POWER PLAYERS: The Annotated Aztlan 
Back to Overview
Full text of Aztlan annotations
[JUNGLE CAT] Such simple distinctions, but so important.The easy way out of looking at this statement is that JUNGLE CAT is referring to the part of the Pobre interview which had just preceded, and to that part of the shadowtalk explaining the importance of ethnic self-identity:
NF: Are you native to Aztlan?Indeed, the distinction referred to could very easily be the Aztlaner-Mexican distinction referenced here, especially coming from JUNGLE CAT. However, there is a secondary meaning, and (from the perspective of JUNGLE CAT) perhaps an unconscious one: referring to the piece of shadowtalk which immediately preceded the comment, which specifically expands and goes beyond Argent's explanation of the Aztlaner-Mexican identity distinction:P: Most definitely not.
NF: Amazonian, then?
P: I am Mexican.
NF: I thought you said you weren't an Aztlaner.
P: I'm not.
There's more to it than that, Argent old droog. It's the historical tradition crap, too. Most people who claim they're "Mexican" instead of "Aztlaner" are harking back to the way Mexico used to be before it blew apart in 2011. But here's the interesting bit -- presumably Pobre couldn't have been around before 2011.So when Pobre is specifying Mexican, with all that implies: what exactly is he referring to? Possibly, even, what exactly in Mexican tradition dates back to relate to the Fourth World, the last time a dragon would have been awake? Such simple distinctions, but so important.
- Socio Pat (13:17:19/5-13-56)
One extremely general note -- I drop it in here only by way of introduction to other evidence will build upon it later -- is that the present-day Mexico and Mexican traditions in some way pull directly from social entities of the Fourth World ... and especially from the Tirs. Here, however, there is nothing yet to suggest that connection in any specific way beyond the hint that something of Mexican culture pulls directly from the Fourth World.
[HECATE] Truth or not?The interview segment immediately preceding questions whether Amazonia supports the Yucat? rebellion, and has been edited to rephrase Pobre's careful "By elements within that nation" into a simple affirmation, without qualification of any kind.[JUNGLE CAT] Do we look stupid??
JUNGLE CAT doesn't say, however, what exactly he considers to be stupid in this context, and what he does say is certainly not a denial of Amazonian support ... or an affirmation, either. Better phrased than Pobre's, perhaps: let the observer make of it what they will, and the answers will say more about what the observers expect to see than they will about the actions themselves. Then again, Pobre was trying to explain, as JUNGLE CAT really is not. For what JUNGLE CAT might consider "stupid" there are several possibilities:
[WORDSMYTH] Sounds too much like Utopia. The truth doesn't quite match the telling, eh, Jungle Cat?The truth which doesn't quite match the telling is in the piece of seriously edited interview just preceding:
P:Two pages later (25), Argent will spot at least one direct lie in what Pobre is saying. This interview has been granted to the journalist Nicola Forberger of NewsFAXday/Xpress Communications Corporation (owned by Aztechnology) in order, not to so much to present the truth of Amazonia to the world, but as yet another spin in an endless propaganda war. Amazonia and Aztlan are not even officially in a state of war at this point (p.123). The entire action to this point has been a quiet support of the Yucat? rebellion by Amazonian factions (probably represented by JUNGLE CAT, although he is very good at avoiding saying it directly), back-and-forth threat displays and skrimishes across the borders and in contested regions and cities such as Bogot? and an escalating propaganda war in which Aztlan holds the edge by virtue of Aztechnology's owning and/or controlling a greater share of the world communications market. This interview is one attempt to regain an edge -- but it won't be revealed to the viewing audience as the journalist wrote it. Her Atlanta editor Diana Mlodzik will see to that.Anyone with an interest in freedom and justice and fairness would support our cause. In Amazonia, my people -- the descendents of the Olmecs, the Mayans, the Aztecs, the so-called traditionals -- are respected and honored citizens of the nation. It angers them to see how their brothers and sisters are so sorely oppressed within Aztlan. Amazonia has no designs beyond assisting my people in achieving their freedom.Next question.
It bears mentioning that just a little later, Ehran will not contradict Pobre's (pre-edit) suggestion that Tir Tairngire directly supplies financial and logistical support to Amazonia for use against Aztlan: and thus might be in a position to know the truth of the social conditions inside Amazonia. (Aztechnology interests have never been permitted inside Tir Tairngire borders [TT]).
The "power player" annotations don't pick it up -- maybe they take it for granted? -- but Pobre's reference to "my people" doesn't go unnoticed in the regular shadowtalk:
There we go again. Pobre keeps saying "my people," hinting at some kind of kinship. I suppose it could be a kind of symbolic kinship, but I can't shake the feeling there's more to it than that.There have been several other references to "my people", or similar sovereign-possessive statements, made by dragons in other contexts [references tba - EDD?], and Dunkelzahn will later refer to the immortal elves as "my children" within a context of personal authority over them (p.64). The implication is that of a ruler-father figure, including a real or symbolic blood-tie and with overtones of horde possession. More than that, I would be seriously speculating. However ...
- Blowtorch (12:03:38/5-11-56)
[JUNGLE CAT] I will admit there is intolerance, but we do not carve the hearts out of our brethren to power our arts.Harlequin seems to directly suggest here that the Amazonians practice blood magic. JUNGLE CAT alter admits high-level rituals, but never affirms or denies this directly (have I mentioned yet that he makes a very good politician?): although he does stress that whatever Amazonia is practicing, it has nothing in common with the perversions of Aztlan. Yet the implication is that blood magic is being practiced in Amazonia: and that suggests one possible source for a blood-tie between Pobre and "my people". There are others.[THE LAUGHING MAN] Much ...
[JUNGLE CAT] Not funny.
[HECATE] Truth or not?A politician's answer, saying nothing, implying everything: but definitely affirming that, whatever the actual support being given, it is not coming from "revolutionary elements" in Tir Tairngire (as the interview text has been edited to suggest), but from at least some among the Circle of Princes. Nor does he suggest any dissension among the Princes on this matter ... but then again, if there were, Ehran wouldn't go out of his way to state it in this company. (Although he does slip slightly at the very end of the annotations: "He [Lofwyr] and I don't talk as often as you'd think" [p.172]).[WORDSMYTH] I suppose that's to me. We are not unsympathetic to the plight of the rebels.
[HECATE] And you, Lady of the Court?One of the curious and subtle elements of the annotations is that the question being asked is not in itself an indication that the questioner is ignorant of the answer. For example, sometimes questions are asked to which the questioner already knows the answer, but is fishing to see what others know of it. LADY OF THE COURT in particular does this quite a bit: the discussion on the New Jesuits being a more generally identifiable case in point (p.35/96). One possible "tell" (in the poker sense) is the phrasing of a question: when it comes out as "Truth or not?" I suggest that it is more likely to be a genuine seeking of something not already known ... as opposed, say, to "Do any of you possess ...?" Additionally, the direct focus on Truth might be a nod in UMSONDO's direction ... if he is in fact Mynbruje.[LADY OF THE COURT] I'm afraid I'm in no position to comment on our political dealings.
[HARLEQUIN] Yeah, right. Are Watchful eyes set in this direction?
[UMSONDO] My gaze is cast in all directions. Laughing Man knows assistance is subtle and indirect when given. I follow the Lady's wisdom.
In this instance, I suggest that HECATE's questions to Ehran are asking for knowledge she does not already possess, but that her additional question to LADY OF THE COURT might rather instead be a test of how her student deals with not revealing more information than absolutely necessary ... and LADY OF THE COURT responds perfectly. Harlequin recognises the gloss immediately: "Yeah, right", and further immediately asks whether UMSONDO is paying attention to this: "Are Watchful eyes set in this direction?" Is the Passion of Truth and Knowledge paying attention to the deliberate attempt to fluff true knowledge?
UMSONDO, however, follows the Lady's wisdom: and elaborates on nothing. At first glance this might seem an argument against the identification of UMSONDO with Mynbruje: why would the Passion of Knowledge support obscurement of knowledge? I suggest that the purpose here is that of focus in the context of imminent threat: the Aztlan truth being pursued here is far more important than knowledge for the purpose of personal spat.
"assistance is subtle and indirect when given": [damn, where is that reference to the guidance of the Passions, and Mynbruje in particular, being subtle? - tba, or to be removed and/or amended if I don't find it soon]
"My gaze is cast in all directions". Could any physical being be capable of saying this, honestly, and with precision? On the other hand, omniscience -- even qualified omniscience (for example, such that all things are seen which can be seen) -- is a common attribute of gods. In the Earthdawn universe, Passions served the same function. But more on this, once we reach the discussion on the nature and purpose of faith.