Callan S.

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Callan S.

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. I think you've probably hit on something thematic there, even if Shae isn't possessing the dunsult. One truth, one soul - the god. Shattered.
  2. Possibly like a kind of graffiti - perhaps a mix of medieval imagery style from old texts, but since say a dragons head is in a three dimensional environment and rapidly created, it kind of looks like it was sprayed onto reality. Making it look like medieval paintings but badly done around the edges would lend to the idea of it being a corruption of gods song. And yeah, the Gnosis should look kinda like Tron.
  3. In terms of women, I'd say women in the series are basically set against hard mode play, so to speak. While men are on medium difficulty or easy mode. The women of the series do accomplish things - but against a very hard difficulty. Like the difficulty of this game, where cheap bastard tricks kill you I would say to be less subtle about the difficulty the women of the series are up against compared to the men. On the other hand though, this is part of what the series does - it flies under the radar of people who want to insist on or only see male dominance. Try and show how well the female character is going against the difficulty gradient and they'll suddenly get feminist triggered and run a mile. I don't understand this change at all? Why would this get 'toned down'/changed?
  4. I would buy 'The Second Apocalypse for Dummies'
  5. It is fun to think though that the Dunsult are so spiritually weak that they are the equivalent of a bunch of dying old men with dementia. I'm not sure it's what Bakker is doing, but I think the idea works quite well all the same. I like to imagine Shae is hanging on by a thread there and almost got killed when one of the Dunsult got killed by Kellhus. He was just leaving the building at the time...I mean, really, if Ajokli was lurking in Kellhus, why can't Shae be lurking in the Dunsult?
  6. Did it? To me it was borderline 'And the container with dinosaur eggs gets hidden in the mud' - ie, high sequel bait. Really I'd expect that to be the critique 'Oh, he left it like that so he could write more books and make more money writing!'. The ending certainly resolves a lot of things (as in the various personages dying!), and it sets off a world ender device to do its slow work. But what's really resolved? Reminds me of the sad ending of The empire strikes back. And what strikes me with the 'What was the point?' critiques is how quickly peoples morale seems to snap if there isn't a happy ending? 'All hope is lost!' sooo quickly!
  7. Layers of revelation are common enough in various shows (as I'd see it), most often with a character who turns out to be a double agent. Suddenly all the past history of that character and all their personal interactions with others are tossed into the air, like whirlwind going through a camp, settling things back into places both familiar yet eerily wrong. It doesn't have to be a double agent, it could be many things that suddenly change the audiences perception of a great deal of history that was previously taken as cannon. To whatever extent you think Bakker succeeds, it has attempts at multiple rewritings of history due to new information. Thematically you could expect that, given his doubt motif rather than promoting being certain of history.
  8. My head isn't big enough to stop some things, it's true.
  9. Thus the layers of revelation. Though I think Bakker indulges his desire for mysteriousness a bit too much at times.
  10. I think Kellhus is supposed to be Acratic at that point. It's like he has a greater will, but then the legion he's supposed to have yoked just wiggle out and do their thing under the radar of the greater will. Like workers sneaking a peak at a forum while the boss looks the other way. Remember how Kellhus was going to execute Cnaiur, but then just surprisingly finds a different purpose for him at the last second? [Rorschach] Convenient [/Rorschach] Proyas and keeping him alive was one of the legion who cares about Proyas getting out from under the thumb of the facistic logos. So Kellhus has him hanging, yet drags him up for a conversation. He'll kick him back down, but he'll save him a few minutes or hours of eternal torture machine time because that's the best optimization the Kellhus fragment can manage without the facist catching it. Also remember Kellhus says the closer the gets to Golgoterath the greater the darkness before becomes to him. He's becoming more eratic and closer to his possession point. He's screwed though, because what is he going to do? Cancel? This is the one shot he has at this. It's almost like he's caught in circumstances or something! Well, that's how I read the situation, anyway. But yeah, why would it somehow be any more fair for Akka to go be damned? That's something Proyas had thought. But maybe those who think themselves loftier can just plummet all the faster for it?
  11. And here is the semantic apocalypse - ie, when I have a good idea, it's a good idea. When you don't agree, you're being triggered in some sort of way I know is just a cave man responce. For I am Kellhus. In the semantic apocalypses there's always an excuse to be found to not treat someone as a peer. The other guy is always being triggered. Then again, it's actually a natural instinct to dismiss others by some assertion of incapacity - sorry to trigger ya, Kabear! [That was dark humour, btw, to make the tone clear. It'd be pretty hypocritical of me to play the 'triggered' game] Again, as already said, surgery is not solving the puzzle, it's carving it up and building something else out of the pieces. If you want to give up on the puzzle, just say. But jumping to surgery without saying you've given up - that's just denial. And yeah, it's a cave man instinct to think denial is bad. Lets cut that instinct out and then we'll be fine with it!
  12. What if we removed you and replaced you with a robot that acts better than you? But we called it 'you'. Wouldn't that be great? I mean, I totally pay that killing off all humans and replacing them with robots that the former humans might often call 'better behaved' would result in that better behavior. But the idea of swapping components and modifying the brain but 'you' somehow remains there - it's magical. It's not even ship of Theseus stuff, since we aren't even replacing components but removing them and adding in whole new ones. Brain modification is like solving a rubics cube by pulling off all the stickers and placing them on together on the right sides rather than actually solving the moral problem we present ourselves (actually it's worse than pulling off the stickers, it's more like 3D printing a solved cube and throwing out the 'old one', but w/e)
  13. I want a speech bubble coming from the squid, with those very words!
  14. 'Better' in what way, when the very things in the brain that would call something 'better' have been removed? That'd be the same as making robots which behave in certain ways and saying 'Those are better humans'.
  15. No one agreeing on what is moral is pretty much what already happened in the dark ages and before. It's neuro modification that's more the issue - probably predicated on people having a magical sense of spirit/consciousness that somehow remains as is, even as they get their brain modified for whatever. For some reason people think consciousness transfer is a thing - probably for thinking consciousness is a thing to begin with, rather than a very complicated process occurring. So they don't imagine neuro modification is kind of partial suicide. It sounds so bad to refer to suicide, how could it be that bad, eh? Anyway peoples brains are at default and on average, pretty much very similar. Yet we still argue a lot on what is moral or what shit people have to put up with for a particular status quo. Sometimes to the point of potential nuclear violence, ala North Korea. Or actual nuclear violence, ala Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Gotta save them troops. Now throw in modified brains, who baseline are not similar - and the arguments they'll give. No doubt hinging on 'But I'm human, you have to respect my (insert behavior here)!'. Even as people messing with their brain are arguably discarding that claim (but hey, they probably still have the capacity to claim a right even as they abandon their responsibility to that right, as default humans are wont to do) So we have a fairly shakey baseline for morality due to our brains pretty much being the same on average. And yet we're primed for some article about some grinning, probably bespectacled guy guy talking about how he didn't just get a card reader inserted under his skin so he didn't have to pull a card out of his wallet (oh god, so hard to do!), but he's had his brain modified so he can do math like a savant. And the media and current culture will lap this up. Because we have no sense of this being poison.