Further Thoughts on Strangulation
Sep. 14th, 2020 08:03 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
eachase.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
queensthiefDoes 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?
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?
no subject
Date: 9/15/20 03:53 am (UTC)I always assumed Gen would like to strangle Nahuseresh because it requires two hands. That always wishing for the thing we can't have factor.
Do you think Gen, otherwise averse to killing, would/will kill Nahuseresh if given the chance? I go back and forth on it.
no subject
Date: 9/15/20 01:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9/16/20 05:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 9/18/20 02:33 pm (UTC)Who found himself in some unfortunate events,
Now his nemesis Nahuseresh,
who thought himself rather fresh,
will soon hang upside down from a fence!