Somehow I think when Delirium wanted to find his brother, Desire was there. When Aristaeus wants Eurydice causing her to tread on a snake, and Orpheus wanting her back from the dead, Desire was there. And finally when Morpheus wants to release his son, Desire was there.
It was a subtler plan than Desire raping Unity Kincaid hoping that her niece is killed by Morpheus, thus spilling family blood. And so, she succeeded, not only in killing Morpheus, but in doing it smoothly and without anyone believing she did it.
The tricky thing about the Endless, is trying to figure out when they are actually manipulating people. While it is possible that Desire could have manipulated people in these events, it is also possible that it was just fulfilling it's function. Dream had the power to put people to sleep, but that didn't mean he was the one behind everyone sleeping. You just happened to be in his realm. When you are depressed you just happen to be in Despair's realm. Death also never killed anybody. She just took people who were already dead or dying to where they needed to go. When Desire showed up in the club to get Delerium, someone instantly fell in love with Desire and wanted to have it. Desire then told that person to go to someone else. Desire did not make that person want to have it. Whenever someone desires something, then we are in Desire's realm. Also Orpheus's wedding happened in 500 B.C. while Desire first wanted to get revenge on Dream in September 1875. It is possible that Desire and Dream started to fight after Destruction left the family. It has been said many times that the Endless were different before Destruction left. Dream also confronted Desire at the end of the Doll's House, telling it he knew what it was doing. Even the thing with Nada loving Dream wasn't entirely Desire's effect. In Seasons of Mists Desire tells Dream that Nada truly loved him. I also want to point out that Desire didn't remember Calliope's name. This could mean that Desire didn't really remember what happened back then. It really wouldn't matter if Desire had a part in the death of Eurydice, it was Dream refusing to help his son that led to Dream's death. If Dream had helped his son, things could have turned out differently and he might not have had to kill Orpheus in the future.
[This message has been edited by Morpheus (edited 07-23-2001).]
[This message has been edited by Morpheus (edited 07-23-2001).]
Dream's death can ultimately be traced back to desire. Do you think that this is Gaiman's ultimate theme in the Sandman, that desire is a dangerous thing?
We're getting a little off topic here, but it is a very valid and appropriate point, nonetheless, because, really, Dream had to desire death as well, to orchestrate (conciously or unconciously) his demise.
It's interesting how all the Endless played a part in Morpheus' road to death.
Definitely, there is a connection between Morpheus' despair after the Thessaly breakup, which led to his desire to seek destruction, which ultimately led to his death. where do destiny and delerium fit in, though?
Destiny held the meeting of the Endless in the Seasons of Mists leading to Dream going to Hell. Delerium asked Dream to go find her brother. If Delerium had not wanted to find her brother then Dream would have never needed to talk to Orpheus. It should be noted though that Desire did not have a part in Delerium wanting to find her brother.
Here's a wild theory:
Loki wanted to get rid of Dream because he didn't want to be beholden to anyone. He steals Daniel, and makes Lyta thinks he's died.
I seem to remember a point where they burn Daniel in fire, to get rid of his mortality. Given that Daniel was born in the Dreaming, is it possible that Puck and Loki were attempting to create a being who could control the Dreaming and destroy Morpheus, ie another Sandman?
|is imperfectly illuminated|
I can't remember who mentioned it, but someone was asking why Morpheus would send out Loki to do his work, when he is so untrustworthy.
(at this point I must admit I am of the Dream commits elaborate suicide school of thought, while others - Desire, Loki etc, believe [at least for a while] that they were the architects)
The point is that Dream knows, and appreciates, the value of nature. He gets a debt owed from Loki precisely because Loki is unreliable. Just as Brute and Glob are untrustworthy. Dream allows his underlings more freedom of action than he allows himself, sometimes. The Corinthian is allowed to kill people for fun, while Dream apologises a million times before actually killing Unity 'the only time I am permitted to take human like'.
Loki is 'fire, and deceit'. Fire is by its very nature untrustworthy. Dream unleashes the Corinthian because the Corinthian will do what Dream bids him. No more, no less. Loki is Mr lawyer loophole, and when he says 'I am fire, etc,etc, and I will be beholden to no one' he is in the process of both paying off that debt AND turning it around.
This is Dream's gift. He IS 'story' by his very nature, and stories use characters flaws to reach the resolution by themselves, providing the prompts, then letting the characters reach the end he forsaw.
I hope I have made sense, and made it clear that I agree with the author of this thread.
[This message has been edited by Murphy (edited 07-25-2001).]
I agree completely with Murphy, and appreciate his agreement with me.
Your point about Dream 'being story" is right on. The nature of stories is clearly Neil's primary subject matter in this, and most of his work. It's no ce
what happened to the rest of my message. I had intelligent philosophizing-type whooey in that.
I think it was something along the lines of...
It's no coincidence that Neil chose Dream to write about. Dream is the only Endless that directly influences stories. In effect, Neil is answering the old question "where do your ideas come from?" for writers and also showing where hope and inspiration come from.
yeah. something like that.
I was under the impression that Dream orchestrated something... some parts of the situation... but that he never conciously intended to die. That it went further than he'd intended. But that events cannot be controlled, nor completely predicted, even by someone older than most of the gods.
He had a choice in every action he took, and he took certain actions that were designed to bring about change to both his realm and his own nature. He had realized that he was not, perhaps, the sort of person who he wanted to be; he had become rigid and unbending.
Here's another thought: Dreams are by their nature fluid and strange. By becoming too rigid he was defying his own nature, what was necessary to his position as the concept of 'Dream'. So maybe the whole thing was necessary, from the point of view that there are rules that even the endless have to follow: one of those being that they must stay true to their own nature, must be the idea that they represent. And Dream was no longer able to fulfil that. He was unable to change to become able to fulfin that. So, he ended, and the new Dream - a blank slate, so to speak - came into being.
Anyways, I thought that he (Dream) had some idea in mind but that towards the end, things happened that he had not planned on. I believe that he knew Loki's nature, and used that; not that he directly asked Loki to do anything. I think that Loki's destruction of Daniel's humanity was necessary, but I don't know if how it happened was intended or not. Anyways, so many different things happened and affected the outcome that the only ones who really knew what was going on were Dream and Destiny; and then again, maybe only Destiny.
I think Lucifer didn't know what would happen when he gave the Key to Dream; but like he said, it couldn't possible do him any good. Dream was way to old, smart and (maybe) powerful for Lucifer to do some sort of planed thing to him, so all he could do was add in a bit of revenge to something he wanted to do anyways. A simple revenge that was planned could not work, it would be too inflexable, and could be too easily defeated. Lucifer could not possibly know how Dream would react to something like that, and it would be dangerous to have it go wrong. But owning Hell was a thing that was utterly unpredictable, a thing that you could not plan around or be upset about: It's like getting a promotion that sends you to the front lines. It's a reward that can get you killed, and you can't say that someone's got it in for you and take it out on them. It's an impossible position and the only one that would have worked. It reminds me a bit of tossing the football to the skinny kid with glasses when the other team is made up of 300 lb linebackers.
Ok, ok, I'll shut up now.
This backtracks a bit, but a lot of people keep talkng about desire as manipulating people into desiring things... and at times in the books this seems very reasonable to see... but someone correctly pointed out that desire doesn't make anyone want anything, and that seems true too... take three septembers and a january.... s/he couldn't make norton want the money or the women or the houses, she just offered him the temptation of things that had led other men down her path... although that scene always felt a bit odd to me... the way the dead guy, i forget his name, when asked what he wanted for all this, he responded "all you have to do is want it", as if he needed a signed statement that norton wanted these things... why not just say, I don't want anything, would you like them? It made it this condition, like the communists asking someone to sign a letter retracting some statement, "apparently innocuous" but really cravenly obvious in its deeper conotations... the guy said "all you have to do is WANT it", but if he accepted the offer of it, wouldn't that constitute wanting it? I've gotten sidetracked from my original point, but its all tied together and it seems pretty unclear how the endless work on these things... also, for more confusing endless questions, see my question posted over in the Delerium in "The Song of Orpheus" thread, where I just discovered while going to get the URL for you all, the first (in my mind) really interesting thoughts about m question were posted by snow (I'll have to respond), though Mike's thoughts earlier were also appreciated....
I'm sorry, I just don't buy this "Morpheus told Loki to kidnap Daniel" theory.
Even with Loki under obligation to Morpheus, why would Morpheus trust him to look after Daniel? Loki can NEVER be trusted. That's why he's in the cavern under the world in the first place.
Then no matter whether he knows it or not, Morpheus has changed. He does care about people, even bit players like Ruby. And when Daniel is kidnapped, Lyta goes through hell. She has nightmares from which she wakes up screaming. Her entire self is focused on "being strong for Daniel". All this is a necessary prerequisite for the murderous hatred that makes her seek the help of the Kindly Ones. If Morpheus had planned it all, he would have seen that. He has been a parent. He has done a terrible thing for the sake of his child. He would NEVER deliberately inflict all that on Lyta for his own ends. Even if he did, how would he know that Lyta would go to the Kindly Ones? She could have done something else that he could not predict.
Finally, the theory that he's been planning to get the Kindly Ones set on him right from the start is absurd. It would mean him planning to kill a member of his family. Now maybe he was right to kill Orpheus, but his way in such cases (as demonstrated forcefully in Season Of Mists) is to hold to his standards until someone convinces him he's wrong, then act immediately to put things right, regardless of the danger he has to put himself in to do so. So he can't have been planning to kill Orpheus before Brief Lives.
On the other hand, he tells Lyta the first time he meets her that one day he will come for her child. This is an incredibly heartless thing to say, especially since Lyta thinks he killed Hector and he doesn't bother to explain the truth. But does it mean that he was already planning that Daniel should be his successor? (Don't forget Daniel is the son of the third "Sandman", the only person ever to make Morpheus laugh out loud. That's GOT to be singular.) Maybe he just wanted an escape route in case he needed one (since it's not in his nature to abscond like Destruction and leave nobody in charge of his sphere).
So often through the series his actions are directed towards saving people from the kind of suffering he has endured in Fawney Rig. (Was he angry with Brute and Glob JUST because they defied his authority? Look at what they'd been doing to Jed, and how!) It starts in a small way with Marco Polo ("You don't know how lucky you are." "I do." "No. You don't.") and goes on through Jed, Calliope, Nada, Loki, and Orpheus (and I don't think this is the full list). Almost every time he does something like this, he allows it to put him in danger somehow, almost as if he's punishing himself for not doing it before, or for allowing it to need to be done. And he lets these dangers hang. Loki is free and hates being under an obligation to anybody. Lyta hates him. Lucifer has sworn to destroy him. And so on. He lets it build up until it inevitably drives him to his death. A twisted kind of subconscious justice has been served.
Someone wondered if the message was that empathy gets you killed. No. I think that even with the empathy Morpheus gains, he is still unable to compensate for his lack of empathy in the past. That's what he can't forgive himself for, and that's why, perhaps, he wants to die.
|is imperfectly illuminated|
Originally posted by Haras-uquara:
I'm sorry, I just don't buy this "Morpheus told Loki to kidnap Daniel" theory.
Even with Loki under obligation to Morpheus, why would Morpheus trust him to look after Daniel? Loki can NEVER be trusted. That's why he's in the cavern under the world in the first place.[/QUOTE]
see my post aboiut why get Loki to do a favour - because he *knows* Loki is gonna do what he asks then twist it.
He is the master of allowing nature to take it's course - while he merely supplies the right prompts.
It's an ongoing theme, throughout, little asides about nature and duty are put in. Look at the agents he uses - Lady Joanna , look what he says about her to Hob, look at the Corinthian - he isn't punished for killing, he's punished for not creating good enough nightmares.
It's important to look on Dream not as *just* a character. He is also the embodiment of 'story'. he doesn't 'act', he pushes others into action
He doesn't 'inflict' it himself, but he knows it must be done, and he does all he can to get Lyta mad. He *tells* her he will take the child, he appears when he must know she will be there. He doens't have to do any of those things, and he knows that when Loki steals the kid, he'll be blamed. It won't be his fault, and he knows killing Orpheus will come back to haunt him.
And as I said, he allows his subbordinates much more freedom of action than he allows himself. He doesn't mind his creatures killing, he has other concerns. And, yes, he has changed, but the reason he dies is because he couldn't change enough. He doesn't mind Loki doing what he does, it isn't his nature to be trusted. And he would never punidh Loki as the Corinthian does, either. That's his gift!
Even if he did, how would he know that Lyta would go to the Kindly Ones? She could have done something else that he could not predict.[/QUOTE]
Except she was a Superhero called 'Fury'. kinda links it in
Finally, the theory that he's been planning to get the Kindly Ones set on him right from the start is absurd. It would mean him planning to kill a member of his family. Now maybe he was right to kill Orpheus, but his way in such cases (as demonstrated forcefully in Season Of Mists) is to hold to his standards until someone convinces him he's wrong, then act immediately to put things right, regardless of the danger he has to put himself in to do so. So he can't have been planning to kill Orpheus before Brief Lives.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. But he uses that afterwards to facilitate his own death. the grief he has after killing Orpheus is powerfully symnbolic, blood dripping off his hands and falling to become little flowers.
There ain't no life in killing Orpheus, its merely a release. The re-birth is the important bit, and it is blood coming from Dream's hands, not Orpheus' blood. But there is life in killing Dream, because it is a 'puh-puh-point of view', an aspect.
We aren't told the hows and wherefores, and so we are always gonna be in the dark here, but to me the story doesn't make any kind of sense without this interpretation.
I agree with so much of what you say, and I do agree. But the cogs and wheels behind don't link for me, unless Dream puts it all into motion himself.
But I love your takedown in that last section. Spot on.
This is Murphy's law.
Okay, but do you ask someone like that to look after a small child? Daniel is valuable to Dream.
This is spot on! I just don't believe that he went as far as to ask Loki to do it. If he did ask, then the consequences would be his responsibility. If he didn't, then he can pretend it's nothing to do with him.
One thing: when he sends the Corinthian and Matthew to find Daniel, he expresses surprise that he is not in the waking world. That suggests to me that he didn't know that Loki was involved.
But the whole thing is so tangled that we'll never find one definitive answer - that's part of what's so fascinating about the whole series.
I just wanted to say, as the author of this thread, that this is a very intelligent debate and everything I hoped for in starting it.
I still hold to my contention the Morpheus orchestrated events to their eventual conclusion, but some of my thinking has been changed by the arguments presented here. Especially of how Loki was manipulated. I thought Morpheus asked him, but know I agree with some of you, that Loki acted on his own, but that Morpheus knew what he would do, and in fact, set it into motion by holding him to a favor which Loki would try to get out of.
Isn't it possible that Dream told Loki to just get Daniel and not bring him back to the Dreaming? Dream could have not trusted Loki in the Dreaming. Also, we never really know why Dream recreated the Corinthian. I think it was so that the Corinthian could just bring Daniel to the Dreaming or be a bodyguard for Matthew. I still think the Loki was working for Dream because why and how would Loki be indebt to anybody else? How would Loki also know to impersonate Dream as the Corinthian and Matthew show up to get Daniel? Did you also know that the Library of Congress contains a copy of the Sandman?
i thought the corinthian was recreated because he wasnt made properly the first time, ie he was originally made to fullfill a function, wasnt made very well so was unmade and dream went back to the drawing board and recreated him, after all just cos he was made badly, doesnt mean the original reason he was made ever went away. simple as that. as for the loki thing, its never suggested that hes indebted to the person hes working for, the way i see it one of dreams enemys could have formed an alliance with loki tells him about daniel and his importance to morpheus and suggested he kidnap daniel as part of a plan for revenge on dream, then loki being as he is decides he has a better plan and will kill daniel instead.
In part five of the Kindly Ones, after Carla burns to death, Loki says, "I am Loki. And I will be under an obligation to no one." This would imply that he was working for someone. Also I think that he was working for Dream because Dream knew that Loki escaped from Odin. Dream was also at the place where Puck left Faerie. In my opinion, for Loki to meet Puck and someone that hated Dream would be like me going into a city and coincidentally running into my best friend and someone I have not seen in years.
not really, i gedt the impression that dream had a lot of enemies. and i still hold to the theory that it is more likely and believable that lucifer orchestrated the hole kidnapping thing
But wouldn't Lucifer owe Dream a favor for helping him leave Hell? I also thought that leaving Hell was part of his plan to destroy Dream.
I don't believe in the Lucifer theory because of Lucifer's comments to Delirium during the story.
That reminds of something...what was that "Dream King situation" that Remiel was all in a huff about? How does that relate to things?
"I will be under obiligation to no one" could suggest two things: 1.) Morpheus called in his favor to Loki (getting Daniel) or 2.) Loki hated having the possibility of Morpheus and kidnapped Daniel to frame Morpheus.
I still think it's #1. Basically because I would be surprised if Loki was aware of Daniel's significance. Once Morpheus told him to get Daniel, Loki would have tried to figure a way to screw Morpheus (his nature), thereby finding out about Daniel. Of course, this would have been suicidual ole Morpheus' plan all along.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3 4 5 6|