Monday, December 14, 2009

Why does Kotil insist that, without Medana, Bala would never have killed the last great snake?

7 comments:

  1. Because, she says Medana's evil is not exactly him doing bad things, it is his ability to make other people do bad things.And Medana, knowing Bala would have done a bad deed by killing the great snake, persuaded him to go and kill it. If Medana was not there Bala would not have killed the snake.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Because, Kotil thought killing the snake was a bad thing that no one should ever do. So when Bala went to the hills and killed the snake she said that without Medana their he done bad by killing the snake.

    ReplyDelete
  3. She insists that without Medana Bala would never have killed the snake, because Medana can make people do the wrong thing so he made Bala do the wrong thing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kotil insists that, without Medana, Bala would never had killed the Great Snake because one night, while Bala was weak and angry, Medana used his evil magic to persuade him to hike the hills and slay Ulikini. On page 175, Kotil's magic songs and charms could not protect Bala from the evil.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Because Medana was infulencing Bala in a way. on pg.185 Bala says to Kotil" It was not Medana's doing only. The notion was there in my head all along. Medana merely helped me find it. He could not make my do a thing I already knew I was going to do. It was I who lacked the strength to resist."

    ReplyDelete
  6. Kotil insisted this because she knew that Medana could influence evil.

    ReplyDelete