Not to mention rolling him out puts extra emotional pressure on Dresden to say yes.

Really don't understand why people have to be so rude.

 

Additionally: "Shit like this is why we get fics where Harry gives Mab or Titania his almighty protagonist cock and suddenly everything is sunshine and rainbows."

There are no such fics. I know this, since I'm the only one who has written smut involving either Mab or Titania. (And I'm trying to do one involving both.)

Do I do this because of some delusion that they can be redeemed by Dresden's dick? Of course not. I do it cause it's fun. I doubt anyone really takes such fics seriously (except you apparently).

Aaand if there are any other fics like the ones you mentioned, could you please link me to them?

 

Just gonna comment about the nicknaming thing re: Uriel.

There was another angel whose name meant "light". Specifically, bringing light.

He's... not exactly an angel anymore. Might be an extra reason for Uriel to be a bit upset about the "of God" bit being left off.

 

In her personal garden? For almost a decade?

Killing him in an excruciatingly painful, slow, and public way and then hanging his body outside her front door would have set an example.

Torturing him for approximately eight years in private in her personal gardens isn't setting an example. That's pleasure, not business.

You're fucking delusional. This is nothing to do with being rude. This is you choosing to ignore facts. I can name villains that haven't done a tenth of the things Mab has done that people would unquestionably call evil, and yet there you stand, making excuses and handwaving away.

It's sad, and you're a sad person.

Look at this shit:

You aren't even sorry. And you expect to be taken seriously?

 

Angels are also less tangible creatures, right? All soul? Perhaps the name does a bit more in actually keeping them together?

Just random guesswork.

---------- Post automerged at 08:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:17 PM ----------

Should I be sorry for making obvious jokes, Raine? Or for wanting to read any fic involing Mab because I enjoy her character? Hell, I think Deirdre's death was the most heart-wrenching moment of Skin Game, or many of the books, and she was a sadistic little shit.

Am I expecting to be taken seriously? No. Of course not. Why? Because I'm not being particularly serious.

I'm not ignoring facts, I'm interpreting things differently. That's a whole other thing.

Now please do the following.

1. Take a deep breath.
2. Repeat. "It is only a discussion about a book on an internet forum."
3. Return to step 1.

When you have stopped being a pissy little kid, you can stop.

 

Oh I'm sorry, was that a joke? Because you were seriously arguing that someone who mentally and physically tortured somebody they crucified to a tree for ten years wasn't evil, and your argument was "well obviously she was going to do that, she has to send a message."

I must have missed the part where you stopped making laughable arguments and were actually trying to be funny.

Are you actually trying to be taken seriously and come across as the reasonable one, and failing at it this badly, or is this some kind of meta-troll?

When you've stopped trying to argue with me about fairies while typing one-handed, maybe we can start this over again.

How about you bite the bullet for a change, and provide some evidence that the Queen of Evil Sidhe isn't evil? Because I've seen a whole lot of fucking nothing on that front from any of you. All you seem to have are excuses and justifications for torturing people and inflicting petty cruelties just because she can. Maybe if your argument wasn't purely reactionary and excusatory in nature, you'd be taken seriously as something other than a fanboy that's scrambling for damage control.

 

1. Evil is a very loose term, making it difficult to apply to anyone.

2. Dresden does not consider Mab evil.

3. Time matters little to someone like Mab. Torturing a mortal like Slate for a few years to send a message would not be the same to her as it would be anyone else.

4. She might also have figured that Dresden would have an easier time finishing the job if he was it as an act of mercy.

5. Failing that, it would serve as a warning to a much sought after asset what would happen were he to betray her.

This might not be more than reasonable doubt, but you're the one suggesting she is evil. I sure as hell ain't suggesting she's good.

To respond to your non-Dresden stuff:

1. My masturbatory preferences are none of your concern, thank you very much.

2. Why yes, I am the reasonable one. You see, I'm not the one frothing at the mouth with rage over an internet discussion, nor the one sinking to insulting anyone.

3. Mab fanboy and proud of it.

 

Meant more along the lines that it's highly unlikely that an archangel would be particularly fond of being reminded of the whole Fall thing.

I tend to view it as two separate but related problems: Harry didn't quite understand just how important names are in the Dresdenverse, and he chose a nickname for Uriel that may have hit on a bit of a sore point in addition to being, uh, what was it? A child playing with a grenade? Been a while since I read that story.

Unless someone gets an answer from Jim Butcher, I'm not gonna touch what exactly mangling Uriel's name would actually do...but it certainly seems like he'd have a lot of reason to dislike a nickname with that particular meaning above most others regardless of the potential negative effects.

 

This argument is fascinating. /popcorntime

To call what Mab does "evil" is really, really stretching it. She's all about crime and punishment, and she's an extremist at dealing judgment to those who have legitimately offended her. As someone mentioned - popping a bullet in the brain of a traitor to send a message is enough for someone like Marcone, but Mab doesn't roll like that. She's a soulless being who's lived centuries (millenia?), and her understanding of the concept of what true suffering means is something that is vastly alien, especially when viewed from a mortal's perspective. She's sadistic, and she's all about herself and what benefits her the most - but she won't go out and eat the heart of a baby just because she feels like it. However anyone who crosses her is fair game, and it can very well be that her response to such an event is vastly disproportionate to the magnitude of offense against her. It's primarily business to her, but she can be extremely fond of mixing business with pleasure.

However, perhaps the real issue of contention here is your (Lord Raine vs Zeelthor) differing definitions of what it entails to be evil. Can Mab be wicked, depraved, sadistic, malicious? Yes, but she's not these things just for the sake of it, as far as we've seen. She's not like Voldemort. She won't kill a child on the roadside for looking at her wrong. As I mentioned - it is important to remember that these are characteristics that only truly come to light when someone gives her reason to vent by offending her. Give her no good reason to, and she stays out of way generally. In fact there are rules in place to ensure this. To clearly go out on a limb and label Mab as evil is to not understand what evil is. Mab is no fairy godmother, but she occupies that grey area between good and bad. No, scratch that - the truth is she is not confined by such paltry notions as good and evil. She resides in a sphere unaffected by such rigid restrictions. Even Dresden, who is usually very quick to designate such labels, doesn't think she's evil.

Now, inb4 you ask, I am a Mab fanboy. And yes, you are being rude. Quite a lot in fact. As much as I don't like Zeelthor p), I'll have to agree with him. You can make your point without resorting to petty insults. This is an internet forum where you are debating an issue that has no tangible implications in real life other than perhaps a chance to stroke your e-peen and come out as the victor. Really, don't you think it's just a little worrying to get so riled up over the simple issue of a disagreement?

Back to /popcorntime

 

On a somewhat related note to the current argument, Mab being Grumpy!Elsa is now my headcanon.

mostly just to fuck with Raine

 

Jesus fucking Christ, calm your shit. It's possible to argue things without coming off like a cock, you know. I hear it's great fun.

 

Wait...Raine, are you seriously wondering why Mab took Lloyd Slate's betrayal and subsequent punshiment so personally?

Now who hasn't read the books? The Winter Knight is a double edged sword. The Mantle's power comes from the Queen and so the Winter Knight is one of the few people capable of doing significant harm to the Queen.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Winter Knight wasn't a walking conjunction for the Winter Queen, or wasn't capable of permanent damage to the Queen's mantle.

So of course Mab took the whole thing personally. The betrayal of the Winter Knight is about as personal as it gets for her. I would say someone of Mab's power took it pretty lightly on Lloyd Slate except I'm not entirely sure how the punishment could have gotten any worse.

 

This isn't the real world. This is the Dresden universe. There are holy swords. Fallen Angels live in coins. Beings of Fairie drag people away into the shadows never to be seen again. Vampires predate humans off the streets.

Try another line besides "there is no good or evil."

Citation needed.

Swing and miss. You just tried to justify torturing and mind raping someone horrifically for a decade on the grounds that the decade doesn't really matter, give or take.

That's not really the important part here.

In which case she just tortured someone horrifically solely to gain an advantage during what amounts to a job negotiation.

Explain to me how that's any less of an evil act.

You still aren't explaining how torturing someone isn't an evil act. You're just providing reasons for torturing them. I can shoot my neighbor to keep them quiet during the night, but the justification doesn't absolve the act.

You just keep listing reasons for why brutally torturing someone over an extended period of time gives Mab an advantage without actually seeming to consider that brutally torturing someone for any reason is evil.

I find it incredibly disturbing that you don't seem to realize this yourself.

No. She's the Queen of Air and Darkness, ruler of Wicked Fairies. Dresden himself described her as being what amounts to the Headmistress at the academy that every Disney Villain graduated from.

The narrative clearly paints Mab as being evil. Thus, evidence would need to be presented to support the assertion that she is not. You can't just say "well it's just your opinion that she's evil."

No. It's basically everyone's opinion in-universe. You don't get to give Mab the benefit of the doubt. You need to provide evidence to suggest otherwise.

Then don't ask for fap material.

No, you're the one using smilies, which is a thousand times worse.

You're also the one arguing that it's cool to torture and rape someone for a decade so long as it provides you some sort of advantage or leverage. So no, you aren't "the reasonable one," either.

So you're admitting that you're not able to be impartial, then?

 

I don't think Mab's evil, I believe she's just a strong believer in, " The ends justify the means " kind of person who just so happens to have a ton of power at her disposable with almost unlimited resources to that " end ".

 

I've got to say, much as this discussion has become somewhat vitriolic, I'm with Raine on this one. Is Mab sadistic? Maybe not (though I'd argue she is). Vindictive? Definitely. Does she have a good goal, the defense of the Outer Gates? Sure. That doesn't change the fact that she has done some horrific things. Evil isn't necessarily about eating babies for fun. Sometimes evil is simply the absence of any empathy or consideration to anything or anyone in the way of your goals, no matter how worthy. Enslaving the world, turning it into a factory for soldiers to man the Gates - that would be evil, in my opinion. Serving a greater good wasn't an acceptable excuse when Dumbledore was stealing Harry's money, and it isn't now.

This reminds me of something in some Naruto thread, where someone argued that Orochimaru wasn't truly evil, he was just motivated by scientific curiosity.

 

I don't use the term evil to describe Mab because I think true evil requires a choice. Mab doesn't have a choice in how she acts; she can no more decide to be kind and generous than she can tell a direct lie. I'd no more call Mab evil than I would a snake or a man eating tiger.

 

Seelie and Unseelie Fae do not equal Good and Evil Fae. That's just the easiest way for a mortal to look at them in broad terms. They're too 'alien' to look at them in such terms. I got that from their early appearances in the Dresden Files though, and as such it is subject to narrative bias.

/mytwocents.

 

The idea of having free will or not having free will is fluff and nonsense that boils down to nothing but confusion when looked at from the perspective of a deterministic universe. Humans don't have free will any more than faeries do, they just have brains that are programmed differently (and the rules for which are not "narrative convention" and "human-derived abstract concepts like 'truth'").

Mab is "evil" because her values do not coincide with those of other beings and she is willing to use force to achieve her ends.

 

I disagree. They do have a choice. Mab was mortal once, she said so herself. We have no reason to presume that the Mantle for Winter Knight or Winter Lady work any different from the ones for the Winter Mother or the Winter Queen.

Harry certainly can choose, within the bounds of his mantle, how he behaves. So too can Molly. Before we saw Molly, you could have applied the same argument to justify everything Maeve did. Now it's becoming clear that Maeve was just that psychopathic a person. And from what admittedly little we've seen them say and do, it's implied the Mothers also have the ability to choose how they behave, within the bounds their roles have them play.

I'm could further argue along that your comparison doesn't work, because tigers, snakes, and sharks aren't sapient beings, and that animals that are intelligent certainly have the ability to choose, as they've been shown to have personalities and make choices. I could even go so far as to say that an intelligent being that also has destructive instincts is still ultimately responsible for how they behave, because human beings are arguably nothing more than highly intelligent animals with destructive instincts, and we certainly hold ourselves and each other responsible for our actions. But it's not really necessary.

You're assuming that the Mantle of Winter Queen is somehow more restrictive than all the others. The Knights can choose, re Harry vs Slate. The Ladies can choose, re Molly vs Maeve. Even the Mothers, as limited as they are in how they can behave, still have the ability to act of their own free will within the boundaries their roles have them play.

The entire byplay of Skin Game on a meta level was that people with mantles and cosmic power can choose to neglect their duties or otherwise misuse or misappropriate their powers. Most of the Greek gods did it. Maeve not only misused her powers and actively neglected her duties, her byplay with Mab immediately before her death clearly states that she could completely ignore ALL of her duties with no repercussions to her person.

Whether or not they fulfill their duties, and how they go about doing so, are within the purview of those who hold the power. Maeve chose to neglect her duties, just as Molly is choosing to fulfill them. Harry chose to fight the impulses, just as Slate choose to indulge them. Mother Winter chose to show partiality to Harry, and even imparted him a valuable lesson about the potential uses of Soulfire, couched within her ability to act as a Destroyer. Mother Summer chose to show Harry the wall, and in doing so, taught him the identity of the true enemy and the stakes that the game was being played for, even though she had zero obligation to answer any of his questions or even give him the time of day. He's literally from the opposing court.

Where, then, is the evidence that Mab makes an effort to assert her will?

So far, I have yet to see any evidence that Mab and Titania aren't just two equally but differently twisted and hypocritical old women sitting on two functionally identical thrones, that don't particularly mind or care that their masks do all the talking for them. Maybe they were both weak minded people in the beginning, like Slate was, and either didn't have the will to resist or choose not to try. Maybe they just got tired of fighting the impulses. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter. Knowingly allowing yourself to be used to perform evil actions is no less of an evil act that deciding to do it entirely on your own.

Apathetically allowing the mantle of the Winter Queen to dictate her actions instead of finding more creative solutions to problems that don't involve running other people the fuck over still makes Mab evil, because not caring what happens to other people is evil.

Even if, somehow, against all logic and indicators we've seen so far, the mantles of the Queens control more of their actions than any of the others, at the very least, their emotions are still their own. Titania proved that, as did Mab. So even in the very worst case scenario, if Mab ever seemed even slightly remorseful at the necessity of all the things she does, you might possibly be able to swing an argument in her favor.

But she doesn't. The only time she ever showed any semblance of regret or remorse for her actions was when Maeve was lost to her. And as far as I'm concerned, that's meaningless.

Even Nicodemus shed a tear over Deidere. That didn't make him good. Just hypocritical.

 

Ok, so I'm gonna be honest. I've skimmed over most of this argument because I keep seeing the same thing.

Lord Raine, you are trying to ascribe human characteristics to an inhuman being. By human standards, Mab would be evil. She is clearly not human, and thus cannot be judged as such.

Aekiel touched on this with his comment about evil requiring a choice. But Mab has a purpose to her life, and she lives to fulfil that purpose. The methods she uses are simply who she is, it is immutable. It's like calling a wasp evil for laying it's egg inside a caterpillar, which then consumes it from the inside out.

For all intents and purposes, Mab is an animal, acting the way she is meant to. What she once was is irrelevant. Stop trying to ascribe human morals to her.

Edit: Just saw the last line of your last post. Nicodemus is human, Mab is not. Maybe try comparing apples and oranges next?