Mindspeak her etc.) The harm is in the chance of creating dependence on the Companion's abilities rather than fostering reliance on the Herald's own abilities. If you always carry a child who can't walk, they'll never learn to use their wheelchair. If Rolan always used his abilities to communicate with Talia, she would never learn to use her abilities to do the same. -jenneke jsb-+AT+-phantom.com new .sig in development ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:57:01 -0500 (EST) From: Jennifer Broekman To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: rules of mindspeech and how we know them Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Heather Mina wrote: > 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. Or simply communication. Mindspeech is a lot shorter and catchier than mental communication, after all. > 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 Foreign terms are always in italics, which, to me, implies that they're being sent in the same way as proper nouns, ie. not translated due to recognition by the receiving party pre-translation. > We know the following things from the text: > 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). Where does Rolan complain? I can recall places where Rolan has been frustrated with Talia's tendency towards withdrawl and despondency, but I can't for the life of me remember any place where he's frustrated or annoyed with *himself* for being too weak a Mindspeaker to communicate with her or whathaveyou. > 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. One of the nations which forbids their use is Karse, pre-Solaris. Karal was inducted into the priesthood pre-Solaris, when those with mindgifts were burned for heresy. The fact of his survival would tend to very strongly imply that he has no mindgifts whatsoever, yet he hears mindspeech from a kyree, as well as from a Companion and a Firecat. To me, this means that the unGifted can hear a strong projective. How do you interpret it? > 6. The Herald-Companion bond strengthens gifts of all sorts. Since > Kethry actively sought a familiar to strengthen her mage potential, it can It's been a while since I read the relevant section, but I never understood that Kethry expected her Gift to be strengthened by having a familiar. A familiar would be "useful" to her, but that could as easily be understood as implying providing an extra set of eyes, ears, etc., as intensifying her Gift. > 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. I believe we have evidence for this, actually. In _White Gryphon_, the insane outcast from White Gryphon is a powerful Fetcher and gets energy from the blood magic performed by the King's disowned brother. -jenneke jsb-+AT+-phantom.com new .sig in development ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 14:01:25 -0500 (EST) From: Jennifer Broekman To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: bardic gift Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Heather Mina wrote: > 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. I believe that in _MPawn_, it's stated that the requirement is two of the three for acceptance as an apprentice Bard and one for acceptance as an apprentice minstrel. In order for the heir of property to be accepted, he would have to be acceptable as a bardic apprentice, because minstrels are lower ranked and it would be insulting. I agree that Talia has Talent, but not Gift, although her Empathy would probably substitute just fine if she ever needed to pose as a Gifted Bard. -jenneke jsb-+AT+-phantom.com new .sig in development ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 95 14:00:03 GMT+0000 From: Heather Mina To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-herald.co.uk Subject: I apologize for any misunderstandings... Message-ID: <9511151901.AA04671-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk> Earlier today, I saw a posting thanking me for standing up to another member of this list. I want everyone to know that it was not my intention to "stand up" to any particular person. As with any book or author I am very fond of, I form very strong ideas and opinions about the work. Usually, I can back these ideas up with textual proof, and am willing to accept anyone's alternate ideas if they can provide me with textual proof. Now, I spend most of my waking hours here at the office, where I do not have my texts at hand. Therefore, I rely on my memory of the text to make my points. I usually ask for a textual reference (because I know there are people who look up the hotly contested topics), and I graciously and immediately thank anyone who can provide me with one, whether it is the way I remembered it or not. I will be the first to admit that I have made a mistake, if you will simply provide me with a textual reference that demonstrates it. However, all of us here have formed our own ideas, how we like to think about Velgarth, and especially Valdemar. These do not always agree with each other, and are sometimes textually unsound. But that doesn't stop us from feeling the way we do. All I ask is that when we discuss these texts, we try to realize where our feelings about them lie, and separate our feelings from the written text. For example, most of us (if not all) are very attached to the idea that Companions are the spirits of deceased Heralds. This was hinted at, but by no means proven, in the texts (in fact, there is one point where it is implied that the Companions are very holy, very powerful demi-deities). One of the problems with this idea is the origin of the first Companions, until they started to mate and foal. But I, as well as most of you, think this is a beautiful and elegant answer to the mystery of the origin of the Companions, whether or not it is textually valid. Now, I am very good at seeing faulty assumptions and flawed logic. As a mathematician and computer programmer, these are the tools of my profession, my Gifts, if you will. While it may seem that I am trashing you when I disagree with something you say, generally a programmer telling someone else that they have made a bad assumption is purely a sign of "cooperative debugging". We all make faulty assumptions. Some of us are just better at noticing them than others. When we analyze literature, including our favorite texts with all of the emotional baggage we carry, we must be very careful to seek out our own assumptions and either validate or discard them by textual proof. I am also very good at seeing patterns, and at giving counterexamples when a pattern is not "real". (for example, if you said to me that you had found the pattern that all prime numbers seem to be odd, I would say, "Well, I've seen that pattern too, since all even numbers are divisible by 2, and therefore not prime. But what about 2 itself? Isn't 2 prime?"). Again, this is part of the process I use every day in generating designs and algorithms. I notice patterns, try to find counterexamples, and then if/when things don't work, I analyze my assumptions and logic. These techniques also serve very well in literary analysis, so this is how my arguments tend to look. There has been a dialogue between myself and another member of this list that seems to have degenerated. The other has made some faulty assumptions which they can not recognize in their own thinking. (Yes, I am intentionally keeping this gender-free, because it can apply to all of us here in our own head-up-the-you-know-where days). I have tried to point out to all of us where some of these assumptions lie, because I have made some of the same ones in the past, only to have to give them up (with more than a little regret) when I notice textual proof of the opposite. I want everyone to understand that I am not trying to bash anyone here, just to give my opinions, as a fellow fan and a writer myself, on the topics that have been introduced into discussion. There are, of necessity, some places where my opinions conflict with those of other readers. I have tried to give as much textual basis as I can without having the books at hand, and I have welcomed quotes and references from those of you who can look them up. My point in all this, is that if you are unwilling to open your mind to the opinions of others, and give their opinions a fair hearing, then you should not be posting to the list. When someone posts a textual reference which contradicts a point I was making, I immediately apologize and thank them. However, if all you have to contribute in return is an emotional and faulty argument, then this is of no use to any of us here. We all have our feelings and opinions about the texts, and freely discuss them, as a group of fans should. But when we are discussing important literary devices (consistent or not), then we need to divorce our feelings and wishes from the text and logic. Okay, enough ranting. I hope we can all continue the wonderful discussions in the future. While I am not usually the argumentative sort, I do enjoy a polite intellectual discussion, whether any of us "win" or not. Thanks for listening to me, Heather +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Heather L. Mina | She whose head echoes | | hlmina-+AT+-vwc.edu | with a hollow BOONNNGGGGG | | heamin-+AT+-sunshine.vab.unisysgsg.com | | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ ------------------------------ Date: 15 Nov 95 14:33:50 EST From: "James T. Yardley" <73201.745-+AT+-compuserve.com> To: Mercedes Lackey Mailing Subject: Re: mailing list poll Message-ID: <951115193349_73201.745_JHE164-1-+AT+-CompuServe.COM> >>>Umm, Meg? could you tell me who Jeff Buckley is? er, that *was* a sarcastic statement - wasn't it? ;> - Meg, the rabidly evangelical JB fan ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 12:50:37 -0700 From: Jean Morrill To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Casting Message-ID: <199511151950.MAA23294-+AT+-flood.hwr.arizona.edu> Cutting who said what when. Sorry > >> How about Gerard Depardieu for Alberich? The accent might work in his > favor.... > > > >nononononono. My vote goes for Patrick Stewart! Remember him in Dune? > >He's a shoe in. yes, my flame proof suit is on! > > Patrick Stewart....hmmm, I'm not convinced. He's a little too smooth for > Alberich, IMO. I picture a more rugged, silent guy like Clint Eastwood. Rugged. Silent. Dark hair, tanned skin. Muscular. The answer is obvious. Sylvester Stallone. (No don't hit me. I am only kidding...) Jean jean-+AT+-hwr.arizona.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:30:24 -0500 (EST) From: Catherine Osborne To: mercedes lackey list Subject: hmmm. Message-ID: sorry about the off-topic short post, but...jenneke and Heather...I'm getting a little tired of the rather barbed posts that have been going around lately. first, I've just seen another mailing list come to the brink of open flame war and I didn't like what it did to the people there. Luckily it ddidn't actually happen. second, misty's work is great and why we're all here, presumably, but really, its just not that important! You guys are insulting each other's intelligences and being quite barbed. Really, they're just theories! About fantasy books! I\/ Catherine Osborne "After great pain, I\/ Sundancer a formal feeling comes." I cosborne-+AT+-sidwell.edu --Emily Dickinson I http://www.sidwell.edu/~cosborne/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:40:32 -0500 (EST) From: Adrienne York To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: bardic gift Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Heather Mina wrote: > 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. You must have two to be accepted as a Bard, one as a minstrel. Heirs had to have TWO to get in, not three. The Collegium wasn't prepared to take someone's heir just so they could be a minstrel. (Feeling that she has something useful to contribute after not reading her e-mail for three days. BIG MISTAKE!) ;];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];] ;] Adrienne York-Minor ;] ;] "I'd like to believe that, but I'm fresh out of optimism." ;] ;] -Princess Jasmine ;] ;] ayork-+AT+-simons-rock.edu ;] ;];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];];] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 16:27:08 -0500 From: AnneS3832-+AT+-aol.com To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Casting Message-ID: <951115162707_84939876-+AT+-emout05.mail.aol.com> ::shuddering still:: Jean said: <> Sorry, it had to be done . . . . . :) -=^*^=- # -=^*^=- # -=^*^=- # -=^*^=- "Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us." --Jerry Garcia Anne Staszalek annes3832-+AT+-aol.com -=^*^=- # -=^*^=- # -=^*^=- # -=^*^=- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 15:47:00 -0600 From: h-wilfehrt-+AT+-nwu.edu (Helen M. Wilfehrt) To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: the Mind and Mindspeech - was Re: Companions and mindspeech Message-ID: <199511152147.AA290172020-+AT+-casbah.acns.nwu.edu> >> 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. > >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, 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). > > Jerry Cullingford jc-+AT+-crosfield.co.uk (Work) One case of an actual Animal Mindspeech *conversation* is when Wintermoon, his Dyheli (sp?), and Skif's Companion were talking during that search for Nyara. Skif could tell that they were talking but couldn't *hear* it because he lacked the Animal Mindspeech Gift. With this Gift I would imagine that the degree of actual *word* exchange as opposed to images would depend upon the intelligence/sentience of the animal. Remember when Darkwind spoke to that Eagle (?) which he freed, he was amazed at the intelligence of the bird's mindspeech - it grasped more complex and esoteric ideas than Vree, and it could !understand! that Darkwind's father Needed him. On the other hand, with Vree, Darkwind had to use more simple ideas and imagery to convey his messages. Vree wasn't as "intelligent". Case in point, when the Gryphon spoke to Vree after Vree tried to steal his feather, Trevan (name?) used imagery to convey the rebuke to Vree while Darkwind could hear the words (Winds book 2). Time to step on my teaching/lecturing podium, but with a disclaimer ... (the following describes various medical concepts based upon my own (albeit limited) understanding of both the psychological and physiological mental processes involved in communication/language/etc & my own perceptions/interpretations of the evidence and as a result extend excessive amounts of reality into this fantasy world of Valdemar & its neighbors).... As to the actual conversion of mental thought to spoken word, and vice versa, in the brain, this is an extremely complex and incompletely understood process involving interactions between the "thinking brain" where "ideas/thoughts/emotions" occur and the mechanisms by which this part interacts with the environment (taking in or expressing thoughts) - namely speech, hearing, writing, seeing, etc. There also seem to be differences in the how/where of the mental representation of the symbolic word versus the word's meaning/significance (intellectual) versus its emotional relevancy/significance. This is just the beginning - the rest gets far too complicated for my tastes. Extrapolating from this, my own interpretation would imply that actual spoken/written language may be considered to be essentially a "program", to use a computer analogy, which that "thinking/reasoning/emotionality" part of the brain uses to communicate with the external world. Hence, when you learn a new language, you are adding a new program (or adding to the original one) with which you can connect your "thinking brain" and the new environment. When you don't "think" in this new language, you are consciously performing the translation; when you "think" in this new language, the translation becomes subconscious. Note, I use "thinking brain" to represent both the "intellect" and "feelings/emotions". Id, Ego, etc. For those who might be interested, there is a brief description of two types of brain injuries which directly affect communication at the end of this note. In terms of mindspeech, I've always considered Mindspeech to be communication more between the "thinking brains" and not so much between the part of the brain where we get "language" conversion. This is why I think there can be communication via Mindspeech between people who speak different vocal languages and why there can be Animal Mindspeech. Communication, therefore, would be dependent upon on how structured & developed this "thinking brain" is. Lower animals do not have as developed "thinking brains" as higher (ie. sentient) animals like humans, gryphons, dhyeli, and kyree have. Therefore, Animal Mindspeech with lower animals might require simpler thought constructions than normal Mindspeech where complex ideas/emotions may be conveyed. The differences between these two Gifts might lie in the relative ability to project complex thoughts versus simple ones. People who can do both have both Gifts. With regard to the perception (of the receptive individual) of the Mindspeech as actual words, I would suggest that this is only a matter of how the "thinking brain" perceives the Mindspeech (ie. the "thinking brain" expects that communication would occur through vocalizations and therefore classifies it as such.). The brain does make some perceptual judgements about what it thinks is happening that may differ from what is actually happening in real life - namely think of the various visual and auditory illusions which can be performed. Another quasi-related example is the brain's perception of a heart attack as a sharp pain in the left arm (see below for a more detailed description). Plus, and more practically speaking, it would be really difficult writing Mindspeech as anything other than words in a book. Also, I would have thought that ML would have included a Gift for languages/translation (a useful tool) if Mindspeech did not broach language barriers. The lack of concrete examples with the latter case, other than communication between humans and intelligent creatures like the gryphons, may be largely due to the relative scarcity of a Mindspeech Gift in non-Valdemaran humans. But there are few to no examples proving or disproving the possibility of Mindspeech between humans who don't speak the same language. In summary, Mindspeech would communicate with the "thinking brain" by-passing language areas. Empathy comes in at the emotional part of the "thinking brain". The Bardic Gift possibly would act on a subsconscious level of the "thinking brain" to encourage things like patriotism, soothing thoughts, etc - possibly with the music aspect being another way to "speak" to the brain. That unnamed Illusion based Gift of that bandit who could make you think he was who you knew was just telling your "thinking brain" that you knew him. For these discussions, of course, I do not claim any knowledge of *how* one brain might actually communicate with another. I am just discussing the "end-point" of this act. As far as I am concerned intellectually and scientifically speaking, there isn't any evidence for telepathy in this reality. For this part, I suspend my disbelief. -Helen (a medical researcher in training) An aside discussing 2 general types of brain injuries which affect communication.... With some brain injuries, people can forget totally what a word means, intellectually or emotionally, but can still speak the word (eg. they can perceive the color yellow but not know that the word "yellow" represents this color - ie. there is no link between meaning (color) and symbol (the word/name)). Others may retain intellectual understanding but lose emotional (or personal recollection/memory) significance (ie. in frontal lobotomies and, more particularly, in the classical example of Phineas Gage). Individuals such as these latter cases CANNOT feel/express any emotional reaction to external stimuli - a picture of graphic violence, a loving embrace, etc. They may understand intellectually that an emotion exists - they just don't *feel* it. There is no link between "intellectual thought" and "emotional content". I would guess that these people would be able to lie yet pass a lie-detector test because of this interruption between the emotional content and intellect (it is the emotional content which seems to produce the visceral (body) responses measured by a lie detector). In actuality, their problem is more complex (they're asocial & amoral from my recollection) but this is the part related to communication. A second aside discussing the brain's interpretation of a heart-attack.... Classically, a heart attack may be perceived as a sharp pain in the left arm. You know intellectually that your heart is not in your left arm despite where the pain is thought to be. Your intellectual (ie conscious) brain doesn't usually normally (consciously) perceive what's going on in your heart - this is an unconscious perception. You really don't need to know that your heart just pumped some blood eighty times a minute. There are other reasons for this to be unconscious but that's another story. This "referred pain" (the clinical term) occurs because the sensory nerves which communicate what's going on in your heart enter the your spinal cord at the same place, more or less, as the nerves which carry sensory info (pain, touch, etc) from your left arm. Since your brain cannot differentiate between the two inputs, your brain *interprets*, on a conscious level, this heart *pain* as left arm *pain*. The intellectual understanding that this pain can indicate a heart attack is non-intuitive but comes with education. ************************************ Helen Wilfehrt Dept. Physiology (M211) Northwestern University Medical School 303 E. Chicago Ave Chicago, IL 60611 Voice: (312) 503-0202 FAX: (312) 503-5101 Email: h-wilfehrt-+AT+-nwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 13:47:44 -0800 (PST) From: Amy Mason To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: bardic gift Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Alison Schiff wrote: > > > > > > Seanna writes... > > > >I think Vanyel doesn't have the Bardic Gift, and Misty screwed up > > > >with the reference in MPawn. The books _never_ again (I could be > > > >wrong) even refer to Vanyel having the Gift, whereas he _does_ use > > > >Fetching, Fire-starting, the Mage Gift, Empathy, Mindspeech and > > > >Foresight (not sure about Farsight, though that might be included > > > >when they're creating the Web) and even Healing. > > I know he has Fetching, but where does he ever use it? It's one of his > weaker gifts I know. Vanyel uses Fetching when he is trying to get the construct (the bird who killed Sayvil) before it reached Lareth. It's in MPrice. Amy :) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 15 Nov 1995 17:00:58 -0500 (EST) From: Rosario Holsen-Baker To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: rules of mindspeech and how we know them Message-ID: Jenneke responded to Heather: > > > 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. > > I believe we have evidence for this, actually. In _White Gryphon_, the > insane outcast from White Gryphon is a powerful Fetcher and gets energy > from the blood magic performed by the King's disowned brother. > > -jenneke > jsb-+AT+-phantom.com > new .sig in development Nope. And, wonder of wonders, miracle of miracles, I have the book with me to prove it! The person was an accomplice of the outcast, Hadanelith, and he was the mage "Noyoki" which was given to mean "no one." Quote (p 297, top) "...he also had another, even rarer ability,' Leyuet said gravely, `One we have not seen in decades, even centuries this city.' `Which the priests were *supposed* to have blocked before they took away his magic,' Palisar continued, `I recall theday I saw this very clearly. He was able to move things from one end of the city to the other with the power of his will alone.'" This would indicate that the Fetching was separate from the Mage-gift. And for the record, Hadanelith wasn't gifted, just insane. |-------------------------------<>-------------------------------| | "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 13:57:06 -0800 (PST) From: Amy Mason To: mercedes-lackey-+AT+-vanyel.herald.co.uk Subject: Re: Dragonlance (off topic) Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Nov 1995, Mr CM George wrote: > > MISS MARIA T FOGEL wrote: > >Irene, > > RE: dragonlance: Rastlin is also my fav. char. I stopped reading > >after the series about him and his twin. I never *could* find the 1st > >bk of that, but no matter... I'm glad he finally redeemed himself at > >the end... It always annoys me when my fav char's turn bad or die or > >something... > > > > > >wyvern > > Raistlin seems to have been a great many people's fav. character > from the Dragonlance books, including mine. There are some great > books around about Caramon's (sp?) sons - ie. Raistlin's nephews - > which I really enjoyed. One of Raistlin's nephews goes for The Test... > think of the effect this has on Caramon. (I forget the titles I'm sorry, > but looking through the blurbs should identify the book fairly quickly. > I think the particular story is in a book of short stories, and > while I still think Raist was the greatest character I found it > worthwhile finding out about the "next generation" of DL characters. > > Well, that's enough ranting from me for another semester. > > > > ========================================================================== > Craig George (E-mail cmgeo1-+AT+-ccds.cc.monash.edu.au) > http://www.cc.monash.edu.au/people/cmgeo1/index.html > ========================================================================== > "We don't like what we don't understand, in fact it scares us." > (Disney's Beauty and the Beast) > ========================================================================== If you liked those books...please, please, please look into buying _Dragons of Summer Flame_, I spent two hours last night doing nothing but reading it. I HIGHLY recommend it to anyone! It talks about the children of Raistlin, Caramon & Tika, and Sturm & Kitiara. Enough hints! Amy :) ------------------------------ End of MERCEDES-LACKEY Digest 232 *********************************