catalina-infanta

[catalina-infanta]

GUYYSSSS

Why was Prescott happy when he found out Katherine was Visander?? If he knows who Visander is then he knows his goal is to kill the Dark King. And why was he insistent they get married??

“I am Visander, the Queen’s Champion, returned to this world to kill the Dark King.’

Prescott smiled. The expression filled his eyes with gratification.”

Was it some weird ritual? blood of lady + blood of sarcean?

“She is a bride worthy of you,’ Mr Prescott said. ‘A bride worthy of Him. I believe He would approve heartily of all we are about to do.”

[catalina-infanta]

The Stewards and what they represent

A few weeks ago I made a post where I expressed my opinion about the Stewards being a representation of religious trauma. In this post I will be going into a more further and in depth explanation on why I think this.

! Spoilers for dark rise and dark heir !

1 - The stewards being a cult:

The definition of a cult is "a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object." You could apply this term to the Stewards who devoted their lives to serving the light and more so the Lady. Everything they do, all the rules they've enforced its all for the Lady. They start their morning off with a chant dedicated to the Lady, they end their day with a chant dedicated to the lady.

It goes beyond just chants, cult leaders typically set rules for their followers. The reason is obviously to assert leadership and keep the control. The main rules the Stewards have are;

You must participate in the morning chants

You must take a vow of celibacy

You must sacrifice yourself when the time is right

Now, lets breakdown how these can control the Stewards and links them to a cult;

Morning chants - In cults, chanting is a mind-altering practice that can be used to break down a person's defences and make them more susceptible to cult ideology. Cult leaders use chanting to direct their followers' emotional and psychological attention to a specific ideology or person - In this case the light side and the lady. This can be dangerous because it can re-wire how the brain works.

Celibacy - Celibacy is the act of one restricting themself from entering a relationship that could be romantic or sexual - in a way, it's abstaining from sex. Cults typically promote the idea of a romantic/sexual relationship being taboo as a way to keep its members from devoting themself to anyone but their cause.

Self sacrifice - Yes, I know. The reasons the Stewards do this is because of the shadow living within them, but dark rise is one big metaphor for all sorts of things (Homophobia, racism, etc...) and so, I believe this act of self sacrifice is more then something for the fantasy plot. It represents how self sacrifice in cults work. Self sacrifice in cults is usually associated with identity fusion - a psychological concept that describes a deep sense of belonging and oneness with a group. This can be the result of intense collective experiences, such as drinking from the steward's cup which of course ruins the drinker's life.

Additional points:

Cults typically wear uniforms - Stewards wear their white/grey/blue uniforms

Cults isolate their members from the outside world - The Stewards are quite isolated from society and only go out when necessary. Their first reaction to Will is enough.

Abuse - Cults typically abuse their members - James. Enough said.

2 - Attempting to destroy anything different then their morals/Brainwashing

Would this really be a Juvive post without the Novitiate trio? This time, I'm going to use them to explain how fast a cult's opinion can change.

When Will and Violet are spending their first day at the hall, Emery and his friends are the only three people - Novitiates more specifically - who willingly talked to Will and Violet. The duo is usually seen with them and the three explain their traditions to the two. The time skip from chapter 14 to 15 is two (?) months, and during that time I want to bet money Will and Violet continued being Emery, Carver and Beatrix's friend.

Of course, it all goes to hell when Violet is outed to be a lion. When the army of Stewards corner Will and Violet, Carver is in that crowd. Yes, he's a Steward. Yes, he's following duties. Sure, but he didn't even try to rebuttal the higher powers? Didn't try to stand up for Violet? Carver knows Violet and Will are good people, his friends are friends with them- HE'S friends with them. All this is to say that Carver changed his opinions faster than the speed of light.

Why though? How though?

Simple, brainwashing.

The ideas of the Stewards were being jammed into his head since he was young. He's been training to be a Steward for years. He was taught lions were terrible beings. His opinion was not even his own, it was the Stewards. It was forced into his mind. If you don't believe me, brainwashing is defined as the process of compromising someone's freedom of choice and action by altering their perception, motivation, or behavioural outcomes. 

Makes sense now, right?

3 - Leadership

Jannick.

Actually, that's not enough. He deserve more.

3.5 - Jannick.

I hate this fucker.

You can associate this guy with being leaders of the cult. A cult leader is the leader of a group that requires unwavering devotion to a set of beliefs and practices - The lady and the light side in this case. Cult leaders are often described as pathologically narcissistic, and may be narcissists.

Let's break him down:

Jannick:

Called his son a "catamite" in front of hundreds of people - Shows lack of empathy which is a trait narcissists have

Implied that he pushes/pushed all three of his sons to the absolute limit and pushed them to be perfect. In the book he does show that he had a desire to be a Steward - Shows both need for admiration and envy, two traits shared with narcissists

"That thing is not my son." - Shows arrogance and just being a dick, arrogance is a trait narcissists have

While the Elder Steward is technically the leader of the Stewards, Jannick seems to have more power and influence over certain things.

Wrap up

In summary, I do believe the Stewards represent a more deeper meaning then what has been shown to us. They're a metaphor. A metaphor for a cult and religious trauma.

Thank you so much for reading. Take care you yourself, ok?

[catalina-infanta]

Sarcean was the father of the Light Queens children (Dark Rise)

Guys I think Sarcean is the father of the lights queen child and here is why. For one, this would explain why he was born to this line. It would also eliminate the problem of having an unknown man be the father of her line which is lame and we have to know the answer was hiding in plain sight all along with Pacat!

It’s very possible but at first I was skeptical because I was only wondering about the timing because it seemed to me like the book was showing that the war was in its late phase when the light queen said she would have a child because she couldn’t be alive for later. That would have made it impossible because how would the all get Sarcean to sleep with her if they were enemies unless she tricked him?

However, that was UNTIL I remembered that as with so many things in these books snippets from the past may actually look like they are referring to one thing when they are in all fact referring to another. An example of this is the sword saying it will make its holder “become the champion”. Or even more crucial was when we thought the “try to run” comment was said by Sarcean when it was really said by Anharion. So, the context we have for when she had the baby is only the message on the locket, but when did she carve that locket’s message?

Also it looked like she could see the future through the mirror when she looks at Will in the beginning of book 1, hence why she knew to have a child so soon before. I mean, to what other purpose was that scene then to show how she could see into the future.?

[catalina-infanta]

Sarcean was the father of the Light Queens children (Dark Rise)

Guys I think Sarcean is the father of the lights queen child and here is why. For one, this would explain why he was born to this line. It would also eliminate the problem of having an unknown man be the father of her line which is lame and we have to know the answer was hiding in plain sight all along with Pacat!

It’s very possible but at first I was skeptical because I was only wondering about the timing because it seemed to me like the book was showing that the war was in its late phase when the light queen said she would have a child because she couldn’t be alive for later. That would have made it impossible because how would the all get Sarcean to sleep with her if they were enemies unless she tricked him?

However, that was UNTIL I remembered that as with so many things in these books snippets from the past may actually look like they are referring to one thing when they are in all fact referring to another. An example of this is the sword saying it will make its holder “become the champion”. Or even more crucial was when we thought the “try to run” comment was said by Sarcean when it was really said by Anharion. So, the context we have for when she had the baby is only the message on the locket, but when did she carve that locket’s message?

Also it looked like she could see the future through the mirror when she looks at Will in the beginning of book 1, hence why she knew to have a child so soon before. I mean, to what other purpose was that scene then to show how she could see into the future.?

[catalina-infanta]

Ok now that I've finished Dark Heir, I still think there's something not right about The Lady and the forces of light. Something's not adding up.

The white death and the army - If the army created with the white death belongs to the Dark King, why would the Lady kill Visander, her champion, to be resurrected that way? Would the Dark King not have power over him when he returned? If she knew what returning would be like and intended for Visander to actually fight the Dark King, why was he not briefed on the procedure? He didn't even know that he wasn't going to be returning in a few years.

Sarcean's brand - Why would the Dark King put a mark that protects people from the white death on his followers? If he killed his followers in the past so that they could return in the future, why wouldn't he want his past followers to possess the bodies of people he had chosen and and were devoted to him in the present? Surely that would make a stronger fighting force than an army made up of the bodies of peasants, children and the elderly? Why leave it up to chance when he could have hand-picked the bodies that would house his loyal army?

Why did Sarcean choose for him and Anharion to be reborn the way they were? It's risky, isn't it? Either of them could have been killed as children. What's more, it is mentioned in the book that the returning spirits, like Visander, have no regard for the people or the world of the present because they had never lived in the present. They just carried on their ancient goals as if they had never been gone. So why did Sarcean choose to be reborn with no memories of his past and with all the chances in the world to form connections and to be a different person? Why take the chance with Anharion?

Kettering didn't recognize Will. He didn't even care about fighting but he knew about how they were to return. Why? Why wouldn't someone who was supposedly part of the Dark King's loyal army recognize the one who put him in that state? Visander recognized Will/Sarcean even when he was wearing someone else's body. But Kettering didn't even recognize Will when he was just himself. If Kettering really had been just a lowly foot-soldier, he just happened to have the knowledge of how the resurrection of the army worked?

It's not that I don't believe Sarcean was a bad guy who did a lot of evil shit. I just don't think he was the biggest, baddest guy around. I think the reason Visander wasn't prepared for his return, the reason that Kettering didn't know Will and the reason that Sarcean's mark protects people from the white death is that the white death is a tool of The Lady and the side of the light. I think if Sarcean wanted an unstoppable army, he didn't have to do it that way. He already had the stewards-turned-shadows, the shadows kings, Anharion and his collar - all the methods of control that relied on his blood and unstoppable magic to control, rather than on some sort of staff that anyone could get ahold of.

Besides that, the whole story that "The Lady and the Dark King loved each other" seems more and more like propaganda and rewritten history. As far as Will's flashbacks show, the only one Sarcean seemed to be genuinely obsessed with is Anharion. The only irresistible impulse Will regularly felt and acted upon was seeking out and sticking to James. He wasn't even drawn to Katherine the way Katherine was drawn to him. There was even one part where Sarcean is surprised to feel something for The Lady: "He hadn't expected his feelings of their one night to catch him so unawares; to recall how painfully and beautifully they had found themselves matched." My theory is that Sarcean cared only about overthrowing the Sun King and having Anharion, no matter what it took - all of that taking over the world stuff, I don't think that was him.

[catalina-infanta]

Sooo, I had the amazing experience of attending a panel C.S. Pacat was part of during the Sydney Writers’ Festival on 25th May 2024. The panel was called “Creating a Monster” (with two other YA authors).

And finally a week later (because adult-ing is hard), I had time to actually go through my notes and write up some of the fascccccinating things Pacat had to say about: monsterous heroes, and villains, and enemies-to-lovers deliciousness, and queer identity!

I didn’t want to forget some of the interesting things said in this panel and thought others might be interested in hearing about them too? Please indulge the splurge. :)

(Please note that all bold headers are just my thematic summary of each section for people to jump to, not the actual question asked.)

WHAT APPEALS ABOUT ‘THE MONSTROUS�� TO PACAT:

From a technical writing standpoint, the ‘Monstrous’ is appealing because a villain will often do an act and the hero reacts to that. It gives unconscious clues to the reader that when the villain turns up, something exciting is going to happen. In that sense, villainous characters have a special sort of ever-present attention given to them (possibly because human nature is to always keep one eye on the dangerous thing that could harm you).

On a personal level: A) When queer characters are awesome but also ‘Monstrous’, Pacat says it can feel really ‘electric’ and empowering to reclaim/allow yourself to embrace the monster role that you’ve been told you fit into by society. Like in Anne Rice’s Vampire Chronicles where queer people are allowed to be beautiful/glittering & powerful & witty & have existential conversations about good and evil while fitting under the Monstrous label. Like heck yeh, that’s cool. And B) as an author, you can feel a ‘minority pressure’ to have characters be Good all the time and be the perfect ambassador for that minority, but sometimes you just want to be a vampire and take over the world, you know?

THE EXISTENCE OF ‘PROTAGONIST-CENTRED MORALITY’ WITHIN THE DARK RISE BOOKS:

When pondering whether it is hard as a writer to convince readers that a Monstrous protagonist is a likeable character, Pacat pointed out that the funny thing is that the question ‘How am I going to make readers like this monster?’ never really ends up being an issue because people actually really like monsters! The thing you might not expect is that the struggle is actually: ‘How am I going to make these readers who are barracking for the protagonist feel that this ‘monster’ is actually monstrous?’

Pacat explained that when a protagonist is also a monster, it brings into play something called ‘Protagonist-Centric Morality’ -- where you bond with that protagonist and want the best for them etc, so much that it can obscure when the protagonist is actually doing something bad. Pacat mentioned that he has found the Protag-Centric Morality fairly striking in the case of the Dark Rise books because people have said to him things like: ‘The Dark King Did Nothing Wrong Ever In His Whole Life’ and Pacat questioned whether the moral centre of the story was landing somewhere different than intended. He was curious whether the other authors had experienced that with their ‘monstrous’ protagonists too.

IF A HERO IS ALSO MONSTROUS, HOW ON EARTH DO YOU DIFFERENTIATE THAT FROM THE VILLIAN? When pondering over the distinction between a Monstrous Hero and a Villain, Pacat shared some thoughts from his lived experience. He said the times when he has felt most threatened by the ‘Monstrous’ is when that person isn’t clearly identifiable to others around you; where there isn’t a shared understanding between everyone that ‘yes, that person is a monster’. Extending from that, the Truly Monstrous is when that person has some kind of control over you and control over the narrative as well; if the monster is the one telling the story but casting you as the monster. Essentially gaslighting via ‘narrative control’.

ENEMIES TO LOVERS TROPE:

This is Pacat’s absolute favourite romantic trope. And he elaborated that he doesn’t mean that in the sense of ‘these characters sort of don’t like each other’, but rather to the point where two characters really hate each other and for a very good reason. He likes when a path between two characters feels IMPOSSIBLE to overcome.

This trope was first explored in the Captive Prince trilogy and Pacat loved it so much he just had to use it again for the Dark Rise trilogy. The planning behind it for CaPri was brainstorming: ‘What is the worst thing I could think to use?’ (Answer: Killing a character’s brother, which lands the bereaved character into a set of hellish circumstances.) But that meant when Pacat decided to use it again for DR, he had to extend that to: ‘Now I need to think of something EVEN WORSE THAN THAT (CaPri)’ in order to separate the main characters. So Pacat had to spend ages thinking about what could be the absolute worst thing to use this time -- and he hopes that he came up with something that is ‘truly, truly way worse.’ Which essentially had everyone, including the moderator, laughing loudly in fear. XD

WILL KEMPEN: FOUND FAMILY & THE LONELINESS OF INAUTHENTICITY:

Pacat spent a lot of time trying to develop a really meaningful platonic friendship between Will and Violet. It meant a lot to see a friendship like that reflected on page for Pacat because some of the most important friendships of his life were across gender lines. The reception to Will and Violet has been so pleasantly surprising, so Pacat supposed he wasn’t the only one with a hunger for that kind of friendship within the romantasy genre.

Pacat also reflected on Will’s complex relationship with his Found Family -- that having the support of a Found Family can be so essential, but in Will’s case that lifeline is undermined by secrecy, turning that Found Family into a different kind of loneliness. Because the thing is: if something so immense happens to you that you feel you can’t talk about, or you feel some way about yourself but think you can’t share that with others, it means you can’t really be your authentic self. But if you’re not being you’re authentic self, who are your friends friends with? They can’t be friends with the true You; they can only be friends with a facade/with a performance. So as long as Will is scared to show his true self and remains hiding himself away from even his friends, he will be alone. It’s a hard step to take. (Note from me: so heavvvvy but poignant.)

NOT DR-RELATED, BUT PACAT’S FAV MONSTERS FROM POPULAR FICTION: Pacat was so excited to namedrop his favourite monsters from popular fiction, he volunteered to go first LOL. The answers: 'The Brat Prince' Lestat (Lestat has been on his mind a lot recently because the AMC TV portrayal captures Lestat so well & has completely rejuvenated Pacat’s 12 year-old love of vampires. Total mood); serial killers such as in the Ripley series; and simply: American Psycho.

Great panel, right? Now it’s Europe’s turn!

[catalina-infanta]

I never expect the readers of a book who literally has a Dark King as its main character display this much level of moral purity.

When Laurent and Damen battled against the Regent's forces, when Vere and Akielos had their war, did y'all stop just to muse about how many "innocents" they hurt? How much time did you waste? This is a war fantasy. People are gonna die.

Ik the ASOIAF fandom is a mess, but at least no one is moaning about “kindergarten lessons” when Rhaenyra killed Aegon’s babies to avenge the death of her own son.

Just because you require a character to be a morally good hero to be likable, doesn't mean the rest of us do too. One of my favourite scenes from Deadpool is when he was being persuaded that he could've become a hero by not killing his enemy, and chose to kill him anyway.

Will did that too. He killed Simon. Not to save the world, but to get his own selfish revenge.

I hope Book 3 will showcase how Sarcean demolished Sun Kingdom to bits cause I wanna hear those bigoted people’s helpless screams.

Cause who tf has so much time and energy to care about fictional bigoted people’s sufferings where irl it’s always queer and ethnic-minority people who are being brutally murdered by them??

I also hope Will has a moment where he snaps the next book because if all he does is having courage and be kind, he’s not the Dark King, he’s Cinderella.

[catalina-infanta]

There’s a trend in this fandom where people deliberately misinterpret and twist others' words into more exaggerated and ridiculous versions, making them easier to attack.

Misquoting pro-Sarcean arguments as a "morally good hero," "misunderstood hero," "secret good guy," "cutie patootie," "goody two shoes," "flawless," "uwu good boi," etc., while the original posts and headcanons/theories mentioned nothing of the sort.

That's lazy.

It's a logical fallacy.

A strawman argument.

"The Dark King did nothing wrong" has always meant that Sarcean was the lesser evil compared to the Light faction. Both sides were corrupt and did terribly harmful things, but the narrative has been disproportionately twisted to make the Light seem like flawless heroes, since they were the victors of the final war.

In fact, they could both be equally evil, but only the Light side used extensive propaganda to erase their own wrongdoings and appear victimized and saint-like.

Why is it so wrong to use a mockery of the Light-side propaganda as a pro-Sarcean stance??

"The Light side did nothing wrong" / "The Lady did nothing wrong" was literally the core soul of their indoctrination presented in both books 🤣

Perhaps people just can't understand subtlety. They require everything to be on-the-nose straightforward and only take things at face value, which is a shame because Pacat's works are at its finest when you can read the subtext.

Anyways, if you wish to counter other people's arguments, at least attack them as they are. Don't misrepresent them into more ridiculous, exaggerated versions to make them easier to attack.

If I had a coin for every time I cringed when one of these posts referred to Sarcean as a "hero" or "good guy".

shudders 🤢

[catalina-infanta]

1. Sarcean was discriminated in the Sun Kingdom because of his type of magic

2. Sarcean was also discriminated in the Sun Kingdom due to his coloring

3. This makes the Sun Kingdom a big symbol and a metaphor for institutionalized queerphobia and racism

4. Sarcean used to commit dirty deeds under the Sun King's order, which makes the Sun King not a good person

Funny that someone had the audacity to say that these are all "my headcanons" lol

[catalina-infanta]

...

*rubs eyes and reads again*

i'm, uh, i'm going to go take a walk.

[catalina-infanta]

The full sketch on my PATREON.

[catalina-infanta]

A little something imagining them a few years after the books...

[catalina-infanta]

what's so refreshing about will as a character is that he doesn't throw a denial tantrum about it at any point like most characters with Darkness Within Them do. he's not a moral paragon, his angst and secretkeeping don't get annoying at any point. and i think it's because there's no contrast between who will Really Is, which is Good and True, and the dark king as his shadow or his dark self.

will is the dark king. he behaves like the dark king. he lies and he manipulates and he's a "sneak" and he's scaringly charming and he's possessive over james and a ton of other messed up shit and he tells himself it's for a good reason, and maybe it is!! and will is clearly you know. a Good Person. while his methods are sneaky, he does not actually do anything wrong. but those are his methods still, and they are cool moments and badass and also kind of eerie.

with the way he's written, i would argue will doesn't have or even need a corruption arc, he's just like that from the get-go and he's not gonna change. and i don't mean he was born evil or whatever other bullshit i mean that he was born a full person, including the dark king and will both, and there's complexity, but no clear line separates them.

[catalina-infanta]

i'm going to need to take a lap around the neighborhood after this.

[catalina-infanta]

On Free Will in C.S. Pacat’s Dark Rise Series

James Has Free Will With The Collar

Recently I wrote an essay (https://www.tumblr.com/catalina-infanta/748214922159194112/the-question-of-the-collar-the-dark-rise-trilogy?source=share) on how I believed that the Collar was a consensual object between Anharion and Sarcean. I still believe that. I will further argue now that although I think the collar gets Anharion/James to obey direct orders, I also believe the collar is something that allows free will to its wearer and is not forcing him (compelling him) to do anything he does not agree to do, and that he ultimately has free will. This essay is an addendum to my last, so I suggest if you have not read it, you may want to read it first to understand the bulk of the reasoning for this argument of mine, but it is not necessary.

First, I will draw attention to the below scene (in the chapter where the collar is put on James by Sinclair):

Here, the two sentences say:

“He felt no compulsion.”

Period.

“He felt nothing at all.”

Period.

The way this is written is short and sweet for a reason, in my opinion. The sentence is simply “he felt nothing at all” not “he felt nothing at all when Sinclair ordered him…” This feels like a deceptive trick of writing to me. It is stated in a way to hide information in plain site; we are meant to think he is only not compelled here because Sinclair was the one ordering him around. But he says here that he feels no compulsion. Nothing at all. These are the ways writers trick us until they give us the final reveal and we are meant to look back and it all makes sense.

Another clue is in the below scene. We see James is not an automaton who repeats back Will's wishes (like his people branded with those “S”/snake tattoos must do – I have seen others mention a theory that they are snakes, not “s” tattoos). Instead, James’s personality is fully his own at the end of the chapter when he rescues Will. He willingly calls Will “darling”, therefore giving a personal twist to his phrasing without anyone telling him to do so (and he is not a mind reader for reasons I will explore below)

and then, James takes initiative to blast them out of the mountain (showing us he can choose the method of escape, Will doesn’t direct him how to do it).

Furthermore, below, James says he will rule with Will, by his side. He has agency. You can’t rule if you have no autonomy. If you can't decide anything you are not a ruler, you are simply ruled.

Why Was James Acting So Weird? Is He Brain Washed?

James was acting weird in the last chapter. What’s more, James’s mannerisms are different, yes, even different from the chapter preceding it where James rescues Will (calling Will “darling”, acts sassy with the others, etc). So, the final chapter could have been done by Pacat to show that James is brainwashed, but I highly doubt this. Instead, I think it is done to show 1) James isn’t acting weird because he has no agency, but because he believes Will remembers everything too, and 2) He is written strangely to obfuscate the truth. We cannot know too much about James’s condition right now as that is a giveaway, so Pacat chooses to hide it and instead has us focus on the turmoil inside Will in the final chapter and on his interpretation of James’s behavior.

[One clue someone brought to my attention that shows James may think Will already remembers everything is the scene when Will says “both of you” to Viserion and James; James knows what he is talking about (the memory where Sarcean said the same thing to Anharion and the Queen when he was arrested) and probably infers that Will remembers everything as well. He doesn’t know that Will only remembers a few small snippets. What’s more, perhaps James is calling Will “His King” and “Sarcean” because he simply remembers everything now and so Will and the Dark King have both become interchangeable in his mind. Will is now “his King”--perhaps he even believes Will expects to be called as such]

Unfortunately, we have very little description of what he was feeling, or even of his facial expressions in the last chapter; James’s actions often appeared mechanic. Very importantly, however, the five times he is described by Will in the chapter, he is described as “achingly genuine” with “blue eyes full of loyalty” and “as eager as Will” and feeling “warm and real against him [Will]” and, finally, saying something “with confidence”.

Sadly, all of these lovely things Will noticed are (in the same chapter/moments) doubted by Will, leading the reader to doubt too. However, Will’s filter is often unreliable as his thoughts are often just his opinion and/or the full extent of his real memories are concealed from us.

The thing is, if James has just gotten access to all his memories, maybe what Will perceives to be genuine is really actually genuine! We kind of know it is from James's point of view given what we read after the collar is placed on him; James's description of his experience wearing the collar seemed to invigorate him. I fully expect that after Book 3 we will be able to look back on these moments in book 2 and everything will make sense.

To that idea, I find it hard to believe that Pacat would call this unbearably erotic (above) if we weren’t meant one day to come back and read this as a situation that is…kind of romantic? Sexy? But NOT lacking in consent or love or taking place with a brain washed partner.

No, James imo has not suddenly become a brainwashed Anharion. He refers to him as Will in the below pic, so he knows he is with Will in the present moment as much as with Sarcean:

To my final point, more importantly, James BELIEVES that Will remembers too! That’s why his responses are so weird to us and to Will. He now knows Will was lying about who he was, so he must assume Will knows too and still is aiming for the same goals as the Dark King.

Hence why he thinks (above) that ruling over the world was what Will wants to accomplish, but it is NOT what the present Sarcean/Will wants (not yet, at least). Notice also that James’s answer to Will asking if he was telling him what he wants to hear (in the above scene) was evasive; perhaps another tool Pacat has possibly employed to make us THINK James is talking about one thing when maybe what he is really saying “yes” to is something else entirely?

Finally, I would like to draw your attention to this final question I have:

This scene where James was asking, “what’s wrong?” always confused me until I realized James thinks Will is on the same page. If James believes Will remembers everything (which I firmly believe based on how he acts in the final chapters) then this question “what’s wrong?” makes sense if he believes Will knows the methods of the collar.

It makes sense because when Will has a virtual panic attack upon seeing the collar on James, James doesn’t immediately try to explain to him the history of the collar to make him feel better (because he thinks Will knows it’s history). So, in the above, James has no idea why Will is so upset.

I wonder if at this point in time here, however, if James remembers and is questioning why Will discouraged the use of the collar and wanted to destroy it?

Perhaps it is as simple as James believing that this incarnation of Sarcean wants him to follow him (Will) first and foremost because he wants to? This is what Will said in the Throne Room. Perhaps James is thinking now it is done, why cry over spilt milk? It’s not the end of the world, after all. Or maybe James hasn’t thought yet about how Will hadn’t wanted him collared and is just too excited to learn the truth (thanks @tackletofset for this idea). Upon thinking further, it is also possible that James doesn’t have to wonder why Will didn’t want the collar if maybe Anharion was always the driving force between the two towards the collar, and Sarcean more hesitant? Or perhaps it was something else altogether? I mention all of this because if my theory is true, it will spill over into book 3 as they try to figure out each other’s feelings in the first half of the book.

Conclusion

Finally, as we see at the end when James reveals he remembers all in the end scene of the book (pic above), we don’t get to see the rest of the conversation: we don’t get to see them talk about what they both remember. That’s for the next book! And I can’t say I have any idea when they will both be on the same page. Hopefully soon enough!

In James saying “You are him”, it’s comforting to see that James believes Will (the loving and loyal person he is) and Sarcean are essentially the same. That Sarcean isn’t the demon the Light side made him to be, that he is worthy to be held in esteem. This bodes well that the Dark King is no cruel man, as Will is not cruel either. James is telling us something about Sarcean’s character here, and I believe him.

[catalina-infanta]

The Dark King and his lieutenant 👑⚔️

I read the Dark Rise books and they're taking over my entire brain - so I had to draw Sarcean and Anharion

[catalina-infanta]

Kings Rising // Dark Heir parallels that make me insane

~