ath No.1 and sarcasm
by Mairashda: 2003-02-11 | 3 out of 10 (2 votes)
The first oath must allow those who swore it a great deal more freedom than it's phrasing let's us presume...
After Nynaeve calls Laras, the Mistress of the Kitchens a sour lump of lard, Siuan scolds her:
"You are a fine judge of character, child. You must have done well as the Wisdom of your village. (...) A fine judge of character, child" (tDR Ch.29)
Now though what Siuan said might technically be true, at the moment of her speaking those words she is clearly being sarcastic - she does not mean to state a true fact.
on first...and even on second or third glances this is a paradox. according to her oath to speak no word that is not true, she shouldn't be able to say this.
the easy way out is of course to say that...maybe Siuan is not Bound to the First Oath at all: (I discard this because those bits of the story seen through her eyes do not indicate this in any way.)
the second possibility is that generally Siuan would agree with the statement she makes. it is just in this situation that she uses a tone of voice to convey another message, quite different from that her words contain (which, however, are true to her.)
or thirdly the oath could fail here because she is not lying consciously... her temper got the better of her and the words are just spoken before the Oath got any chance to...kick in.
which reminds me of the White that turned mute and dysgraphic after she reasoned that since our senses do only understand the world imperfectly there can be no truth. and a good thing that is too. who knows how many other sisters she might have convinced otherwise?
You cannot rate theories without first logging in. Please
log in.
1
Tamyrlin: 2003-02-12
I hadn't thought this through, but couldn't a fourth possibility be that she didn't say it as a fact, therefore the oaths don't stop her from doing so. For example, "yeah, that is about as dumb as saying the sky is green." The sky isn't green, she knows it isn't green, and she is saying it with the assumption that the other person knows she knows it isn't. Similar to being able to say something you believe is true without it actually being true, maybe you can say something that you believe is false with it actually being false. I think I just confused myself, but I think that is it. You can say, "She's fat," because you don't believe it, and she isn't. Wait...I don't know, maybe there is a sarcasm, joke clause. :)
2
Graendalboytoy: 2003-02-12
I think the Oath does keep sisters from making silly comments like the sky is green. When Seaine releases herself from the oath in PoD, she says that it was fun to say that,"Pevara had a beard or that the streets of Tar Valon were paved with cheese." I assume she couldn't say that after she reswore the oaths.
3
Callandor: 2003-02-12
Sarcasm is still based off some kind of fact so it technically isn't lying its just streatching the truth. And Aes Sedai are better at this then any people in the world.
4
Elder Haman: 2003-02-13
I think there is a difference between saying "I'm the queen of Sheba" and "Yah, and I'm the queen of Sheba" w/ sarcasm. Being sarcastic is a method of communication- so a sarcastic comment is the same as putting a "not" in front the words you're speaking- does that make sense to anyone?
5
silverwolf: 2003-02-13
From what we have seen, the oaths seem to define lying as knowingly giving an untrue statement with the intention of deceiving. This allows for sarcasm, and it wouldn't necessarily be canceled out by the example of Pevara and Seine. Also, each of the oaths seems to rely on the perception of the user--if the user doesn't think of sarcasm as lying then she can be sarcastic, and if she views sarcasm as lying then she cannot be sarcastic.
6
Mairashda: 2003-02-20
"I will speak no word that is not true."
thats the first oath, not "I will not lie." unless... those taking the oath are bound not by the words but by their interpretation of them.
7
Anubis: 2003-02-20
how can an individual word be true or false? taken literally aes sedai can now only say the word "True". the oaths THEMSELVES are open to interpertation.
8
silverwolf: 2003-03-02
I had forgotten about that wording. I think that, since the intention is to prevent lying, that is the effect that the oaths have. Maybe this is another inconsistency in the series :)
9
Callandor: 2003-03-03
Its not an error. The oath allows the Aes Sedai to not lie straight out, but lets them keep some secrets, and allows the general public to have trust in Aes Sedai, even though many sayings say never trust what the say :-P.
10
scion2: 2003-03-19
i don't believe Siuan is being intirely sarcastic. Nynaeve is usually a good judge of character in fact. Also Nynaeve's statement that Laras is a sour lump of lard is quite true. Laras is rather lardy and we learn later that she has much to be bitter about (she used to be somewhat of a looker or so she thinks)
11
mako0424: 2003-12-23
I think the Three Oaths cause Jordan alot of trouble now, with such nit-picky readers. The IDEA is that Aes Sedai are witches of new, with amazing abilities, and they are both respected far and wide, and very powerful. Also they cannot lie to help people believe there4 every word.
Now there are hundreds of introduced Aes Sedai characters always saying things or talking casually in these books, its difficult for Jordan to make sure everything makes sense and isn't technically a lie.
This comment was to show Siuan's bitter disposition and smart mouth, not to discreetly hint at her lying, or the Oaths being flexible.
12
Caramoor: 2003-12-23
Its an opinionated response. Opinion has nothing to do with fact (a surprising amount of the time).
13
Lugh of the Vanth: 2006-11-28
When using sarcasm, a person makes a statement that they feel to be false, but they present it in a way that makes obvious their opinion. So, if someone says a distasteful joke, you could reply "Yeah, THAT was funny." You obviously do not feel it was funny and make it plain despite stating the obvious.
Because of this, you are not lying. An Aes Sedai can be sarcastic because the listener is not intended to believe the untreu statement.
Now, I think a good question would be, could an Aes Sedai use sarcasm to lie? Could Moiraine have said "Yeah, like I'M Blue Ajah." The phrasing makes it sarcastic, and would lead the listener to believe that Moiraine is in fact NOT Blue Ajah. Her words would be true, but her intent would be to lie.
14
Gandelail: 2006-12-01
It seems to me that the first oath rely's on individual belief and intent in order to bind the Aes Sedai. If an Aes Sedai believes something is true they can speak it even if it is, in fact, false.
If this were not the case, it would be quite easy for an Aes Sedai (let's call her a White) to test one of her new theories. Maybe she's spent all of her time coming up with what she's sure is a ground-breaking theory, instead of then thinking up a way to confirm it (which can be the harder part by far compared to deriving the theory), all she would need is to try to speak it as a truth. If she can speak it, she's correct; if she can't? Well, back to the drawing board.
Now,
If they believe, or know, something to be false they cannot speak it as truth, except (perhaps) as a sarcastic remark.
For example, Moiraine (in trying to diffuse Rand's suspiscion of her as trying to push him forward as a false dragon) could not have just said, "Okay, Rand, The Amyrlin and I are taking Egwene and Nynaeve to the tower, Matt and Perrin are chasing the dagger and the horn... and since you aren't the dragon reborn, you can go anywhere you want."
Now, on to intent...
Siuan is able to make a sarcastic comment, because her intent is not to mislead, or to misrepresent the truth. She's making a joke at Nynaeve's expense with no intention of having her believe she was a poor wisdom or a bad judge of character. Because she is using a phrase that is not necessarily true to emphasize or poke fun at the truth, and is not trying to mislead Nynaeve, she is able to say it.
This is far different from Seaine's "Pevara had a beard" or that "the streets of Tar Valon were paved with cheese." In her case, she was not saying, "Dragon Reborn? Yeah, and PEVARA has a BEARD!" Her feeling of freedom comes from the fact that she could go up to someone who knows Pevara, and say... "Guess what!!! Pevara grew a beard!" with the intent of leading them to believe it as truth.
Lugh of the Vanth:
I don't think we have to worry about lies masked in sarcasm as per the "Yeah, like I'M blue Ajah" comment above... because she's representing something she knows to be true as something that is not, with the intent of misleading whoever was listening to believe that she was, in truth, any Ajah but blue.
Mairashda:
Not much chance of your third possibility, I think... The Oaths are set into their bones... and it doesn't need to "kick in" it's there all the time and it's on all the time... it seems like the oaths are there as a primary block from doing those things, if their actions or words (belief and intent?) match the allowable criteria, the oaths allow them to speak it. If it had to kick in and an outburst in frustration or anger could bypass that, all of the Aes Sedai would walk around getting angry all the time so when they had to speak they could have an outburst that lets them lie.
Well, that's all for now, sorry for the length... this is my first post and I think I got a bit carried away :)
Hope you all had a nice St. Andrew's Day!
15
T-Bag: 2008-07-01
Could an Aes Sedai speak a common saying that is not true, such as ‘The streets of Tar Valon are paved with gold.’? Although the streets are not literally paved with gold, a lie, it could be interpreted to mean something else, not a lie.
16
fish06: 2008-07-07
I think someone could say the streets are paved with gold as long as they believe that it is true in any sense. Whether it is symbolic or not makes no difference. It is the same as the rebels believing that logain was set up as a false dragon. Even though this is a lie since they believe they can still speak it.
17
Marie Curie 7: 2008-07-15
fish06:
"I think someone could say the streets are paved with gold as long as they believe that it is true in any sense. Whether it is symbolic or not makes no difference. It is the same as the rebels believing that logain was set up as a false dragon. Even though this is a lie since they believe they can still speak it."
Yeah, RJ has spoken about the first Oath and what Aes Sedai can and cannot say:
--------
RJ's blog 20 January 2006 "IT'S BEEN A WHILE"
The Oath against lying does leave room for sarcasm. It is intent and result that matter. No sister can intentionally speak an untruth either with the intent of passing on false information or with the belief that false information might be passed on. Thus the careful slicing and dicing of words. But if someone were to hold up a piece of white cloth and ask whether it was black or white, someone who had sworn the Three Oaths would be capable of saying that it was black as a matter of sarcasm. But not if, for example, the person asking the question was blind and thus might well take the statement for truth rather than sarcasm.
--------
18
Lan: 2008-07-30
I think this has a great deal to do with the fact that 90% (or so) of communication is not the words themselves, but the tone of voice, position of the body, expression on the face, etc. When one speaks sarcastically, one assumes that those perceiving those words will understand that the meaning in quite nearly the opposite of what is being said.
