Talk:Reintroduction: Difference between revisions
From Halopedia, the Halo wiki
No edit summary |
(→Promises to Keep oddity: new section) |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
:Maybe it was around 100-200 years after the array fired. Seems to fit the narative a lil better. -[[User:CIA391|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391|talk]]) 12:15, 4 October 2016 (EDT) | :Maybe it was around 100-200 years after the array fired. Seems to fit the narative a lil better. -[[User:CIA391|CIA391]] ([[User talk:CIA391|talk]]) 12:15, 4 October 2016 (EDT) | ||
::Probably something like that. I just wonder which wording we should use in our articles. "Centuries" is used more often in the story, but "over a century" sounds more definite and specific. --[[User:Jugus|Jugus]] ([[User talk:Jugus|talk]]) 02:31, 5 October 2016 (EDT) | ::Probably something like that. I just wonder which wording we should use in our articles. "Centuries" is used more often in the story, but "over a century" sounds more definite and specific while still allowing for the possibility that more than one century had passed (though the implication is closer to "less than 150 years"). --[[User:Jugus|Jugus]] ([[User talk:Jugus|talk]]) 02:31, 5 October 2016 (EDT) | ||
== Promises to Keep oddity == | |||
Unless I've critically misinterpreted something, ''Promises to Keep'' indicated that the Forerunners "reseeded" each species on the Ark sequentially before sending them back to their homeworlds, and didn't actually have more than one species "awake" on the Ark at a time. The implication in prior fiction, particularly ''Rebirth'', has been that the species (the intact specimens anyway) all lived there simultaneously. To me the idea of reintroducing them to the Ark one by one seems kind of redundant - if you're going to keep the species in dormancy for decades anyway, why go through the trouble of awakening them on the Ark in the first place, instead of taking them to their homeworld first? --[[User:Jugus|Jugus]] ([[User talk:Jugus|talk]]) 01:19, 10 October 2016 (EDT) |
Latest revision as of 00:19, October 10, 2016
"Over a century" vs. "centuries"[edit]
"Promises to Keep" is somewhat inconsistent on this question. Relevant quotes:
Now, every surviving Forerunner—their numbers so few compared to the trillions that had once composed the ecumene—had spent over a century discharging the duty the Lifeshaper had laid upon them.
Bornstellar was, Chant suspected, doing something himself to heal the tug of memories, for as the centuries passed, he seemed more at ease.
He never exchanged another touch, embrace, word, glance with his wife. Centuries had passed.
But what if, all these centuries later, it was indeed a final message for him?
“We have not interacted with the Domain in over a century,” Stone Songs said when Bornstellar had finished.
Then again, many centuries is "over a century", though it's not really a phrasing I'd use to talk about many centuries as some of the quotes seem to indicate. --Jugus (talk) 11:34, 4 October 2016 (EDT)
- Maybe it was around 100-200 years after the array fired. Seems to fit the narative a lil better. -CIA391 (talk) 12:15, 4 October 2016 (EDT)
- Probably something like that. I just wonder which wording we should use in our articles. "Centuries" is used more often in the story, but "over a century" sounds more definite and specific while still allowing for the possibility that more than one century had passed (though the implication is closer to "less than 150 years"). --Jugus (talk) 02:31, 5 October 2016 (EDT)
Promises to Keep oddity[edit]
Unless I've critically misinterpreted something, Promises to Keep indicated that the Forerunners "reseeded" each species on the Ark sequentially before sending them back to their homeworlds, and didn't actually have more than one species "awake" on the Ark at a time. The implication in prior fiction, particularly Rebirth, has been that the species (the intact specimens anyway) all lived there simultaneously. To me the idea of reintroducing them to the Ark one by one seems kind of redundant - if you're going to keep the species in dormancy for decades anyway, why go through the trouble of awakening them on the Ark in the first place, instead of taking them to their homeworld first? --Jugus (talk) 01:19, 10 October 2016 (EDT)