[split]Berserker Fitz (spoilers all Hobb books)

[Farseer]

Research into berserkers and their mentalities generally reveal that there's no emotional link.

You're researching now?!

Oh, now I'm going to have to find time to come back here and research too!

In response to this point,

Some theories about Berserk is that it was a rudimentary form of drug-induced rage. But it could also be biased accounts.

I have heard of this theory , and also others such as the use of alcohol or animal blood etc and agree that, yes, some such accounts, just any account of a berserker state, could be seen as biased. Speaking of drug-induced, it could be considered that Fitz himself may well have experienced at least one such drug-induced berserker rage... though he did also have all of his other factors to contend with at the time.

While under the influence of carris seed, after eating the carris seed cake given to him by Chade, Fitz had forsook all of his previous training in diplomacy and quiet ways of an assassin and publicly killed Justin in Buckkeep's Great Hall with Shrewd's own knife. There was no thought, no plan. Just action. At some point later (I think in AQ when Chade and Burrich finally severed their ties with Fitz and left him to his own devices after he had returned to himself from his death/being joined with Nighteyes), Chade even told Fitz that he would no longer include him in his plans because Fitz was too dangerous. I will have to find it to confirm but I am sure that Chade even mentions thereabouts that he couldn't trust Fitz not to go berserk in the middle of things, like he did when he 'avenged' Shrewd's death back in Buckkeep. In doing the deed as he had, so thoughtlessly, violently and publicly, Fitz had stripped he and Chade of the Six Duchies dukes' support and thus their power base at Buckkeep. Fitz excused the episode with his simply having been angry following Shrewd's murder.

During the berserker episode in the Great Hall, Fitz took injuries that he did not even recall having suffered until he later came back to himself. He was also exhausted, which is apparently a notable side-effect following a berserker episode (he also experienced such an exhaustion following his berserker on Antler Island). Of course, on this occasion in the Great Hall at least, his exhaustion was supposedly attributed to the downer that followed the consumption of carris seed as well as the exhaustion that usually followed after Fitz had Skilled.

When Fitz was approached by Regal and the dukes while he was in prison following his 'murder' of Justin, Shrewd etc, I believe that this berserker state that Fitz was known to experience in battle was considered common knowledge and Fitz even used it to argue against his own insanity.

As for these other things that bring about a berserker state, like drugs and alcohol etc, I did actually include such things in my previous posts though did not go into detail: "deliberately or physically worked toward/produced as true berserkers of the past sometimes did to work themselves into a frenzy" and "involuntary or produced". Sorry.

All berserker states (for Fitz or any other 'berserker') are triggered by emotion (be it true emotion, or even an emotional high deliberately or physically worked toward/produced as true berserkers of the past sometimes did to work themselves into a frenzy...not that unlike how a sportsman may work himself up prior to or during competition).

Berserker is a state that is triggered by emotion, involuntary or produced. For Fitz, it is further triggered, or exacerbated, as a result of his heightened emotional sensitivity.

It might be that the tangle leader either intentionally or unintentionally used a different or erroneous interpretation for berserk when creating FitzChivalry.

I think it was intentional. There are too many similarities. As far as I am aware, some in history even theorised that berserkers did not only wear bear or wolf skins etc into battle but that they were actually like shape shifters who used magic and physically took on the forms of animals during battle. This most certainly puts me in mind of Fitz when he was on Antler Island (and the little girl who saw him even attested for Regal to his having shifted back from wolf to human form following his berserker...though we know the truth that what she actually saw was Nighteyes leaving Fitz behind) and also when he was trying to save the little girl from the Forged Ones. In his case, Fitz both did and did not take on the form of a wolf via his Wit-bond.

[joost]

Fitz *is* a berserker though. We know that he has entered into berserker states

Playing music doesn't make someone a musician .

[Farseer]

Wha? Okay. Crikey, now you've stumped me.

I am having two debates here. I think. *scratches head* The 'thul beings seem to be debating against the 'by birth' aspect of the motto, under the guise of 'born to' and lots of other things that I'm still trying to translate/guess at...

..and you, joost, seem to be debating the berserker aspect. I think.

So. When is a berserker not a berserker or, rather, when is one one?

I can't detach myself from FitzChivalry Farseer's berserker-ness. It is too important an aspect of him. Of how I visualise him and even connect with him as a character (this extends to a certain extent to include Paragon also). So. His berserker-ness I must defend. I think.



Looks like a wolf, howls like a wolf, hunts like a wolf, feels like a wolf...is a wolf? Or not?

Have I truly been eating too many hot foods that have come into contact with aluminium foil?

['thul]

Joost is arguing about the same point really. If the basic core facts aren't correct, then it doesn't matter how many other traits are similar... It still doesn't make it all correct...

At least one core element of what is berserk is missing. No matter how many other berserk-like traits exist, it does not make it berserk.

[o0Ampy0o]

'FitzChivalry Farseer'. .....It was even these traits and by-blood virtues that combined to make him the perfect candidate for a Catalyst, not to mention 'Changer'.

Sorry if this is off topic.

Are not these terms used to suggest the same thing?

As he typically did with fundamental principles, Nighteyes was using a pragmatic translation of catalyst when calling Fitz "Changer." I do not recall anyone (The Fool?) making a point of differentiating between changer and catalyst.

[Farseer]

'FitzChivalry Farseer'. .....It was even these traits and by-blood virtues that combined to make him the perfect candidate for a Catalyst, not to mention 'Changer'.

Sorry if this is off topic.

Are not these terms used to suggest the same thing?

As he typically did with fundamental principles, Nighteyes was using a pragmatic translation of catalyst when calling Fitz "Changer." I do not recall anyone (The Fool?) making a point of differentiating between changer and catalyst.

I would disagree that they are one and the same. Fool has both alluded and stated a number of that *all* can take on the role of a Catalyst, and create great change, in the world. But there is only one 'Changer'. Fitz.

---

Just had to quickly add that it was not only Nighteyes who dubbed Fitz 'Changer'. He was given the name of 'The Changer' during his Man Ceremony (likely by his sponsoring Man whose role it was to both sponsor and name a ready and worthy recipient) around the moon of his fourteenth birthday ( see http://forums.theplenty.net/showthread.php?tid=191 ).

The name given was of the old tongue and while it *does* say Fitz translated its ancient meaning via the words 'Catalyst' and then 'The Changer', I think that we (as the reader) are witnessing the events of the world because we are seeing the changes wrought by 'The Changer', not just another 'Catalyst'.

I don't know. I can't justify my reasoning but, for me, there is a very distinct difference. Think we have touched on all of this in the Wintrow or Liveships threads as well eg the difference between all having the opportunity to create change (someone suggested somewhere that Wintrow was 'The Catalyst' for the Cursed Shores/ the Liveships trilogy). I disagreed. Though he was 'a Catalyst'.

[o0Ampy0o]

I would disagree that they are one and the same. Fool has both alluded and stated a number of that *all* can take on the role of a Catalyst, and create great change, in the world. But there is only one 'Changer'. Fitz.

What you say The Fool "alluded to" and "stated" are a distinction between catalyst and The Catalyst not Catalyst and Changer. The capitalization cannot be discounted. Alluding to something leaves too much open to conjecturing. Unless it was clearly stated I think it is probably not so. Hobb seems to make a point of making important points when it is significant to the world she is creating.

Just had to quickly add that it was not only Nighteyes who dubbed Fitz 'Changer'. He was given the name of 'The Changer' during his Man Ceremony (likely by his sponsoring Man whose role it was to both sponsor and name a ready and worthy recipient) around the moon of his fourteenth birthday ( see http://forums.theplenty.net/showthread.php?tid=191 ).

I do not recognize this Man Ceremony you referenced. I'll have to read that thread you linked to. Forgive me for being unaware of the previous discussions here. I can either proceed and speak or I can be silenced by the daunting task of catching up on the forum archives. I would like to proceed and participate here and I hope relevant discussions can be quoted or linked to for immediate reading. Being a late comer I suspect everything I might say has already been touched upon. But that is no fun........or perhaps I am just selfishly thinking of my own enjoyment. This may be boring to people who have been through it earlier?

The name given was of the old tongue and while it *does* say Fitz translated its ancient meaning via the words 'Catalyst' and then 'The Changer', I think that we (as the reader) are witnessing the events of the world because we are seeing the changes wrought by 'The Changer', not just another 'Catalyst'.

Nighteyes dubbed Fitz "Changer." Fitz saw that The Catalyst was called a changer or that The Catalyst was translated to The Changer or that a word in another language (old tongue) was translated to The Changer while reading ancient texts. That makes them the same thing. The bolded text above: Is this your feeling or a quote from the books?

The first time I recall the name "Changer" being applied to Fitz was when Nighteyes was contacting him using The Wit. Later Burrich called out to Fitz using "Changer" when he was attempting to draw Fitz out of Nighteyes and back into his own body after he had died in Regal's dungeon. It was always through Nighteyes' view that "Changer" was used. The Fool always used "Catalyst" as far as I can remember. Burrich used "Changer" because he was working with The Wit to communicate with Nighteyes using Nighteyes' language.

I don't know. I can't justify my reasoning but, for me, there is a very distinct difference. Think we have touched on all of this in the Wintrow or Liveships threads as well eg the difference between all having the opportunity to create change (someone suggested somewhere that Wintrow was 'The Catalyst' for the Cursed Shores/ the Liveships trilogy). I disagreed. Though he was 'a Catalyst'.

In order to have The Catalyst you have to have a White Prophet paired with it. Wintrow could only be a catalyst but not The Catalyst. Wintrow definitely was a catalyst when he freed the serpent on Others Island. That event changed the world.

[Farseer]

Forgive me for being unaware of the previous discussions here. I can either proceed and speak or I can be silenced by the daunting task of catching up on the forum archives. I would like to proceed and participate here and I hope relevant discussions can be quoted or linked to for immediate reading. Being a late comer I suspect everything I might say has already been touched upon. But that is no fun........or perhaps I am just selfishly thinking of my own enjoyment. This may be boring to people who have been through it earlier?

Not boring AT ALL! I just have no time for the responses I once used to give or the thinking I was once able to allocate (actually my brain cells have depleted so quickly since I arrived here!) so it's easier to sometimes direct to old snippets of discussion.

I agree with some, even most of what you've responded, eg the importance of capitalisation, BUT am up to my neck in science experiments, inputting wages, cooking for staff, doing stocktakes for our Rec Club etc etc, and shouldn't even be here...so am going to have to not type another thing here on thePlenty until time stands still. Little updates and banning people will have to be my limit! Gar!

['thul]

Yes. important difference between "catalyst" and "The Catalyst". Wolves, or animals for that matter, don't have the same words for the same things as humans do. They might use "changer" and "Changer". For that matter, dragons might have yet another form of reference.