I think it is more likely that it is something ray wrote almost 30 years ago and just understandably forgot about. A darkness at Sethonon was written a long time ago. I mean there are examples of this the first that comes to mind is erik and kitty. Then again maybe it is intentional only ray can say but this just seems like an insignificant detail to the larger world that was forgotten about. I highly doubt ray has someone who fact checks every single detail about his books. Just look at the chapter 15 thing. Personally it doesnt bother me. I wish everything lined up perfectly but when you are writing in the same universe over 30 years some errors are bound to make there way in even if this is an error. On Mar 19, 2012 10:21 PM, "Anestis Kozakis" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Anestis Kozakis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> On 20 March 2012 05:51, William <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > **************Spoiler*************** > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > I'm an avid reader with a long memory. I went back to double check and > >> > confirmed something from A Darkness at Sethanon, Macros helps Tomas > remember > >> > his Valheru heritage and it notes that "Like all Valheru > Ashen-Shugar's > >> > first meal was raw meat". In A Crown Imperiled it is written that > >> > Draken-Koren's first meal was nursing from the tigress. Is this > intentional? > >> > >> Milk straight from the teat is different to the processed and > >> pasteurised stuff that you buy at the supermarket, so it can be raw in > >> a way. I don't see a problem with this. > >> > >> Anestis. > > On 20 March 2012 07:06, tony gurnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > not to be picky but you dont see the difference between milk and meat? > > Placing your comment at the bottom of the thread as regards to > possible spoilers..... > > Yes, there is a difference between meat and milk, and I acknowledge > that, but there is also a difference between milk that has been > collected and processed and milk straight form the teat of an animal. > > You could say the latter is raw milk, whilst the former is not. I > know my grandparents back in their village in Greece, when they rook > milk form the cow, they then boiled it before allowing it to be drunk > by anyone. That is a form of processing. > > Again, I don't see an issue in what Ray has described. In this case, > raw is straight from the animal instead of being cooked or processed > in any way. Yes, I acknowledge that in medieval times most cultures > would collect the milk then drink it. So yes, that is also raw milk. > Still doesn't make it an issue in what ray has described. > > Anestis. > -- > Anestis Kozakis | [email protected] | http://www.akozakis.id.au/ > > >
