Because,as I recall, Bianca offered him an out in exchange for Susan and Susan alone and he tried to burn the place down.
Do you mean that he attacked Bianca earlier when she was trying to destroy the sword thereby causing a war even though she later offered him a truce which he then rejected?
Spoiler
Actually, the last run against Bianca has nothing to do with the Sword and the party. It's just about getting Susan back. Harry found out she was bitten and blood was drunk by Bianca, and he went off on them. This was after the party.
Thomas' ignorance of the coin and it's dangers is especially disheartening when you consider the years that Harry struggled with his. And even after apparently ridding himself of Lash (albeit accidentally, after turning her) he never came clean to Thomas about what happened. And still hasn't now.
Mind, Thomas doesn't seem to know a lot about the Knights of the True Cross, even that there are others. Which is odd since he met Harry and Michael for the first time at that party.
"Any plan which requires the direct intervention of any deity to work can be assumed to be a very poor one."- Newbiespud
Safe to say that Harry does his best to keep his vampire friend and his holy knight friend as far away from each other as possible. And Thomas doesn't exactly have unfettered access to the Raith's intelligence resources most of the time. He probably just assumed Michael was some guy with a magical sword.
I mean, there are only three Knights total. The chances of ever meeting one are low. It's not like someone can just shout, "GOD IN HEAVEN, HELP US!!!" and Sanya will appear.
Because,as I recall, Bianca offered him an out in exchange for Susan and Susan alone and he tried to burn the place down.
Do you mean that he attacked Bianca earlier when she was trying to destroy the sword thereby causing a war even though she later offered him a truce which he then rejected?
Spoiler
Actually, the last run against Bianca has nothing to do with the Sword and the party. It's just about getting Susan back. Harry found out she was bitten and blood was drunk by Bianca, and he went off on them. This was after the party.
Spoiler
Which was my point. He was offered an out and chose to ignore it to save Susan.Bianca made him an offer of truce in exchange for her keeping Susan. However just protecting Amoracchius may have been the same cannot be said of ignoring any sort of truce for Susan, even if they were goading him (seems unlikely given that we later learn that the war came too early which is why Ortega wanted to suspend it for a while)
Which was my point. He was offered an out and chose to ignore it to save Susan.Bianca made him an offer of truce in exchange for her keeping Susan. However just protecting Amoracchius was the same cannot be said of ignoring any sort of truce for Susan, even if they were goading him (seems unlikely given that we later learn that the war came too early which is why Ortega wanted to suspend it for a while)
Spoiler
Well it goes to what I said about Harry before. Look at his sponsorship by Uriel. 'I don't care what you believe or who you follow, you do what's right, that's enough for me'. The White Council wants politics. That's fine, especially for the Senior Council, as they're functionally the Congress and or the Senior Executive Council. Harry's not a politician. He does what he sees is right. Bianca was torturing Chicago's ghosts, forced him to leave Susan with her, and then she half-turned her. She then tried to blackmail Harry into leaving Susan with her with a choice she knew Harry wouldn't take mostly so she could leave Harry in the grave she gave him as a gift at her party. Harry did what was right. She underestimated Harry. And it especially didn't help that the ghosts pooled in Bianca's basement gave him a pool of energy to draw from and throw at her. Too bad for her.
Which was my point. He was offered an out and chose to ignore it to save Susan.Bianca made him an offer of truce in exchange for her keeping Susan. However just protecting Amoracchius was the same cannot be said of ignoring any sort of truce for Susan, even if they were goading him (seems unlikely given that we later learn that the war came too early which is why Ortega wanted to suspend it for a while)
Spoiler
Well it goes to what I said about Harry before. Look at his sponsorship by Uriel. 'I don't care what you believe or who you follow, you do what's right, that's enough for me'. The White Council wants politics. That's fine, especially for the Senior Council, as they're functionally the Congress and or the Senior Executive Council. Harry's not a politician. He does what he sees is right. Bianca was torturing Chicago's ghosts, forced him to leave Susan with her, and then she half-turned her. She then tried to blackmail Harry into leaving Susan with her with a choice she knew Harry wouldn't take mostly so she could leave Harry in the grave she gave him as a gift at her party. Harry did what was right. She underestimated Harry. And it especially didn't help that the ghosts pooled in Bianca's basement gave him a pool of energy to draw from and throw at her. Too bad for her.
How exactly is starting an existential war right? And I don't mean "right for the hero in a story" I mean right by the same calculus we use in our lives.
Scrib wrote:
How exactly is starting an existential war right? And I don't mean "right for the hero in a story" I mean right by the same calculus we use in our lives. I think the former is what makes all these things seem acceptable.
That's something we see as fallout in the next book. There's no telling what that could've led to. Either way, Bianca deliberately provoking him with a situation that she felt she knew what his choice would be, thought she had control of the situation, but turns out she didn't, is on her. The fact that she happened to just be promoted to Red Court Royalty and forces them to play their hand early? I personally couldn't care less. That war was happening regardless, whether then or a decade later. The case for that is made in a later book. The Red Court is too damn ready for the war to say it wasn't going to happen otherwise.
Scrib wrote:
How exactly is starting an existential war right? And I don't mean "right for the hero in a story" I mean right by the same calculus we use in our lives. I think the former is what makes all these things seem acceptable.
That's something we see as fallout in the next book. There's no telling what that could've led to. Either way, Bianca deliberately provoking him with a situation that she felt she knew what his choice would be, thought she had control of the situation, but turns out she didn't, is on her. The fact that she happened to just be promoted to Red Court Royalty and forces them to play their hand early? I personally couldn't care less. That war was happening regardless, whether then or a decade later. The case for that is made in a later book. The Red Court is too damn ready for the war to say it wasn't going to happen otherwise.
You haven't made a strong argument.
Spoiler
Harry only later found out about the war being planned a while in advance. This is irrelevant to Harry's thought process in GP. He still chose to start a war when he didn't know of this. And even if he did know-which I maintain he didn't-, he didn't weigh the strategic implications, he didn't care. This is not an excuse.
And Bianca's provocations are also irrelevant.Harry is an adult with will. It is irrelevant if he is predictable, he still chose to act as he did. He still chose to put Susan above peace. I don't care if Bianca died. Who cares if Bianca died? I care that Hary chose to kill her knowing the consequences.
There is nothing here that explains why Harry was right in putting the lives of god knows how many people at risk. All you do is dodge the fact that he CHOSE that path.
All things considered the Merlin is quite justified in hating the ever-living shit out of Harry.
Harry only later found out about the war being planned a while in advance. This is irrelevant to Harry's thought process in GP. He still chose to start a war when he didn't know of this. And even if he did know-which I maintain he didn't-, he didn't weigh the strategic implications, he didn't care. This is not an excuse.
And Bianca's provocations are also irrelevant.Harry is an adult with will. It is irrelevant if he is predictable, he still chose to act as he did. He still chose to put Susan above peace. I don't care if Bianca died. Who cares if Bianca died? I care that Hary chose to kill her knowing the consequences.
There is nothing here that explains why Harry was right in putting the lives of god knows how many people at risk. All you do is dodge the fact that he CHOSE that path.
All things considered the Merlin is quite justified in hating the ever-living shit out of Harry.
Spoiler
I'm not saying it's relevant. Harry had a whole damn Trial by Ordeal in the next book thanks to what he did. A Trial by Ordeal where one of the judges would've killed him himself if Harry hadn't finished the fight after he'd solved the case. Harry's thought process at the beginning of the series is 'what's the right thing to do?' Bianca manipulated him into a situation where she should've been able to kill him and tried to stack the deck but hell if she didn't have a nuclear bomb's worth of energy in her basement because ghosts don't like vampires.
The point of the beginning of the series is Harry's not one to worry about the strategic implications. He's a PI. He's got friends. He will put everything on the line for his friends and too damn bad for you if you're in his way. It's after a few years of the war with the Reds that he really starts processing things like this. Especially when he has to start dealing with the Denarians and acting as a Warden. The third book of the series when he's just a PI? You give him too much credit. What you need to do is not mischaracterize the character.
Harry only later found out about the war being planned a while in advance. This is irrelevant to Harry's thought process in GP. He still chose to start a war when he didn't know of this. And even if he did know-which I maintain he didn't-, he didn't weigh the strategic implications, he didn't care. This is not an excuse.
And Bianca's provocations are also irrelevant.Harry is an adult with will. It is irrelevant if he is predictable, he still chose to act as he did. He still chose to put Susan above peace. I don't care if Bianca died. Who cares if Bianca died? I care that Hary chose to kill her knowing the consequences.
There is nothing here that explains why Harry was right in putting the lives of god knows how many people at risk. All you do is dodge the fact that he CHOSE that path.
All things considered the Merlin is quite justified in hating the ever-living shit out of Harry.
Spoiler
I'm not saying it's relevant. Harry had a whole damn Trial by Ordeal in the next book thanks to what he did. A Trial by Ordeal where one of the judges would've killed him himself if Harry hadn't finished the fight after he'd solved the case. Harry's thought process at the beginning of the series is 'what's the right thing to do?' Bianca manipulated him into a situation where she should've been able to kill him and tried to stack the deck but hell if she didn't have a nuclear bomb's worth of energy in her basement because ghosts don't like vampires.
The point of the beginning of the series is Harry's not one to worry about the strategic implications. He's a PI. He's got friends. He will put everything on the line for his friends and too damn bad for you if you're in his way. It's after a few years of the war with the Reds that he really starts processing things like this. Especially when he has to start dealing with the Denarians and acting as a Warden. The third book of the series when he's just a PI? You give him too much credit. What you need to do is not mischaracterize the character.
I'm going to be concise: I don't really care.
You didn't start out by making excuses. You made a strong claim: that he was RIGHT to make that decision. That is the claim being argued for. The first paragraph is totally irrelevant, you're just restating the events of the book. The second is also irrelevant: it's an excuse.
As a grown man Harry chose to make a decision to do something. You said that he did the right thing. You don't argue for this at all, instead you essentially tell me that he's an impulsive moron. That may be true but it's besides the point. The two issues at play are whether you, if you were making a moral decision while in possession of all your faculties would make the same one and consider it moral and whether Harry was a good person for making the decision that he did or more importantly if the Merlin is justified in hating Harry for it. You haven't advanced either position. Whether he is the sort of person to impulsively do bad things is irrelevant. What if I impulsively beat people's heads in. If he doesn't process things that's his fault and he's a fucking moron. And I don't even know what that means since he clearly knew the consequences of his actions.
I have not mischaracterized the character. I merely find his decision-though consistent with his character- morally dubious. That's like saying that I can't hate the Merlin for trying to off...certain people despite it making perfect sense.
All this is apologia and besides the point. You want to let him off-probably because he's the hero and he did something we generally consider heroic- so you're making these tangential arguments to get you to the point you are reaching for without the logical rigour that you need to push your carriage forward.
Harry at that point was not doing "Right" so much as he was doing what he felt was right at the time, given such limited choices. All through the novels Harry is faced with a lot of bad choices, and many of them are lesser of two evils. Very rarely does Harry get time to sit down and think of his actions, (and when he does he often still doesn't think things through all the way). Harry puts himself in situations where he has to make a decision, and then live with the result no matter what. He's mostly damn lucky to survive his choices.
So, Doing RIGHT? Harry tries. He tries his best. He's just not that good at thinking out his actions and what they'd do to those around him.
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
LadyTevar wrote:Harry at that point was not doing "Right" so much as he was doing what he felt was right at the time, given such limited choices. All through the novels Harry is faced with a lot of bad choices, and many of them are lesser of two evils. Very rarely does Harry get time to sit down and think of his actions, (and when he does he often still doesn't think things through all the way). Harry puts himself in situations where he has to make a decision, and then live with the result no matter what. He's mostly damn lucky to survive his choices.
So, Doing RIGHT? Harry tries. He tries his best. He's just not that good at thinking out his actions and what they'd do to those around him.
This is a pretty unambitious claim compared to what Gaidan originally said, which is probably why he's so interested in arguing for this instead of his own stated position.
However, even with that said: I'm still not seeing it. I honestly don't think that anyone can bridge this gap and explain his behavior in terms that don't rely on some affection for him as the protagonist.(Or you could,y'know, really just bite the bullet and actually argue that he was right) If we're talking about what was right to do, we all seem to agree on what it was so I don't see the (quite weak) defense here. He knew the consequences of his actions and still acted. That is the standard by which we judge real people,if not fantasy heroes. His character excuses him but not everyone else in the series just as bound to their viewpoints?
There is no try.Trying is just something people we like do. At a certain point you choose to make immoral decisions (YMMV on this of course).
See here:
Spoiler
Bianca's eyes widened. "You are mad," she said. "You would flirt with chaos, destruction—with war. For the sake of this one wounded soul?"
"For the sake of one soul. For one loved one. For one life." I called power into my blasting rod, and its tip glowed incandescent white. "The way I see it, there's nothing else worth fighting a war for."
So to me all this talk about split second decisions is pointless. There's a reason I'm not arguing that he was wrong to save Amoracchius. Now THAT is a split second decision where you have leeway. If the choice is between a huge diplomatic incident and a priceless weapon from God himself then you get to pull the split second decision card because of the value of all the possible decisions. Not so with Susan.
I feel like we've had a similar conversation on this board. Is it right to do the right thing, as you understand it, in all things large and small and damn the consequences? I can recognize a good intentions, and even a form of nobility in that. At the same time I feel an adult is responsible for considering the consequences of their actions.
Bianca asked Harry if he was willing to drag the White Council into a war for one person. He replied a person was the only worthy cause he could imagine fighting a war over. This indisputably happened. That the Reds were already preparing for a genocidal war against the wizards and Harry's actions upset their plans is a happy accident, he had no way of knowing it at the time.
"Any plan which requires the direct intervention of any deity to work can be assumed to be a very poor one."- Newbiespud
You can easily argue that saving one life is always good regardless of consequence. I'm sure that's a valid philosophical alternative to utilitarianism or some form of duty ethics that require Harry doing the prudent thing.
The problem is that no one wants to argue this probably because the case seems so intuitively obvious them. Instead we get a bunch of apologia for Harry that is completely besides the point.
Harry's choices don't always end up smart. See "Ghost Story".
I never said I was arging for or against, Scrib. Harry has his own moral code, he does what he sees as Right. Protect the Mortal against the Immortal is Right, or did you miss Harry's reaction to all the mortals that the Red Court was about to serve up as dinner? Save the Sword of Love is RIGHT. Kill a vampire for trying to take the sword is RIGHT.
Susan, however, was Personal, and he always meant to kill Bianca for touching her. That was the "Not Thinking" part I mentioned.
So, yes, he stormed a Red Court bastion over Amocchius, but he killed Bianca and set off a War over love. To him, this was RIGHT. To the current Merlin, it was stupid, reckless, and would get them all killed. To Ebenezer, it was young and stupid, but he knew why Harry did it. To the Fae, this was GRAND Entertainment, and caught Mab's interest in this young mage.
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
LadyTevar wrote:I will point out there is a HUGE reason why the Fae Courts are in Detroit. You find out in "Small Favors" why Chicago is so important.
I assume you mean Chicago, yes?
Yes, I meant Chicago. Cold meds, I blame Cold Meds.
But more implicitly, I mean what's Under Chicago... the biggest node of Leylines on this side of the world, one which outshines Edinburgh.
Again, we don't find out where it's coming from until "White Night", and it's central to "Cold Days", but I'm not saying a WORD about it here.
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
LadyTevar wrote:Harry's choices don't always end up smart. See "Ghost Story".
I never said I was arging for or against, Scrib. Harry has his own moral code, he does what he sees as Right. Protect the Mortal against the Immortal is Right, or did you miss Harry's reaction to all the mortals that the Red Court was about to serve up as dinner? Save the Sword of Love is RIGHT. Kill a vampire for trying to take the sword is RIGHT.
Susan, however, was Personal, and he always meant to kill Bianca for touching her. That was the "Not Thinking" part I mentioned.
So, yes, he stormed a Red Court bastion over Amocchius, but he killed Bianca and set off a War over love. To him, this was RIGHT. To the current Merlin, it was stupid, reckless, and would get them all killed. To Ebenezer, it was young and stupid, but he knew why Harry did it. To the Fae, this was GRAND Entertainment, and caught Mab's interest in this young mage.
Do you think this is right? Because that's how this entire discussion got started. Describing the factors in the decision is not particularly interesting.Just imagine if every trial went this way.James Holmes killed a bunch of people. To him this is RIGHT...
Of course, one could also easily argue that Harry was full of shit and didn't consider himself right in the way you mean at all. You yourself jump from thinking the action was personal and thoughtless to morally right in half a post. But of course, less interesting that defending the hard position that Gaidan set for himself.
Why does my opinion of Right/Wrong have to come into this? I read the books because I love the writing, the characters, and because I like that Harry is a flawed hero. He has his code, and I respect it, but there have been many times reading the novels I've facepalmed and thought "Oh gods, he's doing it again, what will go wrong this time." Harry seems intent on doing things the Hard Way sometimes... see how he retrieves Bob in "Cold Days".
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
Because that was what this whole thing has been about since the very beginning when Gaidan made his post. This has always been a discussion on what was right, what he OUGHT to have done.
Because description is not particularly interesting since we all read the books too and understand why Harry makes decisions.
Because I suspect that this laid back, let-me-explain-but-not-actually-take-any-stand thing (the alternative to the more common excuse-excuse-excuse tactic) is completely unsustainable for anyone other than people like Harry.I think it's a tactic of convenience. Apply it to every despicable character and I think a lot of people crack (or more likely they wouldn't make any of the arguments seen here). If they don't crack nothing gets discussed because we all know the events, it's the judgement that colors them that we need other people for.
What Harry *should* have done is not going to change what happened, because Harry would not have done anything but what he felt he had to do. Save Amocchicus? Face down a house full of Vampires. Save his stupid girlfriend who should never have been there in the first place? Kill Bianca. Stop rampaging Werewolves? Kill them. Stop a ritual that would make someone a god? Revive a T-Rex as a tank. Save your best friend's daughter? Face down the Council and get in even deeper shit with the Merlin. Save his baby boy? Pick up a coin.
Harry never does the smart thing, which you might argue was the Right thing (ie not kill bianca, not start a war). He does what his personal code demands: save the girl, stop the bad guy. It's not always RIGHT to do the GOOD DEED
Nitram, slightly high on cough syrup: Do you know you're beautiful?
Me: Nope, that's why I have you around to tell me.
Nitram: You -are- beautiful. Anyone tries to tell you otherwise kill them.
"A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. LLAP" -- Leonard Nimoy, last Tweet
LadyTevar wrote:I never saw Gaiden's post, only yours, LOL.
What Harry *should* have done is not going to change what happened, because Harry would not have done anything but what he felt he had to do. Save Amocchicus? Face down a house full of Vampires. Save his stupid girlfriend who should never have been there in the first place? Kill Bianca. Stop rampaging Werewolves? Kill them. Stop a ritual that would make someone a god? Revive a T-Rex as a tank. Save your best friend's daughter? Face down the Council and get in even deeper shit with the Merlin. Save his baby boy? Pick up a coin.
Harry never does the smart thing, which you might argue was the Right thing (ie not kill bianca, not start a war). He does what his personal code demands: save the girl, stop the bad guy. It's not always RIGHT to do the GOOD DEED
I can't remember who makes this point to him (Nicodemus himself?), but the point is made to Harry that at the time Nicodemus tosses the coin, Harry instinctively grabs the coin, instead of the kid. That's a theme that plays out several times in the course of the books: Harry has immediate impulses toward self-sacrifice, which is not the same thing as impulses to protect.
