Small, random questions about RotE that still bother you (spoilers all RotE books)

[Farseer]

You are right that there is a very, very clear distinction in the text between the evidence of Realder's Dragon of Farseer and the evidence of Realder's Dragon of Tawny Man, Relpda...no matter how or by who it is interpreted. The evidence in this regard is irrefutable.

As noted in other threads where I have prattled on about this, G-o-a-D is in an entirely different location (the quarry) to the dragon Fool recalls promising to fly him from his dream (the stone garden) and who he also greets as 'Realder'. As they reach the Stone Garden first, it is 'Realder' who we and the party are first introduced to, and it is only upon entering the quarry that we are later introduced to G-o-a-D. Both locations are quite a distance from each other on foot, thus Fitz used the Skill-pillars when he went to awaken the simulacra at Verity's bidding. In this there is no way that one can be confused with the other.

Also, G-o-a-D is already awakened and in flight, with Fool on her back, when Fitz and Nighteyes awaken 'Realder' and the other dragons. 'Realder' is also the very last dragon to leave the Stone Garden on the way to purging the Six Duchies of the Red Ships etc whereas G-o-a-D was the first to leave, with Fool on her back, leading the charge. EDIT: All from memory but will check later too!

As this was one of my favourite bits of the F and TM books (a lot concerning Realder hinged on my Rooster Crown theory which I still haven't shared yet!), I noted this on my very first read and the discrepancy, more than any other crazy theory I've had, has driven me to multiple re-reads!

There is a possible reason, aside from a plot error but, as I am in the middle of school already, I will have to come back and chat about. Will also try and find those other threads in the meantime.

I must also admit that I have almost asked Robin about this multiple times...and think I will have to one day not too far away!

[Relpda]

I've been wondering if there might be a reason for it too although I have no theories as to why. I think it just stood out to me as the attention to detail is usually spot on even down to things that go way back in the books, and this seems like quite a big discrepancy if it isn't deliberate. I guess we'll have to wait and see and in the meantime enjoy theorising

[gonzagylot00]

Hi,

I signed up for this site just to ask this question:

Would Fitz and the peoples of the Six Duchies by considered "Black" by Earth standards? They are described as having dark skin, dark features, and Kettricken sticks out amongst them for her light features and mikly white skin.

However, all the artwork I see of Fitz show him as a white man.

thanks for any input.

['thul]

Considering the type of terrain described in the books, it would not be likely that they are of such skin tones. The culture, climate, nature and wildlife of the six duchies is typical of "high Fantasy", which tends to use near-european looks for most, though other types of humans may often pop up, sometimes as foreigners.

It would seem more likely that the "dark of skin" is a general tan and weathered skin type, whereas the culture of the mountain people is different, and may potentially have less sun exposure of the type that gives a tan, thus pale. If you compare northern europeans with southern europeans you will generally find that skin is slightly darker in the south than in the north. The same effect is likely between Six duchies and the mountain kingdom.

[fool-ish]

For me, Fitz's colouring was akin to a Spaniard or Italian, for example, whereas I imagined Kettricken's fairer skin and hair colour to be more Scandinavian or even Scottish/Irish. Was it ever mentioned that Kettricken had freckles? Or am I thinking of a different character altogether, from a different set of books even?!

[Valarya]

For me, Fitz's colouring was akin to a Spaniard or Italian, for example, whereas I imagined Kettricken's fairer skin and hair colour to be more Scandinavian or even Scottish/Irish.

I think the same thing. Same as South Americans vs. Canadians or something, hahah.

[Farseer]

Well met and welcome to thePlenty...it's terrific to have you here with us, gonzagylot00!

I agree with 'thul ( that's happening far too much of late ). While the Farseers and those of the Six Duchies (and even the Out Islands) have dark skin, they would not be considered 'black' as such. They are simply darker in their features than most and especially the Chyurda (the Mountain Kingdom folk such as Kettricken and Fitz's mother).

This is confirmed for me in that Pilkrop (the White Prophet who resides on Aslevjal) is considered 'The Black Man'. This 'black' component of his name would lose its importance or relevance, I'd think, if he were no darker than those others who resided in the Out Islands or the Six Duchies. It is this 'black' appearance of his skin that makes him stand out and assists with the mystery that surrounds him.

Also, when Fool changed toward the end of Fool's Fate, I remember that Fitz described his skin as being the colour of an apple seed. This, to me, points to Fool having finally gone through all of the changes of his skin colour to reach that same tone as The Black Man/Prilkop, and thus his skin could only then be considered 'black'. Quite a lot darker to the skin tone that Fitz and others have.

I'm looking forward to chatting with you about any other questions you may come back to us with!

Oh, just got your post fool-ish, while I was typing. Yes, that's the kind of picture for the colouring that I got also eg a Spaniard vs a Scandinavian.

['thul]

Indeed... It happens far too often, Farseer... Ruins many things that could otherwise become nice arguments and discussions...

[Farseer]

Funnily enough, though I'm not sure yet if we agree or disagree, I was ranting about an old post of yours just a second ago. For more info, keep going, following the path that's been set before you...

As noted in other threads where I have prattled on about this...Will also try and find those other threads in the meantime.

I have found the majority of initial discussion here in the Plot holes in Farseer and Tawny Man thread and so am heading there for a quick post (to respond to the one from the 'thul beings! ) to keep things 'Realder-related' in that thread, if that's okay, Relpda....though you may need to sift through all the posts to get the Realder bits, sorry.

[Relpda]

Funnily enough, though I'm not sure yet if we agree or disagree, I was ranting about an old post of yours just a second ago. For more info, keep going, following the path that's been set before you...

As noted in other threads where I have prattled on about this...Will also try and find those other threads in the meantime.

I have found the majority of initial discussion here in the Plot holes in Farseer and Tawny Man thread and so am heading there for a quick post (to respond to the one from the 'thul beings! ) to keep things 'Realder-related' in that thread, if that's okay, Relpda....though you may need to sift through all the posts to get the Realder bits, sorry.

That's more than ok Farseer - the whole thread was a very interesting read I'm now on tenterhooks to hear what Robin is going to say re the Realder question!

Re skin tone I agree. I always pictured the Farseers to be slightly Meditteranean and the mountain folk to be Northern European or Celtic.