(urth) Like a good Neighbor

[David Stockhoff]

On 11/21/2011 11:43 AM, António Pedro Marques wrote:
> David Stockhoff wrote (21-11-2011 16:33):
>> On 11/21/2011 10:57 AM, António Pedro Marques wrote:
>>> David Stockhoff wrote (21-11-2011 15:25):
>>>> Why do you think a death here harms the story?
>>>
>>> I think the problem with Horn dying at this point is the consequence -
>>> that either there is no more Horn or Horn resurrects. The first 
>>> makes the
>>> whole story a sham (not so much for us as for the characters), the 
>>> second
>>> introduces an element that not only seems to be otherwise absent from
>>> LS/SS, but is applied to Horn in particular with no justification.
>>
>> OK. What justification is needed for a character on a great, impossible
>> quest to die and be resurrected before he achieves his goal?
>
> The one that explains why it isn't done to every such character in 
> History.

I see. Yes, that's a good question ... IF you assume that whoever holds 
that power can do it for everyone. I have not seen such a theory stated 
here, and I assume that we are not actually speaking of God so I don't 
expect to see one.

The simple answer is the Sun Cycle does not exist in an intertextual 
vacuum. As in any tale of a quest, forces who possess a limited ability 
to resurrect humans have an interest in keeping the hero alive. So they 
do, albeit at great cost to themselves. In this case, they had to give 
up a Neighbor. So you know they wanted Silk pretty bad.

Why this might be the case is a far larger question than I will take up 
here. Plainly we don't need to answer the "why" before we answer the 
"how" because we already know it happened.

To put it another way, as I implied, a hero on a great impossible 
mission needs no further justification whatsoever to be resurrected if 
he dies. It is the death and resurrection that are the point of the 
story, not the achievement of the quest.