Could the soul bet be relevant to the Gates ?

[Lews]

Hi all ! Long time reader and lurker here. I mean, aren't we all, around here ? ;)

While I know it will be revealed in due time, I do love trying to guess what is coming, and a few loose ends just aligned into a theory while I was re-reading BitF while commuting - one that I couldn't find already discussed in this fine theorycrafting institution. I thought I would hazard it, should anybody find a bit of fun discussing it :)

TLDR of the guess: the Snarl IS the eastern pantheon, locked up in the first world by the other gods.

Full version:
I re-read BitF recently, and after reading all the explanations and story around Souls Bet between Hel and Thor, it got me thinking - what is the ONE thing we know fore sure about the Snarl ? It's that Soon couldn't raise his wife from the dead because her soul wasn't there anymore. We saw several cases of souls being trapped to that exact effect: Eugene's Master, Durkon and Dorukan, to name a few. And let's not forget Xykon's "Soul-hidey-place".

So, what if the Snarl just trapped souls ? In this light, we now have a whole pantheon of gods - beings that use souls as power, that vanished around the same time.

So, what if the Eastern Pantheon (or some of its member) stockpiled souls and rose to such power that the other gods got scared and locked them up with the First World ? Basically, the whole story do not overly change, but but the few oddity get explained that way :

- The Gate's world is the First World - it wasn't destroyed litteraly, the "Snarl" just trapped the soul of everything and everyone. It explains why Laurin didn't scry a living being in the Gate World.
- The "Snarl" does reach out from the gate to trap the souls of people around, probably hoping to eventually gain enough power to break free.
- No god ever lied to its follower : there IS an abomination, and it could even kill and soul-trap god for even more power.
- The Soul Bet. I mean, everything feels odd about this bet. Why offer it in the first place ? Why not make Thor the butt of the joke, rather than Hel ? Then again, Loki was shown as being very wary of the Snarl - it may be a coincidence, but I could see Hel going to steal souls for power, and Loki making the bet to trick her out of that.

Well, it was a longish rant. Hope people will find a bit of fun with it !

Cheers !

[Mad Humanist]

That's an interesting theory.

However I think it very likely that the souls of those the Snarl killed have been destroyed. Then the substance from those souls (including the Eastern pantheon) may have been used to make the world we saw in the rift. That's similar to your theory but I would guess more likely. Both would mean that that world is populated.

[martianmister]

I don't get what you mean by the link between the bet and the snarl.

[Synesthesy]

It's a theory actually better then most I have read here.

[Rrmcklin]

I'm just going to say that you're trying to fill up some holes that aren't actually there, by making connections that also aren't there.

[woweedd]

Hm...Admittedly, an interesting theory, but I don't really buy it. The Snarl using the souls of those it "kills" to populate the world in the rift? Yes. The Snarl not even existing...Not really, no. We know SOMETHING, with purple tentacles, is reaching out from the Gates. We've seen it, and not just in crayon..

I don't get what you mean by the link between the bet and the snarl.

The idea seems to be that Loki wouldn't have a motive to humiliate Hel, and that she quite similar to the Eastern God sin this theory. That said, A. Since when did Gods need a reason to screw each other over, especially Loki and B. He could easily swing it as a test. See if she cna puzzle out the solution.

[Kish]

Like Synesthesy, I've seen much worse theories here, buuuuuut...

I suspect Hel is mostly self-contained to Book 6, where, depending on perspective, either she or her High Priest is the main villain. Her bet doesn't relate to features of the overall plot; it's just about her motivation.

Mostly self-contained. She has a role in the overall plot in that she provides the answer to the question Roy wondered about in #998: Heimdall does not have a point. The end of the world would result in all dwarves who were living at the time it ended being enslaved to Hel and Hel being the Queen of the Northern Pantheon in the next world. The Order has to succeed and prevent the destruction of the world.

[woweedd]

Like Synesthesy, I've seen much worse theories here, buuuuuut...

I suspect Hel is mostly self-contained to Book 6, where, depending on perspective, either she or her High Priest is the main villain. Her bet doesn't relate to features of the overall plot; it's just about her motivation.

Mostly self-contained. She has a role in the overall plot in that she provides the answer to the question Roy wondered about in #998: Heimdall does not have a point. The end of the world would result in all dwarves who were living at the time it ended being enslaved to Hel and Hel being the Queen of the Northern Pantheon in the next world. The Order has to succeed and prevent the destruction of the world.

Well, that, and to provide a catalyst for Durkon's character development, but yes. She's a stakes-raiser.

[jwhouk]

I think it's all based upon what Thor and company believe the Snarl is, and what that new world is all about.

Maybe Kraagor did something to close up the biggest of the gates, and now that world inside the snarl-vision is the result?

[Rrmcklin]

Obviously there's more to this than we (or the characters know) but I've never understood the appeal of "The Gods were lying all the time!" or "There's no Snarl, but the Eastern Gods!"

Neither of those sounds like interesting or logical twists to me, for various reasons.

[Lews]

Hi again,

Adressing a few things that might have been unclear (english is not my mother tongue, so error are probable...) :

I saw a few comments of not understanding the appeal / the point of this theory. I agree, there's as much point to theorycrafting as to guess the trick in a magic show - it's almost always pointless. I totally agree on that. The game is to have fun trying to play foreshadowing bingo ! :)

And the game, for me, is that BitF spends a lot of time driving home the point that the Gates and the Snarl are not what the Order think they are. V is shown unwilling to speak about what Blackwing saw in the Azure City Gate; it gets a few panels in V and Roy's discussion on the Mechane, there's the final scene with Laurin... To me, it would be extremely odd if we ended up with the Snarl and the Gates exactly as described in the Crayons of Time with that much comic space dedicated to cast doubt over it.

So, do the Crayons contain a honest mistake or disinformation ? And if it's the latter, who is lying ?
SOD shows us that the Dark One only has second-hand knowledge of the Snarl (from Rat and Tiamat); Soon's party could have learned it either from the Gods or from Lirians and Dorukan's epic level divinations.

What sticks out the most in the Crayons for me is that the Snarl is supposed to unmake existence in 27mn. How come he has a non-unmade planet in his prison then ? And one devoid of life at that (seriously - if there's no life in an OCEAN, odds are that the world is dead). ?

One possible explanation would be that the Snarl is not actually chaos and destruction incarnate, which is a theory that leaves the First World intact inside the Gates. Existence was not unmade, it was destroyed. Then, it means that the Snarl should not destroy souls any more than anything killing anything else, which led to the soul trap idea. Then it's just wondering who/what could the Snarl be, and why would he go around collection souls... and the theory gets out by itself.


But yeah, it's nothing more than having a bit of fun thinking out loud :)

[Darth Tom]

I really like your idea. I don't think that it's what the Giant has in mind, but I think it's a really interesting idea.

[Snails]

To me, it would be extremely odd if we ended up with the Snarl and the Gates exactly as described in the Crayons of Time with that much comic space dedicated to cast doubt over it.

So, do the Crayons contain a honest mistake or disinformation ? And if it's the latter, who is lying ?
SOD shows us that the Dark One only has second-hand knowledge of the Snarl (from Rat and Tiamat); Soon's party could have learned it either from the Gods or from Lirians and Dorukan's epic level divinations.

IMNSHO there is a huge difference between the Crayons lying to us and the Crayons giving us information that is easily interpreted in a manner that could be wrong. I would bet a lot of money that no specific information presented as fact will turn out to be wrong, while lots of conclusions people/gods believe may turn out to be wrong.

For example, it is not actually known whether Kraagor is dead. That everyone in the OotSverse (and probably all Readers except me) assume that Kraagor is dead makes perfect sense. The fact that Kraagor was trapped within the Snarl's prison is not going to be "corrected".

Similarly, it is believed by the gods that the Snarl could potentially be harnessed as a weapon via manipulating a Gate through which the Snarl could attack. The potential is apparent because the historical record of pre-imprisoned Snarl is of a (apparently) mindless killing machine that can even eat gods. But what if the Snarl does not feel like cooperating? Is that a contradiction with the Crayon tales?

Ideas about the Eastern gods and similar would make a wonderful tale, but I am pretty darn sure that is not where the Giant is going.

[CJG]

I like it! I admit, my own personal headcannon is that the world inside the snarl-gates is ours, that’s why we know about Zeus et al, but less about the other Pantheons.

Alas my ideas stop there, like you said, more a fun exercise than anything!

[Emanick]

I like it! I admit, my own personal headcannon is that the world inside the snarl-gates is ours, that’s why we know about Zeus et al, but less about the other Pantheons.

Alas my ideas stop there, like you said, more a fun exercise than anything!

Hate to break it to you, but The Giant actually specifically shot down that theory in a post.

[Kish]

Also, since when do real-world people know more about the ancient Greek pantheon than about the Norse or Mesopotamian pantheons?

[woweedd]

I like it! I admit, my own personal headcannon is that the world inside the snarl-gates is ours, that’s why we know about Zeus et al, but less about the other Pantheons.

Alas my ideas stop there, like you said, more a fun exercise than anything!

Um...A. That depends a lot on the culture B. that's mainly just because the Greeks wrote things down more often, in a form we can still read, and C. It isn't.

Also, since when do real-world people know more about the ancient Greek pantheon than about the Norse or Mesopotamian pantheons?

In my experience, as someone who is something of a myth buff, Greek/Roman is probably the most well-known mythology by people in the Western World, through the Norse are a close second.

[CJG]

Hate to break it to you, but The Giant actually specifically shot down that theory in a post.

The Giant has no dominion over my brainmeats!

[Emanick]

In my experience, as someone who is something of a myth buff, Greek/Roman is probably the most well-known mythology by people in the Western World, through the Norse are a close second.

This is my experience, too. The Greek/Roman mythos is by far the best-known in my opinion, particularly relative to the Mesopotamian pantheon. I doubt most people I know could name a single Mesopotamian deity, but everyone knows who Zeus is.

[CJG]

Also, since when do real-world people know more about the ancient Greek pantheon than about the Norse or Mesopotamian pantheons?

Well, we did name the planets after the Roman variants of the Greek pantheon. To be honest I’d not bet on the Greeks being the “world’s” most popular pantheon, but I’d bet my hat that it’s the western world’s most popular pantheon.

Besides, I’m just having fun here. Not trying to start a war betwixt Ares and Quetzalcoatl.

[martianmister]

Also, since when do real-world people know more about the ancient Greek pantheon than about the Norse or Mesopotamian pantheons?

Since I born?

[hroþila]

I don't think Norse mythology is particularly well known. Many people know the names of the most famous gods, but they would be hard pressed to tell even of one myth. By contrast, many Greek myths are widely known and have entered our popular culture in one form or another. As for the Mesopotamian pantheon, I expect that the average Westerner wouldn't be able to name a single god, unless Gilgamesh counts.

[martianmister]

I think popularly the closest one would be the egyptian pantheon, and even that one is nowhere near popular as greek pantheon.

[The Pilgrim]

The greek-roman panteon has been featured heavily on western culture since the Renaissance. Western literature derives from ancient greece. Western plastical arts were born from greek canons. And our Law system comes from the Romans. So basically the greek-roman mytos are something rooted in the cultural infancy of the western world.

The Nordic apportation to western culture was, well, not so prominent. So Norse mytology was barely featured until Wagner, Nazi neo-paganism, and Marvel Comics.

19th century esoterism liked eastern deities a lot more. 20th century neo-paganism depends on the country, norse neo-paganism has been popular in Scandinavia, Germany and the USA. But for UK, France and the rest of western europe the pagan substrate were the Celts. And in the officially atheist eastern europe, being christian was already being counter-cultural enough.

Still, the Norse are better known than the Egiptian, Hindu, Mesopotamian, Chinese or Aztec. (Regarding this last one, I wonder how can you expect to make a panteon popular when the name of your gods is barely pronunciable).

And then you have the Cthulhu Mythos, who in the latter times seem more popular than most.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Still, the Norse are better known than the Egiptian, Hindu, Mesopotamian, Chinese or Aztec. (Regarding this last one, I wonder how can you expect to make a panteon popular when the name of your gods is barely pronunciable).

This assertion is too western-centric. Over a billion people know Hindu mythology much, much better than they know Greek or Norse, and a similarly high number know Chinese mythology.

Heck, I'd say that Norse and Egyptian are about even in most people's knowledge: they have heard of the god's names, but cannot say much about who they were or why. Thor, god of Thunder is about as well known as Ra, god of the Sun or Anubis, the jackal-headed god of Death.

Grey Wolf

[The Pilgrim]

Mmmh... now that you mention it, a sizeable amount of people not only knows but also still worships the Hindu pantheon.

So, objection accepted. Yes, that part of my comment is only appliable to western world people.

[hamishspence]

Heck, I'd say that Norse and Egyptian are about even in most people's knowledge: they have heard of the god's names, but cannot say much about who they were or why. Thor, god of Thunder is about as well known as Ra, god of the Sun or Anubis, the jackal-headed god of Death.

And it's possible that the reason so many people know of them, is from watching things like Stargate SG-1, and various movies.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

And it's possible that the reason so many people know of them, is from watching things like Stargate SG-1, and various movies.

My awareness of them predates SG-1, but I'd agree that the many mummy movies of the early Hollywood likely did much to place them in the general knowledge. On the other hand, Egypt has always had a special mysticism about it - Napoleon's Egypt expedition might have been to screw the English, but it was sold to the French on the idea of recovering the artifacts, for example. I suspect it hits the sweet spot between familiar and foreign.

Grey Wolf

[hamishspence]

Egypt has always had a special mysticism about it - Napoleon's Egypt expedition might have been to screw the English, but it was sold to the French on the idea of recovering the artifacts, for example. I suspect it hits the sweet spot between familiar and foreign.

I think Norse Mythology tends to get "done for kids" a bit more often than Egypt. At my primary school there were some stories from Norse mythology, and a children's story collection (of a fairly wide range of mythologies) I read as a child had a lot more Norse stories than Egypt stories.

The only Egypt one in the book was the murder (and resurrection) of Osiris, but Norse stories included the binding of Fenrir, Thor's marriage to Thrym, Thor and Loki's encounter with Utgard-Loki, and Ragnarok.

[Jasdoif]

And it's possible that the reason so many people know of them, is from watching things like Stargate SG-1, and various movies.

Age of Mythology, in my case.