|
The books are much better than most of this thread makes them sound. My experience of the books was like this: The first book was a bit of work. I had to keep checking the cast of characters and the maps at the back to see who the hell I was being shown and why I should care. The book explodes at the end though, and it seemed worth it. The second and third are fantastic. The first two books of the next series have a similar up and down. Some moments are white-hot, and some are boring or didactic. The big strengths of the books are that Bakker is capable in all spheres of writing. He can write battles, court intrigue, small groups around the fire, lone warrior monologues, the descent into madness, etc. and none of it seems forced. He also has a big plot in mind and he is happy and capable of doling it out in small measured bits. His main strength overall is that he has a clear understanding of how to present a believable culture and present ideas through the exploration of that culture. Really a fantastic feat. His main weakness is characterization. It feels like the idea that spawned the series was that there would be an protagonist/antagonist who had studied philosophy of mind and then weaponized it like a super hero. He clearly had in mind other characters who would bounce of this guy and interact with him in different ways so that he could present various ideas about consciousness and morality. The problem is that because what these characters are and what they do was decided in advance, he has to make their personalities fit his aims, rather than building the other way from the characters up. So, in total, the characters are less than the sum of the book. I don't think this hurts, because the series is, at bottom, a bunch of ideas pasted into the epic fantasy genre. But, if you're expecting a character you can understand outside of his role in the story, you're out of luck. This is a deal breaker for some people. Finally, to address the "demon semen" thing. People point this out when they don't like the book, because it makes the book sound like it's trying too hard to be grimdark fantasy, and therefore easy to mock. It's not an intellectually honest argument. Those scenes are few and far between (I think there are 2 or 3 in the whole first trilogy, and one is an epilogue meant for us to realize that poo poo JUST GOT REAL). Further, the characters who act that way are so removed from the reader (we are almost never in their heads, and certainly not on the few occasions when they are doing their grimdark thing--that's always from the perspective of the victim, which makes them properly horrifying) that there is no glamourization or sensationalism associated with it. In sum, they're a good read, and they are similar to Dune.
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2011 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:57 |
|
|
I think that Bakker would like you to buy that the ability comes from the fact that all people except Kellhus are slaves to their cognitive/observational inability to percieve. How much you want to buy that is up to you. If it helps, you can just pretend that it's magic.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 18:56
|
|
|
My own half-cooked theory is that Kellhus is going after the Consult to get the Tekhne (or whatever it's called)since then he will control all possible avenues of power (Dunyain, sorcery, tekhne). Then, once he's done that, he is going to create oblivion. He is going to literally try to create 'the darkness that comes before.' He will have to destroy the Gods and the world to do this. To me, this is the only motivation that makes sense for him. This is the goal he was raised to know--and it seems like that is where the thousandfold thought would take him. Also, it makes sense in terms of Bakker's interest in cognition and turning genre on its head. The normal fantasy protagonist brings light back to the world. Kellhus wants to bring darkness.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 00:44
|
|
|
JLightning posted:Just want to point out a couple things about the Dunyain. First, we haven't had any POV from them other than Kellhus so we don't know anything about what they expect from his trip. Also, Kellhus had no freaking clue sorcery was a thing so I'd assume they don't either and therefore couldn't expect "someone like" Achamian to come looking for them because (in my mind at least) there's a big discrepancy between normal world-born men and sorcerers who know of and distrust the dunyain. Well, we also have the bit from the prologue of TDTCB, where they guy says the kid "has nothing to fear" because they are Dunyain. Of course, they went from that to paralyzing disabled people and cutting the skin off their faces, so "nothing to fear" may have been misleading. Overall all though, I think the Dunyain might be a problem for the author. It's going to be hard reconcile people who want to master circumstance but know nothing about circumstances.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 18:21
|
|
|
Maytag posted:I think you're wrong about the Dunyain knowing nothing of circumstances being a hindrance. I'm not talking about the Dunyain, I'm talking about the writer. Kelhus lucked into a lot of stuff, particularly in the first book, because the plot needed to move, and his abilities are never fully explained, so whatever he needs to get done, gets done. This is not a criticism--I think Bakker made it seem as plausible as he could. What I am saying is that he is going to have more trouble making it plausible that a whole race of Kelhus-types would just continue to ignore circumstance, rather than acting like Kelhus did. Either they are naive about socery (like Kelhus was) and get iced by Akka, or they master all circumstance and come out of their hole. I think it will be hard for Bakker to thread the needle between those two in a plausible way.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2011 03:57
|
|
|
The Gunslinger posted:I'm about halfway through The Darkness that Comes Before and it feels like this just isn't clicking for me. It's like the worst parts of a Steven Erikson book without any decent characterization. It seems like every character introduced is yet another political schemer, small piece on a large chess board blah blah. He's throwing out factions, names and kingdoms practically at random. I feel like I'm almost overwhelmed with information but I barely know anything at all about the various characters and backstory. I found the same thing, but I stuck it out and referred to the indexes at the back a lot. The book ends strong and the next two keep it up. I think it would be worth it to stick it out. If you still don't like it by the middle of the second book, I would just drop it though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2011 02:32
|
|
|
savinhill posted:What culture are the Skylvendi supposed to be like? I picture them to be a mixture of Mongols and American Indians. I believe they are dark-skinned people with a Japanese style culture.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2011 21:04
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:It's a really Christian thing to do in a world where religions very similar to the abrahamic group are a major theme. And also it's just an incredibly profound thing to do, to forgive such a violation. The same for forgiving murder, just y'know, with sex. Because everything is sex in Bakkerworld. Considering that Mimara literally being able to see morality is a big plot point I felt that was fine. I can't remember how much she does it in the second trilogy, but it seemed like she couldn't go five minutes in the first one without looking at the prostitute tattoo on her hand and remarking to herself on how it made her feel. That along with "hide in a brothel" thing to me really shows how Bakker's reach exceeded his grasp with the point I think he was trying to make.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2012 02:42
|
|
|
Maytag posted:Esmenet running back to a brothel had nothing to do with reminding us she was a prostitute. Of course it did. You're really saying that there's no greater meaning to be taken from that sequence? The most powerful woman in the empire, when threatened, has no choice but to return to a brothel just like where she started. It's practically a sledgehammer of symbolism. quote:Also, there's a big difference between not wanting to read this particular subject matter and spouting off that writing about such makes someone a bad, tasteless author. I don't know who you're addressing with this. Writing badly about this sort of thing will come off worse than writing badly about other things. That's the risk that Bakker decided to take, and obviously some people feel he didn't pull it off. I don't see anyone here suggesting that merely writing about misogyny and related acts makes you a bad author. Just to be clear, I like the books and think they are worth discussing, but I don't think Bakker completely suceeded in everything he's tried to do so far. He has suceeded in an awful lot though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2012 15:55
|
|
|
OriginalPseudonym posted:I'm going to poo poo bricks when Achamian gets there and finds Cnaiur sitting on top of a pile of Dunyain corpses. I would like to see this so much, but Kelhus could already do so much superhero stuff even before he got magick'd that it'd take some major power-ups even for Cnaiur. Seldom Posts fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Mar 5, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2012 19:06
|
|
|
Ambiguatron posted:I was floored when Maithanet dropped that he'd deduced Kellhus' rationale for leaving Esmenet in charge of the Empire. Bakker's work is a rare example of an author presenting a protagonist who is unfettered from conventional morality, and pulling it off rather than devolving into a self-empowerment fantasy. eh, I don't know if we'll able to say if he "pulled it off" until the end, since it's clear that Kellhus developed his plan while he was still a POV character, but it was kept from the reader. It'll be interesting to see if it coheres once we see the endgame. Also, one of the things I really didn't like about the series was how stupid powerful Kellhus was before he learned sorcery--the first book in particular did read a lot like a self-empowerment fantasy to me.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2012 02:56
|
|
|
Edged Hymn posted:I despise Kellhus as a person, but not as a character. Consider training yourself for your entire life to read the faces of men, what drives them and how they understand the world, and I don't think his mastering everything put before him is some thinly veiled mary sue power fantasy. The man is a human being honed to its full potential. I buy the face-reading thing to an extent, but when he starts seeing what is essentially their internal monologue, then catching arrows in mid air and dangling the most violent of all men off a cliff by one hand, it breaks verisimilitude and creeps into power fantasy.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2012 04:38
|
|
|
Edged Hymn posted:but the fact is the rothfuss and grrm threads are huge (and although the asoiaf thread is a bit more tongue-in-cheek), I can't stand reading posts written by goons about how much they tsked tsked over rothfuss' new blog post, and how grrm is a creepy fat gently caress. it's like they're ashamed to enjoy something written by the kind of person this community shuns, so they have to constantly remind the fanbase just how repulsed they are by this author. while they're pre-ordering winds of winter or whatever the new kvothe poo poo is. Bit of a derail: I can't stand those threads either, but there are basically two big themes for the SA forums: 1) Intelligent people discuss books/art they love. 2) Self-hating nerds mentally flog themselves. There is, not suprisingly, a lot of crossover, and stuff like the GRRM thread is a good example of it. There are other threads that are only one or the other. (i.e. the Bibeau thread is only #2, the McCarthy thread is only #1). This thread is more #1 but you can see how it can start to slip into #2.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2012 14:28
|
|
|
quote:NihilCredo said: Just so I am clear, you like him because he is a sociopath? Because I found that pretty irritating after awhile. Yes, I get that he's supposed to be the opposite of your typical fantasy hero, but the whole "can do anything, doesn't give a poo poo about anyone" I found just as grating in short order as the typical "we have to save everyone" stuff from stereotypical fantasy. Here's another quesiton from the first trilogy. Why did the Consult kill the Emperor at the end? I've chalked it up it being part of their adjustment to Kelhus (i.e. they want him to come to power even faster) but is there some other more obvious reason I'm missing?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2012 14:45
|
|
|
Maytag posted:Kellhus is not the protagonist. He is not the hero. That's an over simplification. We're obviously meant to see him as such at first. The first chapter of the first book of the first trilogy has him setting off on a heroic quest to find his father. It hits a lot of tropes just for that reason. He's clearly a protagonist of the first trilogy. It's only as we read that we learn he's not the hero.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
Maytag posted:The protagonist is the one the audience is supposed to chiefly identify with. You should realize by the second book of the entire series that this is not Kellhus. No, that is not a protagonist. No story demands that we identify with anyone. A protagonist is a 'prime mover' or 'prime actor.' They are a character whom we follow closely and from whose perspective we see some or all the events of the novel. The protagonists in the first trilogy are Kelhus, Akka, Cnair, and Esement. The game Bakker is playing is making characters we think are going to be heroes (Kelhus and Cnair) turn out to be thoroughly unlikeable. So they're not heroes, but they are protagonists. Akka and Esement are arguably heroes--Akka for sure I would say. Of course, I am pretty sure the reason Bakker has made those two heroes is so he can show how their freewill was dominated by Kelhus ALL ALONG and see how consciousness is an illusion man?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
02-6611-0142-1 posted:Kellhus was a monstrous rear end in a top hat in the very first chapter of the very first book, did some of you really miss that? Apparently you missed that no one missed that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
Tres Burritos posted:Ok so I just finished the third book and I don't think I'm likely to read any more of these. No specific reason, it just seems like too much loving work to keep reading all this crazy poo poo. A couple of questions: Overall, it's a bit of shame. I thought the second book in the series was one of the best fantasy books I have ever read, but it seems like the author is not interested in writing that type of book. I will keep reading the books, but it is a lot of crap to keep track of, a lot of which is parceled out in ways that are intended to make hard to follow.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2012 13:58
|
|
|
General Battuta posted:There is a whole lot of graphic and grotesque rape. It does not get better. I agree the books don't get better, but I don't remember anything as grimdark as the last part of TWP in the other books.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 15:21
|
|
|
R. Scott Bakker thread: The villain is a misogynist helicopter
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:You can have both at once. They share a body. I really liked them when I first read them, but the more I thought about them, the less they seemed to hold together. For me, that's a pretty bad sign. I will admit that reading his blog and particularly the Light/Time/Gravity excerpts made me think less of his writing and probably retroactively coloured my thoughts on the book. I don't see any reading comprehension problems in the criticism in this thread though. I also don't think that's a particularly viable way to approach any criticism, since the books themselves are all about holding back and eliding important information.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
Maytag posted:Sorry I haven't been around the last few months to post "Kellhus is not the protagonist" over and over. A lot of the critics the past two pages seem to assume he is. We had that argument in this thread already. That has nothing to do with comprehension and everything to do with the definition of protagonist. Kelhus is clearly a prime mover, and therefore a protagonist. (In the first trilogy at least). He's also an unlikeable sociopath. If that turns people off the books, that's not related to reading comprehension.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 15:54
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:
The point I was really trying for was just that it has nothing to do with reading comprehension. Please ignore me on the other stuff, I don't want to debate that again. Seldom Posts fucked around with this message at 20:16 on May 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 14, 2013 20:01
|
|
|
Present posted:Kellhus, on the other hand, IS trying to save the world. e: I am just being a dick. What the below posters are saying is correct. There's no reason to think this is what he is doing, and a lot of reasons to think he has an ulterior motive. Seldom Posts fucked around with this message at 17:13 on May 15, 2013 |
|
#
¿
May 15, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
savinhill posted:I agree with you, I don't think authors should be condemned for trying to tackle an issue, even if the conclusions they come to are wrong, as long as they're approaching the issue without having some extreme bias influencing the whole thing. I this speaks to a fundamental disconnect in the conversation. My position, earlier in the thread, and what I understand GB to be saying is that Bakker has tried to tackle misogyny and not succeeded. No one is condemning him personally. I do realize there are other people out there on the internet who have attacked him personally for this. My own take on the books is that they are very ambitious, and succeed in a lot of their goals, but fail in others, notably on the point that they are trying to make about misogyny. I don't condemn Bakker for this--it's admirable that he tried to work that big idea into a lot of other big ideas. But I also don't see why someone would give the books a free ride on this point just because Bakker doesn't seem like a bad guy. The work stands apart from the author.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
Abalieno posted:To me it only means he has an agenda. The fact that he writes too, about similar themes, and is using the work of another author as a kind of comparison to self. Quoted for ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 19:09
|
|
|
Tom Yum posted:Just started White Luck Warrior after loving the absolute poo poo out of The Judging Eye, and I just wanted to ask: has anyone else seen a bunch of little Blood Meridian riffs in Aspect-Emperor? Besides the obvious one of Achamian joining a band of scalpers, the way Bakker describes Cleric is a whole lot like the Judge (though a lot of this is probably from his inherent Nonman characteristics like hairlessness and paleness. Imagine a whole race of Judge Holdens *shudder*). And someone on another forum pointed out that Kosoter and Glanton share some similarities as well. We know Bakker is a McCarthy fan from the epigram quote from Thousandfold Thought. Been a while since I read it, but I recall it being explicitly a mash up of the mines of moria with Blood Meridian.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
Cardiac posted:
It's been a while, but my recollection is that they killed the No-god by shooting it with a laser gun, so has to be something doesn't it?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
savinhill posted:Yeah, he's contained in a big metal sarcophagus thing that has chorae on it and he can control all the different weapons races during the battles. This is why this book series is kind of hilarious. For it's all philosophical ponderings, it still has an awful lot of cheesy van drivin' metalhead warhammer stuff in it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Who would possibly click on an unknown link in this context?
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2014 13:36
|
|
|
Brodie posted:Right on, I'm definitely gonna finish it. It might take me longer than usual though. I haven't got that hook that makes me sit in the shitter till my legs fall asleep reading yet. I'm usually there before the 50% mark when I really like something. My $0.02 would be to read the second one as well. If you don't like that one, bail out. The second one I think is the best one in the series so far.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2014 13:53
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 08:57 |
|
|
Poldarn posted:I'm pretty sure he explains how the Inchoroi pretend to be prophets and give the tribes of man the tusk as a holy artifact. The tusk tells them to migrate west over the mountains which helps the Inchoroi disrupt the Nonmen civilization. I thought he actually said this out of book, like in an interview somewhere? I remember being irritated that a big plot point like that was dropped in such a weird way.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2014 13:52
|
|