Do Na'vi "control" those animals?

[magne]

Some possible explanations here; might be that the Na'vi has to be pretty determined, if he is to afraid or unsure the bonding will fail probably fail. Also quite possible that they must fight the ikran and show they are stronger for the ikran to accept the bound.
Sneaking up on a ikran and connect would be less dangerous but the ikran might reject you while flying.

Good points, there. I believe that the Ikran will only bond to the Na'vi if they are worthy, i,e brave, resilient. I think the 'ritual' if you will is to weed out any would be riders that would be weak, or indecisive and therefore a bad choice for the Ikran.

Oh, sure. But that's before the tsahaylu. I, personally, I'm kind of assuming that the Ikran at that stage still assumes Jake is a predator it must fight off. And once they bond it knows that that's not the case. Not quite sure I believe the part about the Ikran attacking him supposedly cause it chose him.  But even if it did: it's seemingly part of the weird ritual that it tries to kill him if it "chose" him, so, that wouldn't necessarily mean it doesn't want to bond, but maybe that it wants to test if he's worthy first.

[Ash]

Not quite sure I believe the part about the Ikran attacking him supposedly cause it chose him.  But even if it did: it's seemingly part of the weird ritual that it tries to kill him if it "chose" him, so, that wouldn't necessarily mean it doesn't want to bond, but maybe that it wants to test if he's worthy first.

I wouldn't entirely dismiss the matter of "choosing" here. It may not fit into a typical rational mindset, but with the Na'vi being so conscious of everything living that surrounds them and the importance of connectedness to Eywa (which is, after all, everything (living) on Pandora) I think there may indeed be some kind of "resonance" even without Tsaheylu, that makes Na'vi and Ikran choose each other instead of other individuals. Maybe as a sign that later they will indeed harmonize when flying together.

The following struggle could be for the Ikran to test if it will connect(for lifetime!) with an individual that is strong enough to be its guide/rider, who will not endanger it by panicking a.s.o. This may not be so detailed for the Ikran, more like a general test of strength, physical as well as mental.

[Txontaw]

Interesting theories, ma 'elyan. It must be mutually beneficial, or else it would never happen. I think that tsahaylu allows both animal and Na'vi a unique, mutually benefical mental and emotional but also physical bond of sorts - remember how Neytiri said "feel her strong legs?" to Jake? I think there's some very deep connection because they can obviously sense the animal's body and breath, among other things. There is no domination, but a perfect unity between rider and animal. As for the animal feeling fear in battle, I look at the countless examples of horses in human warefare. They are prey animals but can with proper training and a solid, steady (not nervous for example) ride be coaxed into doing tasks not normally in their nature, such as charging into battle (don't forget that dressage was used before tanks and such to utilize the horse as a weapon to ground forces, kicking, rearing and lashing out at the rider's direction) or doing something that might make it nervous such as crossing a stream or going past a scary looking stack of things. I know this from years of handling horses and training them using "Join up" a la the Horse whisperer. No coercion. No force. Just using nature. This is how I picture tsahaylu, as perfect unity.

I was just about to post something like this.

And remember Jake's first ride? He definitely didn't mentally enslave that Pa'li!

[Mithcoriel]

Oh, sure. But that's before the tsahaylu. I, personally, I'm kind of assuming that the Ikran at that stage still assumes Jake is a predator it must fight off.

come on, we both know that the Ikran is smarter than that. besides, Jake is half the Ikran's size. if anything, Jake is the one fighting off a predator.

Size doesn't matter for wether something is a predator. If you walk upto a wild animal and poke it, it's gonna wonder if you're some form of threat to it, and run or fight. Maybe the Ikran doesn't literally think Jake wants to eat it, but I'm quite certain it must have that kind of hostility toward a Na'vi. I mean this guy invades the Ikran's personal bubble, throws a sling at it to bind its mouth, and then jumps on it against its will. But once tsahaylu is made, the animal understands all his intentions, and knows he's not planning on killing it or something.
No, Jake's not fighting off a predator, cause the Ikran isn't interested in eating him. And the Ikran is defending itself. Jake was the one who went after the Ikran. So the ikran in this situation couldn't possibly classify as "the predator", even if it's true it's objectively more dangerous than Jake.

and if we consider that the bond probably doesn't allow one Na'vi to control another, I think the only plausible way it could work would be via some sort of most-intelligent-species-wins type system with the animals the Na'vi bond with being too simple or unintelligent to resist control.

I agree that intelligence seems to play a role. But that should still make it possible for you to control your partner a little it. Or what if an adult connected with a kid. Would they then have the kid mentally bound?

You gave the example of having a horse walk around when it doesn't have much better to do, but I think that's avoiding the difficult cases where the animal definitely has something else it wants to do but follows counterproductive directions anyway.

I wasn't deliberately avoiding those cases. This is referring to the normal situations.
It's a different question altogether what the horse will do if it doesn't want to obey. I mentioned the example of ordering the horse to stick its hoof into a meat grinder. Do you think it would obey?

Also, it seems a bit insulting to the horses to suggest that their own natural behavior is so horribly wrong, their best advantage is to be helplessly enslaved by something else. I know Na'vi can use their intelligence to come up with good ideas sometimes, but the horse's decisions can't be flat-out stupid.

Firstly, even if an explanation is insulting that doesn't mean it's wrong. Secondly, I don't think it's insulting at all. As I argued before, giving control to the Na'vi rider would probably improve the performance of the horse/Na'vi pair, and the Na'vi doesn't necessarily have to discount the horse's decisions as you're suggesting. And ultimately, we're not even talking about the horse's "natural behavior" unless you're suggesting that the horses and Na'vi have been together for so long that they've adapted their behavior to the relationship, a claim which you rejected when I made it.

Well, if an explanation is insulting, it carries the implication that it might be wrong/silly. I mean, let's face it: no doubt, Na'vi are smarter than horses. And there's situations where the horses' survival instincts would cause them to do the wrong thing, e.g. if they have to hide from a hunter, but they're so panicked as he comes closer that they end up running away from their hiding place, where a Na'vi would know to stay put and be quiet. But overall: horses aren't idiots. They wouldn't run into walls without the help of the Na'vi. They overall have the right idea about how to survive. You're sort of implying that their brains are filled with so much trash that instead of having them evolve certain behaviours that are more advantageous than the ones they currently have, they would be better off having their entire brain replaced (or controlled by) the instructions of a completely different creature.
Like I said: why doesn't the horse's behaviour just adapt, so it stops doing uncareful things, or they start paying attention to their Na'vi instructor more, instead of loosing all control to him?
And as I said before: this obedience couldn't have evolved via domestication of the horse by the Na'vi, as other animals have it as well.

What's arrogant is not the reason for killing the animal. That's the same either way: "I'm hungry. And my social instincts forbid me to kill someone of my own kind. So I'll kill this creature." The point is your attitude toward the animal.
. . .

That seems kind of arbitrary to me. Are you saying that any action taken towards any creature can be done in a non-prejudiced, non-arrogant way if your attitude towards the creature is respectful?

Not any action. Just those which are useful, reasonable. Killing and torturing animals for fun and then respectfully apologizing wouldn't be one of them, for example, cause you're not forced to do that to survive.

But as I've pointed out before, the attitude of the Na'vi towards the animals they bond with is respectful, so how could using the bond, even if it does involve complete control of the animal, make the Na'vi arrogant or "prejudiced against another species"?

True. Maybe it would be more adequate to call the movie, or James Cameron, "arrogant on the Na'vi's behalf", i.e. the movie is sort of homocentric/navicentric in that it paints Na'vi as something superior to the other animals.

It's like the story where the biblical god made all the animals just for humans to use. If that were really true, that the animals were made for us, it wouldn't be arrogant of us to treat the animals that way. Thing is though, it's arrogant of whoever wrote the story, to put animals in such an inferior position.


Oh yeah, and concerning the Ikran: here's another theory: what if that's how they pick their mates? An ikran looking for a mate approaches another, and if the other chooses him too, they engage in a wild fight almost to the death, till the aggressor, the one who's interested in bonding, manages to do tsahaylu? That way, the other ikran knows this is a worthy mate, cause he's strong. And then they might fly around together bonded, to seal the bond. In other words, it would be pretty much exactly what the Na'vi do.

[txur txe'lante]

I do not believe control is the right word in this situation. when bonded with an animal you become part of each other, sharing thoughts and emotions. when bonded with an Ikran you are not enslaving him, losing his free will no. the Na'vi are as part of nature as the Ikran. The Ikran and the Na'vi have a teamwork. The Na'vi see in his thoughts his mind and can show him mentally what they want him to do. I think that the Ikran agrees to the motion because there is no such thing as "breaking free from tsahaylu." I think you are at one with the animal and at peace and you work together. there are no threats involved no treats just a bond into the mind you can feel their breath their fear you see what they see and they see what you see.

[Jake_Sully_1]

Kaltxi frapo!

For me as an animal rightist and great respecter of animals of course I find the topic of tsaheylu most intriguing and interesting!! :-)
I think a majority has come to the conclusion here that tsaheylu is not a way of total and irresistible enslavement. Just like animal friendship, such as hopefully by good animal trainers like "horse whisperers" is not enslavement. The animal simply trusts the human being and does what he asks, because of trust and friendship. Because it wants to please.
Actually I think that line which Jake Sully said when making tsaheylu "Now you're mine!" was very misleading and VERY un-Na'vi. But like a former poster wrote, I agree that must have been because Jake was still quite new on Pandora and still very much a human marine.

Seen from an evolutionary standpoint it would make no sense at all if tsaheylu were a means of enslavement. The fact that even prey animals such as dire horses have tsaheylu organs means that even prey animals must profit somehow from tsaheylu. If tsaheylu were just a means for enslavement, predator animals would certainly profit of it, they could use it to enslave their prey animals and stop them from fighting / kicking / defending themselves. But if predators could use tsaheylu that way, the prey animals would CERTAINLY have evolved away and gotten rid of their tsaheylu organs.
The fact that even prey animals such as the dire horse have tsaheylu organs, means that those organs must be used primarily with the animal's social partners, mates, children, rivals, pack / herd or clan members.
The most likely thing would be as a means for perfect, non-ambiguous communication.
And that's what I think Cameron envisioned. An anatomic organ for "horse whispering", for telepathic communication. However, obviously only Eywa has the transmitter strength needed for wireless (telepathic) broadcasting, all others must fall back on good old ethernet, err- tsaheylu by making a physical connection, just like when you plug in an ethernet or USB cable into your PC.
I think it's most likely a lot like the mechanical connection to the brain seen in the movie "The Matrix", where people could upload tons of information in milliseconds and transmit images, smells, entire worlds.
All in all, it's a very interesting and intriguing thing of Cameron to invent. :-)

An oh, sorry, I'd like to correct something I've seen:

When cows are led into the slaughterhouse single-file, they see the cows in front of them drop dead and just keep moving. They don't understand what's going on.

I must correct this:
I've seen a LOT of videos involving slaughterhouses and VERY OFTEN the animals understand damn well what's going to happen to them and what's going on, even BEFORE they even get near to where they are killed, sometimes they already "get it" when they should be loaded to be hauled off to the slaughter house. And even if you see animals going up to a place where they see their mates being killed, that does in no way mean they don't understand what's happening.
What do you think the people in Nazi concentration camps did when they were led into the gas chambers by the Nazis? They too let themselves be lead right in, without any resistance and they knew damn well what was going to happen to them in there.
Sorry, but for Eywa and the life here on earth, I had to correct that.

Greetings,
Mark

[Tsa'räni]

From what we've seen, the Na'vi are the only sentient species native to Pandora.  Ikran and the like, while obviously not dumb as rocks, still appear to only have an animalistic level of intelligence.  It's entirely possible that the bond between a Na'vi and animal represents some level of control, only the Na'vi are capable of doing that because of their level of intelligence.

I still don't see a level of control as an issue.  If the minds are really functioning as one, I'd like to have my mind be the dominant aspect of that.  Why?  Because my brain is capable of higher reasoning and all those other things animal brains seem to lack.  In a blend with an animal level of intelligence, you're still going to want the more advanced brain calling the shots.

And that is a type of control.

[Jake_Sully_1]

Well obviously any type of influence is a "type of control". And obviously tsaheylu does allow one to influence others - or be influenced by them, least it wouldn't make sense to make tsaheylu with riding mounts. But that's still a far shot away from enslavement.
Perhaps tsaheylu is not needed for issuing "commands" at all, but only as a means to understand the animal better, to know what it thinks and feels so the rider can better consider the animal's needs and better adjust his expectations, commands, etc.
;-)

Mark