The only question is whether the Adversary really does not want to be a part of Oronthon's plan or not. I love Anne Rice's treatment of the 'adversary' if you will in Menmoch the Devil. There the devil is a willful participant in God's plan, albeit because he disagrees with the way God handles creation. He provides an 'alternate path' to salvation. I'm not saying that this character plays the same role but there certainly could be more to the Adversary's decision to 'go green' than simple self-preservation.
Aeon (updated 10/9/14)
The only question is whether the Adversary really does not want to be a part of Oronthon's plan or not. I love Anne Rice's treatment of the 'adversary' if you will in Menmoch the Devil. There the devil is a willful participant in God's plan, albeit because he disagrees with the way God handles creation. He provides an 'alternate path' to salvation. I'm not saying that this character plays the same role but there certainly could be more to the Adversary's decision to 'go green' than simple self-preservation.
You know, I'm not sure. Before I realized there was a distinction between Asmodeus and The Adversary, I would have said no. To much opacity ruins any chance of empathizing with a character, and it seems that empathy is somewhat called for, given the Miltonian feel.
But in all honesty, who is to say? The answer, as afact, is probably fairly inconsistent. Nwm said it himself: the Great Deceiver may be pulling one Hell of a hood-wink. And what's more, I bet the Adversary could lie so well, he believed it, making he lie a truth. Until, of course, he no longer needed or benefited from it.
Really, it's entirely possible that between Oronthon and the Nameless Seraph, the paradigm is one of children bickering at make-believe. Oronthon is older, so he will always win, but it's an eternity of "my attack pierces your armor!"
"my shield reflects your attack"
"my attack was a distraction from this other attack"
"well I was an illusion the whole time".
Schrodinger's nightmare; every possible answer, save to most absurd, is entirely true until a nodality is reached which severs the possibility of some ... Possibilities. Hm, I need either a thesaurus handy or better sentence planning. But you see my point?
But in all honesty, who is to say? The answer, as afact, is probably fairly inconsistent. Nwm said it himself: the Great Deceiver may be pulling one Hell of a hood-wink. And what's more, I bet the Adversary could lie so well, he believed it, making he lie a truth. Until, of course, he no longer needed or benefited from it.
Really, it's entirely possible that between Oronthon and the Nameless Seraph, the paradigm is one of children bickering at make-believe. Oronthon is older, so he will always win, but it's an eternity of "my attack pierces your armor!"
"my shield reflects your attack"
"my attack was a distraction from this other attack"
"well I was an illusion the whole time".
Schrodinger's nightmare; every possible answer, save to most absurd, is entirely true until a nodality is reached which severs the possibility of some ... Possibilities. Hm, I need either a thesaurus handy or better sentence planning. But you see my point?
I, for one, very much appreciate the re-stating of ideas and conflicts by Baron Opal and Cheiromancer. This is tough stuff, and I'm not ashamed to admit it.I'm also thrilled to see a new update!
Yeah, I loved the update.
But I had to read it three or four times to grasp what was going on... and even then I missed a few bits and pieces. Baron Opal and Cheiromancer did a really great job of summarizing and condensing the whole argument and even pointed out a few things I missed.
I always feel like I'm sitting in on a philosophy class when this story hour updates... I love it.
Absolutely see it...Oronthon and the Nameless Seraph are exactly like kids playing a make-believe game, only they have the power to shape reality in the process. Oronthon always 'wins' because he can 'make-believe-create' better than the Adversary, but no one has fun at make-believe unless there's a little give and take. I see it in my kids all the time. Yeah, the older one shapes the reality but the younger ones add their own flavor to the story, shaping it within the structure created by the eldest.
That description would fit whether the Adversary was a willing participant with Oronthon's plans (ie he supports Oronthon's ends but not his means), an unwilling participant (he supports neither the means nor the ends but is an unwilling - though likely not unwitting hence the bitterness - tool of Oronthon), or a true enemy to the plans of Oronthon, actively attempting to thwart both Oronthon's means and ends. Regardless of which paradigm describes their relationship they truly are playing a game of 'make-believe-create' or maybe a better wording of 'believe-make'.
The Forsaken One
Explorer
TOLD YOU MY INFINITY WAS BIGGER THEN YOURS!
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!! Brilliant xD.
Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!!! Brilliant xD.
Don't forget of course that one of those kids created the others.
How important that is depends on who you ask, the Adversary or Oronthon.
