Thanks for reading and for taking the time to write up your thoughts.
One thing to note is that there are presumably things that witch knows that the reader does not. So while the story itself might not give us enough detail to conclude that there is no afterlife in the story world, the witch may have additional information that allows her to reach this conclusion with some fair confidence.
Oh, that’s clearly what it’s meant to come across as. But to me it reads more like a Materialist Immortalism sermon delivered by someone who really ought to know better in context.
Also I’m a little irritated that Death has apparently literally never felt the need to justify itself before, but does this time. Human history is deep, like ‘the time of Christ until now is like the most recent ten percent’ deep. How, among the untold billions who have died, has Death never encountered a mage capable of making it experience shame and/or guilt until after Melbourne came into existence?
Did magic only recently become possible? Is the Death we see younger than King Arthur? Is magic a skillset so encouraging of hubris that this witch is literally the first magic-user in history to both desire endless life and have a clue that repentance is important?
I love the frame idea of a debate with Death while a mage tries to imprison it, but if it’s a frame for a philosophical debate, the philosophy could use a lot more development.
Thanks for reading and for taking the time to write up your thoughts.
One thing to note is that there are presumably things that witch knows that the reader does not. So while the story itself might not give us enough detail to conclude that there is no afterlife in the story world, the witch may have additional information that allows her to reach this conclusion with some fair confidence.
Oh, that’s clearly what it’s meant to come across as. But to me it reads more like a Materialist Immortalism sermon delivered by someone who really ought to know better in context.
Also I’m a little irritated that Death has apparently literally never felt the need to justify itself before, but does this time. Human history is deep, like ‘the time of Christ until now is like the most recent ten percent’ deep. How, among the untold billions who have died, has Death never encountered a mage capable of making it experience shame and/or guilt until after Melbourne came into existence?
Did magic only recently become possible? Is the Death we see younger than King Arthur? Is magic a skillset so encouraging of hubris that this witch is literally the first magic-user in history to both desire endless life and have a clue that repentance is important?
I love the frame idea of a debate with Death while a mage tries to imprison it, but if it’s a frame for a philosophical debate, the philosophy could use a lot more development.