HFQ Official Snippet #14

I won’t pretend that everyone who’s learned the truth has simply gone merrily along still believing in God, because some of them haven’t.

I think his brother, Baron Rock Point, is less certain God even exists, much less that He’s taking a personal interest in anything that happens here on Safehold.

Incognitia wrote:

I won’t pretend that everyone who’s learned the truth has simply gone merrily along still believing in God, because some of them haven’t.

YES

I think his brother, Baron Rock Point, is less certain God even exists, much less that He’s taking a personal interest in anything that happens here on Safehold.

EVEN MORE YES.

Moar Rock Point please?

In all seriousness, this is a very good snippet, thank ye good Mad Wizard; I'll be very interested to see how Sandaria's internal turmoil develops and what effects her eventual beliefs have on the Sisters of Saint Kohdy.
It is good to see that Merlin's, Nimue's and the Inner Circle's tolerance does extend to non-belief; I've really not been clear on that, and e.g. was somewhat concerned that if Paityr Wylsynn went atheist he would have been quietly murdered. I suppose as Intendant he was in a special position, but even so there was a lot of effort put into bringing him round; good to see that isn't universal or official Inner Circle policy.
A Merry Christmas to all, and after Christmas we'll be eagerly waiting to see what happens next!

JeffEngel wrote:

Kufat wrote:It's interesting to contrast the nuanced (but still undeniable) villainy of the Writ's authors with the unmitigated evil of Clyntahn and many of his goons.

Merry Christmas and thanks for the snippets!

Even Clyntahn isn't a villain in his own mind. He's got an account of his actions, many of them at least, that's exactly the right thing to do given his plausibly sincere beliefs. He's the one standing between Safehold and Shan-wei. He's it. Everyone else, except a handful of the Inquisition and a tiny portion of the Vicarate, is soft, soft, soft. They think that fallen man has levers called "love" or "hope" or "respect" that can be flipped and point them away from Hell. They're wrong. Fear and pain are it. That's all that's left. You want someone spared eternal damnation? Those are your tools. If you flinch from using them, you're Shan-wei's tool, whatever rosy visions or cuddly warm feelings you have.

Langhorne and company weren't necessarily cruel, like he is. They didn't count on humans being quite so simply motivated, and they certainly didn't have theology justifying their position. (Well - not exactly - it's arguable they had a "punishment for technological hubris" historical narrative rolling around their orientation.) They figured this is what it would take to keep humanity safe from the Gbaba: no more technology, ever, and a social matrix that left the minimum social position that of chattel slavery, or tortured-to-death heretic.

Clyntahn's probably a lot worse in terms of personal vice, that we know of - just how slimy "the Archangels" may have been in their personal dealings, we do not know. In terms of program and background for it, Clyntahn's is stripped down a bit by comparison. I'm not sure I'd be ready to say he's worse. To my mind, they're both pretty near the floor of human aspiration. The bits of regard for the well-being of other humans common to both programs don't count too much against the stupendous scale of suffering both programs casually accept as necessary. Total sociopaths without much ambition would rate as far better human beings, for instance.

Peter2 wrote:snip

Clyntahn comes over to me as power-hungry, a control freak (I'm not sure that those two are not the same), totally amoral, and a monomaniac. Considering what we know so far of his personal habits, it would be interesting to learn in detail precisely what he does believe in.

I'll add my thanks to RFC for our Christmas present and I wish all of you a Very Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and every good fortune in 2015.

fallsfromtrees wrote:

Incognitia wrote:In all seriousness, this is a very good snippet, thank ye good Mad Wizard; I'll be very interested to see how Sandaria's internal turmoil develops and what effects her eventual beliefs have on the Sisters of Saint Kohdy.
It is good to see that Merlin's, Nimue's and the Inner Circle's tolerance does extend to non-belief; I've really not been clear on that, and e.g. was somewhat concerned that if Paityr Wylsynn went atheist he would have been quietly murdered. I suppose as Intendant he was in a special position, but even so there was a lot of effort put into bringing him round; good to see that isn't universal or official Inner Circle policy.
A Merry Christmas to all, and after Christmas we'll be eagerly waiting to see what happens next!

I would have thought that the discussion between Staynair and Paityr when Paityr was inducted into the inner circle would have shown that they were willing to accept that non-belief was one of the possible results, and that it would not be held against him. Archbishop Staynair would fight any tendency to killing an atheist as totally against his beliefs, which are that everyone must be free to choose whether or not to believe. Any other position makes them no better than the CoGA, which insists on forcing belief on penalty of torture and death.

Incognitia wrote:In all seriousness, this is a very good snippet, thank ye good Mad Wizard; I'll be very interested to see how Sandaria's internal turmoil develops and what effects her eventual beliefs have on the Sisters of Saint Kohdy.
It is good to see that Merlin's, Nimue's and the Inner Circle's tolerance does extend to non-belief; I've really not been clear on that, and e.g. was somewhat concerned that if Paityr Wylsynn went atheist he would have been quietly murdered. I suppose as Intendant he was in a special position, but even so there was a lot of effort put into bringing him round; good to see that isn't universal or official Inner Circle policy.
A Merry Christmas to all, and after Christmas we'll be eagerly waiting to see what happens next!

fallsfromtrees wrote:I would have thought that the discussion between Staynair and Paityr when Paityr was inducted into the inner circle would have shown that they were willing to accept that non-belief was one of the possible results, and that it would not be held against him. Archbishop Staynair would fight any tendency to killing an atheist as totally against his beliefs, which are that everyone must be free to choose whether or not to believe. Any other position makes them no better than the CoGA, which insists on forcing belief on penalty of torture and death.

Incognitia wrote:Staynair might not, but Staynair might not get the final say - I saw that scene as showing that the Inner Circle were prepared to pull out the big guns (Staynair) to get someone to toe the line before pulling out the slightly smaller gun of Merlin's pistol, not that Merlin's pistol might not come out.

Kufat wrote:It's interesting to contrast the nuanced (but still undeniable) villainy of the Writ's authors with the unmitigated evil of Clyntahn and many of his goons.

Merry Christmas and thanks for the snippets!

fallsfromtrees wrote:I would have thought that the discussion between Staynair and Paityr when Paityr was inducted into the inner circle would have shown that they were willing to accept that non-belief was one of the possible results, and that it would not be held against him. Archbishop Staynair would fight any tendency to killing an atheist as totally against his beliefs, which are that everyone must be free to choose whether or not to believe. Any other position makes them no better than the CoGA, which insists on forcing belief on penalty of torture and death.

Incognitia wrote:Staynair might not, but Staynair might not get the final say - I saw that scene as showing that the Inner Circle were prepared to pull out the big guns (Staynair) to get someone to toe the line before pulling out the slightly smaller gun of Merlin's pistol, not that Merlin's pistol might not come out.

fallsfromtrees wrote:I read it as they might have to remove someone not because they lost their belief in God, but because they would become a danger to the inner circle - that is they would run out and start screaming it's all a fake and God doesn't really exist, and these people can prove it. That would be catastrophic, and Archbishop Staynair would have no problem with that individual being killed - well no problem is perhaps a little strong, but would accept the necessity. However the reason would not be a rejection of God, but rather the danger to the secret of the inner circle.

NinaKatarina wrote:

Kufat wrote:It's interesting to contrast the nuanced (but still undeniable) villainy of the Writ's authors with the unmitigated evil of Clyntahn and many of his goons.

Merry Christmas and thanks for the snippets!

You've just put your finger on something that's been bugging me for a while - Clyntahn is such a cartoon villain that he feels much less believable than Langhorne et al, even though Langhorne, Bedard, etc have been dead for centuries and are only shadows in the book. Clyntahn's only positive quality is his intelligence.

It makes those tantrum scenes everybody else seems to enjoy kind of tedious for me to read, honestly. I would love to see a bit more depth to his character. Although, to be fair, the way he is painted right now makes me very happy to ponder how much fun I will have reading the story of his eventual defeat.