Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

lokisnow

Bakker XXIII: Priapic Godlings and Whoresome Folks

417 posts in this topic

Continue...

To the noobs who clicked the thread to find out wtf it means: Bakker is an epic Fantasy author currently near the conclusion of his six-volume series, the Second Apocalypse. Five books have been published, starting with The Darkness that Comes Before. The final book, The Unholy Consult, is completed and is being revised/awaiting publication. All of the Bakker threads have completely made up numbers associated with them, and sometimes other symbols in the place of numbers.

This is an example of what scenes from the book might be visualized as, cross posted from the second-apocalypse forum's art thread:

http://spiralhorizon.deviantart.com/art/Akka-v-Zioz-423227143

The books are grim-dark fantasy of the medieval crusades variety, Bakker's characters are all Dungeons and Dragons archetype varieties (Monk (kungfu monk, no less!), Barbarian, Sorcerer etc), and he expands and elaborates this form in invariably grim-dark psychological directions (no other psychology may be explored!) all within an incredibly detailed mileau composed of really fascinating mechanics of how the world, the magic system, the religious beliefs, the societies and cultures all work. There's lots of badassery, but little levity, and some oft ponderous but usually fascinating pontificating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On One Addendum:



Link to The False Sun, a prequel short that offers a good bit of perspective on the major conflicts.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we can get clarification on the "conclusion of his six-volume series, the Second Apocalypse. Five books have been published, starting with The Darkness that Comes Before. The final book, The Unholy Consult, is completed and is being revised/awaiting publication."



Bakker made one comment and everyone assumes we aren't getting TSTSNBN and that it is suddenly non-essential to the story. Bullshit.



Also, Faint, I still want a response.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that Kellhus is monk and Cnaiur barbarian and Akka sorcerer. So what D&D class is Esmenet?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's not. She's one of the henchmen that every player gets at level 8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the gods for a moment.




If they really are immanent and intervening in the first trilogy (like Gilgaol helping Cnaiur that night where he murders Nansur galore), is it kind of like the TTT appendix is accurate? The appendix talks about compensatory gods, bellicose gods, and I think there's a 3rd category. If one reads the first trilogy w/ the bias that it's just the belief of the people which I did, the appendix reads just like a description of how those gods are. But if it's actually literal...how exactly does it work?



We get Ptatma as a big example with Yatwer by being like a high priest of the Cult. But Cnaiur doesn't actually worship Gilgaol, so why does he get aided? Or is it that he as a great warrior...and actually one of the greatest of the freaking People of War who actually worship the thing itself even if they aren't part of the Cult of Gilgaol? Could the Scylvendi as a people been aided by Gilgaol just because they are the People of War?



And if that is the case...Conphas kind of did battle with a God and beat him making Conphas' arrogance that he is god-like all the more justified.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what D&D class is Esmenet?

original D&D had a prostitute class, with genital magickes and whatnot. gygax toyed with making it a subset of the bard, but then gave its own class, and then it got cut. you can find the old prostitute rules on ebay sometimes, as part of the addenda to the first edition of unearthed arcana, which were separately published as a paper insert.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of the Bakker threads have completely made up numbers associated with them, and sometimes other symbols in the place of numbers.

Erratum: when Happy Ent starts a Bakker thread, he meticulously uses the search function to actually count how many threads there have been before, and gives that thread its proper numeral, no matter the juvenile naming schemes invented by less meticulous boarders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if it's actually literal...how exactly does it work?

The Hundred are far more alien than the Olympians or Asgardians.

I suspect we haven't deciphered how they interact with the Inward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Picking up this question from the previous thread:





Since we are discussing Gods I want to point out a discrepancy. It may be a continuity error or it may be more. Kelmomas sees the idol of Ajokli in the Allosium, which I presume is somewhere in the Imperial Complex or Temple in Mommen, but apparently Ajokli is condemned by the Tusk according to the Narindari, which begs the question of how/why the Idol is present. (sorry about the quote tags- these are excerpts from the book. I really need to learn how to quote properly). .






Not necessarily a discrepancy. The separate deity Ajokli could very well be condemned by the Tusk (and hence frowned upon by other cults following the Kiünnat faith), but still be treated as a valid aspect of God within Inrithism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To follow up on the 'Squee' from the previous thread, someone asked him if he was serious about being two weeks away and he said,




From having a draft for my editors to pick over. Yes.


Kinda hard to believe, I know!





So... can we have more speculation as to possible release dates?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... can we have more speculation as to possible release dates?

I think it's what Calindibar said - late 2014 is the very best estimate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, based on what Calindibar said, early (Feb) 2015 is a better estimate, but I have learned that it's always better to be pessimistic with fantasy book release dates.



3) Because the Gods only warp back to stab Kellhus on the toilet in Act VI: The Return of the Gods. The moment of their Ordination has not yet arrived in our experience of the narrative unfolding.



So could it be that they are keeping him alive because he really plans on destroying the Consult? (And then attaining the Absolute which is the point that they're going to kill him.)



Is it possible that Yatwer thinks Kellhus is a demon because she has seen a future where he has somehow joined them in the outside and is trying to prevent that? Or to be a bit more crackpotish... is Kellhus actually a God in the outside right now but because of the Outside's timelessness it looks to Yatwer as if he'd always been there and has now decided to physically enter Earwa and interfere, thus becoming a demon?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thought I would let anyone know who wants to partake:


We're going to break the system for Bakker and coordinate our purchase of TUC on Amazon.



Anyone who wants to get involved, can. Thread to coordinate is here. Or you can PM me to get after details as people organize and we pick a moment.



Cheers all.



@ Ruiner:





So could it be that they are keeping him alive because he really plans on destroying the Consult? (And then attaining the Absolute which is the point that they're going to kill him.)



Is it possible that Yatwer thinks Kellhus is a demon because she has seen a future where he has somehow joined them in the outside and is trying to prevent that? Or to be a bit more crackpotish... is Kellhus actually a God in the outside right now but because of the Outside's timelessness it looks to Yatwer as if he'd always been there and has now decided to physically enter Earwa and interfere, thus becoming a demon?





All good thoughts :). I see possibility in your nerdanels.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the gods for a moment.

If they really are immanent and intervening in the first trilogy (like Gilgaol helping Cnaiur that night where he murders Nansur galore), is it kind of like the TTT appendix is accurate? The appendix talks about compensatory gods, bellicose gods, and I think there's a 3rd category. If one reads the first trilogy w/ the bias that it's just the belief of the people which I did, the appendix reads just like a description of how those gods are. But if it's actually literal...how exactly does it work?

We get Ptatma as a big example with Yatwer by being like a high priest of the Cult. But Cnaiur doesn't actually worship Gilgaol, so why does he get aided? Or is it that he as a great warrior...and actually one of the greatest of the freaking People of War who actually worship the thing itself even if they aren't part of the Cult of Gilgaol? Could the Scylvendi as a people been aided by Gilgaol just because they are the People of War?

And if that is the case...Conphas kind of did battle with a God and beat him making Conphas' arrogance that he is god-like all the more justified.

I tend to think that someone like Cnaiur would indeed be "aided" by Gilgaol even if he doesn't specifically worship the entity itself. I almost feel like these events could almost be like something that's "activated", rather than it always being one person specifically calling out to a god and then being aided by that god through direct choice. I mean I think that happens too, but I also believe that in a case like the one with Cnaiur here, he's such an embodiment of War that he gains the aspect of Gilgaol by that and that alone.

In the end I think it ultimately matters more about how you "worship", rather than specifically knowing prayers, knowing the gods' names and such, etc. I think that's what the Kiunnat is sort of like. For example, some random-ass tribesmen up north might be the best hunter ever, and might epitomize the ideals of Husyelt in every way, but he may not know all the rites and rituals, prayers, so and so forth. I think that with Inrithi, it was basically meant to "reinforce the faith", and make it stronger and more accessible, if you will. You've got a better chance of earning favor if you are very knowledgeable about the gods and explicitly worship them in specific ways, like Psatma, but someone like Cnaiur can still fall into the archetype of a god based on his actions, and thus at least temporary gain his favor. Whether or not that would actually get you salvation, however, is a different story. I think in that case you have to be more like Psatma and her followers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The books are grim-dark fantasy of the medieval crusades variety . . .

Question: Isn't grim-dark fantasy usually associated with dark humor?

I've only recently become familiar with the term and have usually seen it applied to writers like Joe Abercrombie and George Martin. As I have come to understand it, it seems to apply to a fantasy setting that is seemingly self-aware about how comically dark and depressive it is, and uses that fact to litter its story with humor. I know this is somewhat off-topic, but I was just trying to clarify whether I'm mistaken about this subject. Because by my understanding, Bakker would clearly not qualify since his series is actually pretty unique by its almost total lack of anything resembling humor (which, if we really want to go into digressions, might be one of the reasons it has never found the success of other dark fantasy series of similar quality that use it as one of their main ingredients).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grim-dark is generally just used to refer to fantasy that's grim and dark. A lot of it may be humorous and self-aware, but it's not necessary. TSA is about as grim-dark as you can get.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only Bakker had brought his DotD brand of "humor" to TSA... utter disaster.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why bother distinguishing from, say, "dark fantasy" then? Or is it just another term that means the same thing? Does it have to do with the ending of the story? As in, it doesn't have or it's assumed not to have a happy ending.



I didn't want to sidetrack the conversation, so I'll leave it there. I'm just continually confounded by invented internet language that never has anything resembling a precise definition, and everyone seems to have their own definition, which makes discussion about it all but impossible (i.e., "Mary Sue").


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's just sort of evolved organically. I think there has been general discussion on what is and is not grim dark in various Abercrombie threads. I don't think there really is a consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.