Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:Foolishness plays no part here, Ossicle. Have you read NIGHTWORLD?
I have read Nightworld, though I don't understand how it applies here.
However, you have made me return to my use of the word "foolishness" and I agree that it's the wrong word. Basically I meant that it's an error for R. not to kill Jack. Not all errors are foolish, and perhaps this is one of those cases.
However, as I tried to indicate in my previous post, everyone's replies _have_ made me rethink my initial objection. It seems like two factors are making R. keep Jack alive: R.'s arrogance and the yummy psychic misery R. intends to draw from Jack in the days to come. I guess that explains why Jack is still alive, and it now strikes me as more than adequate. Maybe it will even prove to be terrific and far better than anything that would have resulted from the kind of take I advocated in earlier posts. I haven't read Infernal yet, and there are more books to come... (Hooray!)