I think that Harry was better able to deal with having a vampire friend than a vampire brother. And they were friends; that's an interesting thing about re-reading the books, seeing how much they liked each other from the beginning, even before Harry knew about the relationship. But Thomas was still living a vampire lifestyle at that point, still dividing his loyalties between the White Court and helping Harry. And I think Harry is now having a lot of trouble dealing with the fact that Thomas, once again, has other responsibilities and other people in his life than Harry. It's not clear-cut, of course, because Thomas has always been much more conflicted about the Hunger than his sisters. Harry saw his soul -- it's not a happy place in there. But he wasn't any less conflicted and miserable when he was living as a human, and I don't think Harry really recognized that. Or, if he did recognize it, he saw it as a valid trade-off, because that's the way Harry's morality runs. Harry would consider it perfectly acceptable to be miserable himself in order to save other people -- that's kind of how he rolls. (Oh, Harry.) But Thomas isn't really that way; he's fiercely loyal to the people he loves (and I do think he still loves Justine and Harry as much as he ever did), and he's not at all unwilling to be part of a heroic rescue mission or even to do it on his own because it's the right thing (like saving all the women from the serial killer, in whichever book that was). But he's not a heroic martyr the way Harry is -- or, at least, it's not something that he defaults to, the way Harry does.
... which puts an interesting spin on my speculations earlier, because I can now see Thomas becoming the Winter Knight much more easily than I can see him becoming a Knight of the Cross. I'm not really sure he's Knight material. Of course, neither was Sanya, on the surface, so one never knows ...
There is still plenty to fix with Thomas -- mostly, I want to see him get back what he had with Harry, because the two of them being so distant with each other is hurting me. And I want to find out a little more about what's going on in his head, because he is clearly conflicted, but I'm starting to wonder if Harry's solution -- to go back to "sipping" souls again -- is really one that would work for him at all; it's starting to look like a failed experiment, and he can't feed off Justine anymore, so as long as he's having to feed the Hunger, he doesn't have very many options.
Oh, there's an interesting tidbit on the official website about the protective effect of love on mortals vs. White Court vamps. (And this goes back to what Harry knows/is told vs. how things actually work -- Butcher actually says in that section that what Harry knows isn't necessarily the whole story.) According to Butcher -- yes, I'm back to calling him Butcher again XD -- sex isn't necessary, "but it helps". It has to be equally reciprocated love, self-sacrificing love, but not necessarily romantic love. Someone asked if parent-child love counts, and he said no, it doesn't, because there is no way that a parent's love for their children or vice versa can ever be equal and reciprocal in the way that is required for it to work.
no subject
I think that Harry was better able to deal with having a vampire friend than a vampire brother. And they were friends; that's an interesting thing about re-reading the books, seeing how much they liked each other from the beginning, even before Harry knew about the relationship. But Thomas was still living a vampire lifestyle at that point, still dividing his loyalties between the White Court and helping Harry. And I think Harry is now having a lot of trouble dealing with the fact that Thomas, once again, has other responsibilities and other people in his life than Harry. It's not clear-cut, of course, because Thomas has always been much more conflicted about the Hunger than his sisters. Harry saw his soul -- it's not a happy place in there. But he wasn't any less conflicted and miserable when he was living as a human, and I don't think Harry really recognized that. Or, if he did recognize it, he saw it as a valid trade-off, because that's the way Harry's morality runs. Harry would consider it perfectly acceptable to be miserable himself in order to save other people -- that's kind of how he rolls. (Oh, Harry.) But Thomas isn't really that way; he's fiercely loyal to the people he loves (and I do think he still loves Justine and Harry as much as he ever did), and he's not at all unwilling to be part of a heroic rescue mission or even to do it on his own because it's the right thing (like saving all the women from the serial killer, in whichever book that was). But he's not a heroic martyr the way Harry is -- or, at least, it's not something that he defaults to, the way Harry does.
... which puts an interesting spin on my speculations earlier, because I can now see Thomas becoming the Winter Knight much more easily than I can see him becoming a Knight of the Cross. I'm not really sure he's Knight material. Of course, neither was Sanya, on the surface, so one never knows ...
There is still plenty to fix with Thomas -- mostly, I want to see him get back what he had with Harry, because the two of them being so distant with each other is hurting me. And I want to find out a little more about what's going on in his head, because he is clearly conflicted, but I'm starting to wonder if Harry's solution -- to go back to "sipping" souls again -- is really one that would work for him at all; it's starting to look like a failed experiment, and he can't feed off Justine anymore, so as long as he's having to feed the Hunger, he doesn't have very many options.
Oh, there's an interesting tidbit on the official website about the protective effect of love on mortals vs. White Court vamps. (And this goes back to what Harry knows/is told vs. how things actually work -- Butcher actually says in that section that what Harry knows isn't necessarily the whole story.) According to Butcher -- yes, I'm back to calling him Butcher again XD -- sex isn't necessary, "but it helps". It has to be equally reciprocated love, self-sacrificing love, but not necessarily romantic love. Someone asked if parent-child love counts, and he said no, it doesn't, because there is no way that a parent's love for their children or vice versa can ever be equal and reciprocal in the way that is required for it to work.
Never said anything about siblings, though ...