Further Thoughts on Strangulation

[eachase.livejournal.com]

Does anyone else have trouble getting to sleep after our chats? I'm energized and my mind is going a mile a minute. (I'm not complaining, just noting a trend.)

Last night I continuted to ponder my question about Philologos, Gen, and strangulation.

"'Not because he's king,' Philologos said, disgusted with their dull wits. 'Because he has only one hand,' he said, voicing the king's bitterness as his own. (pg. 327)

Then later, Gen says to Costis, "'Do you know, you can't strangle a man with one hand,' he said very seriously. 'It's probably why I have only one. It narrows one's options. I may make a poor king with one hand, but the gods know I'd be no king at all if I had two.'"

So, my question really should have been: why does Gen want to *strangle* Nahuseresh? We know he's skilled enough to take him out in many other ways.

Here's my current theory:

Nahuseresh caused:
-Attolia to cut off Gen's hand, which led
-Eddis to declare, "War, then." Which eventually led
-the MoW to have to try to stangle his own son to death to save him from (further) torture by Attolia

In response, Gen
-steals Nahuseresh's (metaphorical) right hand, Kamet and uses him to
-destory the Mede fleet, at the very least postponing a war

And so to finish off the mirroring, the only fitting way to kill Nahuseresh is to strangle him.

Thus, fittingly responding to each of the atrocities Nahuseresh caused the people most dear to Gen to commit against him.

Thoughts?

Memories...

[aged-crone.livejournal.com]

Feeling nostalgic, I went digging in the archives and found my first post (https://sounis.livejournal.com/63111.html?view=comments#comments) Gosh, almost 14 years! It was interesting to see who is still on LJ and whose names have lines drawn through them because they've left. I hope everybody comes back to discuss the last book.

Maybe I'll go through and read the entire archive...