"That was one nice thing about being Queen--she was now immortal for one thousand years. She would no longer age physically and would rapidly heal from any sickness or injury."
I later state that she can died from beheading, but that's all she (physically) fears in a fight because she's immortal.
I granted that this is pushing the primary definition of "immortal," but I thought this 'almost-immortal' definition was so common that using it wouldn't be confusing. Yet I just got a crit back saying that I was contradicting myself and was confusing when I said an immortal person can die.
So, should I call my version of 'immortal' something else, and, if so, what? Any replacement needs to be short and sweet.
Or should I say "practically immortal" in that first sentence and refer to it as immortal after that.
Or is it fine as it is.
Or do you have another suggestion on the topic?
Thanks.
[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited April 07, 2007).]
posted
It was the same in highlander. remember?: My name is Connor McCleod of the Clan McCleod. I was born in the village of Glenfinnan on the shores of Loch Sheehan in 1518... I am immortal.
We all knew he could die with beheading. Didn't bother me.
What does bother me about your proposal is that she is immortal for 1000 years.
IMO this is the contradiction. She has a life-span. She is not immortal, just very long-lived.
BTW the only possibly mitigating factor may be how she dies. Is she ritually beheaded?
posted
hoptoad is right, there is a precedence for "immortals" that can be killed, but if it were me, I'd have her think of it as "I'll live for a thousand years if I can keep my head attached to my shoulders", for the simple reason of avoiding too much comparison with The Highlander.
Posts: 612 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:IMO this is the contradiction. She has a life-span. She is not immortal, just very long-lived. BTW the only possibly mitigating factor may be how she dies. Is she ritually beheaded?
Ritual beheading is a cool idea, but, no. She is chosen as Queen by a divine creature that grants this 'immortality' to her for 1,000 years. If someone hasn't beheaded her before then, the immortality is revoked 1,000 years into her reign and time catches up the her.
I guess you could say that the effects of time are held back and her body is renewed (rather than healed, with scar tissue and such) until 1,000 years have passed. Very few people in the story realize this fine difference between healing and re-newing or timeless versus time-held-back, so most people would describe it as my quoted sentence does.
[Edited to correct a word, and I added:]
So perhaps "practically immortal for a thousand years" would work better. Or maybe I can find a way to scratch using the word 'immortal' at all and just keep the effects. I only use the word a could times. Hmm.
[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited April 06, 2007).]
posted
Yes, but what if it she was maintained in her perfect state for only 10 years?
More important than jabbering about the nuance of a particular word is the question:
Are you comfortable with how it stands?
If so, then don't change it. If not, then consider a change.
I think this is a case of just making up your mind and being happy with your decision regardless of detractors.
PPS: As an option, why not choose a term like "transcendent" or "unfading" or "exalted" or "amaranthine" that more accurately portrays the whole concept?
(( Actually, 'the amaranthians' would be a cool way to describe this class of woman — I'm off in a veteran's reverie... please excuse. )))
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited April 07, 2007).]
posted
Hmmm, besides it's similarity with highlander (which would quickly go against you), I think there were a few flaws in highlander's logic. So what happens if you are cut in half in the middle of their body? Would the half with the head grow the rest back? What if someone cut half their head off, about where the eyes are?
I would also suspect that the fact that the queen could be killed would be a closely guarded secret. What queen would want to go spreading the news that no one could touch them...except by beheading them? If people believe they will live for 1000 years, and there hasn't been a beheading in enough time, then the queen is effectively beyond harm from the prospect of the people. I would also think the queen would not venture into battle without some form of neck protection that would prevent said beheading.
I would also wonder why some form of deity would grant the lifespan while still leaving a way of killing the queen. If the deity found the next in line queen wanting...why would it grant it to her over choosing someone else? If you are going to use a deity, then remember to give it more intelligence than the beings below it...not to mention it should be wise enough to convince the reader it is a deity instead of a convenient reason for the conditions you desire.
Figure out the why's of your background, otherwise it will show in the writing.
posted
When I came up with idea, I wasn't even thinking about how similar 'immortal...beheading' sounded to Highlander. I just got another crit back, though, and I can see that the similarity is blinding people to what I actually say and show versus how things work in Highlander. I think this was really what was bothering me. So using the term 'immortal' is out, especially since 'immortal for 1,000 years' is 'voted out' here as well.
I've re-writen it so "the deity" confers agelessness and rapid healing upon the ruler for the period of 1,000 years. Because she is ageless, she cannot have children. While she can heal rapidly, it's not instantaneous. She does feel pain and can be incompacitated by the pain and unable to defend herself until she is healed. So she isn't invulnerable, just really hard to kill.
I was planning on having her lose a hand in book two (assuming I sell book one). Yes, cutting her body in half would kill her, but that's not as easy to do as beheading. Heck, sticking a blade through her heart and _leaving_ it there would kill her since the healing can't occur until the 'active damaging' ceases. Beheading was simply the way a past king was killed, so I focused on that in the book. Anyway, I changed a sentence at the beginning of the story to make sure it's clear that other possibilities exist.
Anyway, thanks for all the feedback and ideas.
[This message has been edited by DebbieKW (edited April 07, 2007).]
posted
Piers Anthony wrote a series of seven books called Incarnations of Immortality (or something like that. The first five were the best. "On a Pale Horse" (Death), "Bearing an Hourglass" (Time), "With a Tangled Skein" (Fate), "Wielding a Red Sword" (War), "Being a Green Mother" (Nature), and the last two centered on God and Satan. Mortals took over the office of incarnations and became immortal during their, uh, reign. They had weaknesses, but for all intensive purposes were immortal during their stay in office. I won't ruin it for those who haven't read the series, but getting out of office was interesting for all positions. I recommend the series for anyone, but perhaps it will give you some ideas on how to work your immortal queen. P.S. Hint hint: Immortals dying is NOT necessarily an issue. But people have already said that.
Edited to seek and destroy my dangling modifier.
[This message has been edited by Sunshine (edited April 08, 2007).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
)))
