The Unholy Consult post-release SPOILER thread III

[Rhom]

9 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

I don't think it ever did?

Yeah, if you just copied the direct link to a tweet it would pop up in the board.  It was one way to still share pictures after they took that feature out.  Can only assume they have also taken tweets out now.

[Kalbear]

5 minutes ago, Ajûrbkli said:

Yatwer is pro-caste and anti-social mobility, but she's also a female(?)-aspected goddess.

That's fine. She's a female-aspected goddess that is specifically about women knowing their place and staying in it. She's the Ann Coulter of goddesses.

[redeagl]

2 hours ago, Ajûrbkli said:

Why isn't he condemning the Ordeal* for the violence at the recent rally in Golgotterath?

*The alt-right would prefer the Ordeal, right? Despite Kellhus' weakening of patriarchy by letting women inherit and giving slaves more rights, the Consult has a pro-science, pro-illegal immigration, pro-LGBT agenda.

Technically, all the Ordealsmen are illegal immigrants.

[Larry of the Lawn]

This just in from Reddit AMA Bakker based the Cunuroi on Juggaloes.

[Gaston de Foix]

I've been checked out for a bit.  Where exactly is this Bakker AMA?  

[Callan S.]

24 minutes ago, Gaston de Foix said:

I've been checked out for a bit.  Where exactly is this Bakker AMA?  

Get ready for people to call it Argh Mah Ayes!

Here it is

 

[Larry.]

3 hours ago, Triskan said:

Then the implication is as obvious as it is horrifying:  sranc were made in the image of Juggaloes.  

The "Semantic Apocalypse" at its scariest?

[Callan S.]

On 8/16/2017 at 10:13 AM, Darth Richard II said:

I don't...what? Someone asked him a question and he gave an answer. You keep saying that answer isn't true.

LTTP: No, I'm saying your interpretation of the text of the answer isn't necessarily correct. Your own interpretations are transparent to you, like a lens - you see through them and see 'what answer he gave'. But lenses dictate focuses; so instead of me arguing your lenses, your own particular focusings, I appear to be disputing 'the answer he gave'. An answer from the guy who said Cnaiurs arc was over, which was clearly an ambiguous answer in retrospect, yeah?

[Callan S.]

TPB seems slightly active again - I'm trying to find the quote someone gave about the setting being like poker in the dark with rules you're not told, infinite stakes and a dealer who scowls all the time, to pass on the goodness - have looked through some pages and can't find it, anyone else know what page it's on?

[odium]

am•big•u•ous /æmˈbɪgyuəs/  adj. 

open to or having several possible meanings or interpretations:He gave an ambiguous answer to that question.

I would say "Cnauir's arc is over" is not an ambiguous statement. I always wonder why authors would bother to lie when they can just not respond.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

I agree with @Callan S.. Bakker is wily and intentionally ambiguous. He steers you where you want to go. Example, Kellhus is dead. Now, we know that while dead he is not done. But, you could've known that from, "Kellhus is dead." Just like that which comes after determines which comes before. While true, its not in all instances. Seswatha came before the Mandate. Nonman before Men. 1st apocalypse before the 2nd. Both are true, and that is Callan S's point. You all need to take whatever Bakker says with a grain of salt, period. He doesn't seem, to me, to be one to show you his hand.

[Darth Richard II]

[redeagl]

29 minutes ago, Michael Seswatha Jordan said:

I agree with @Callan S.. Bakker is wily and intentionally ambiguous. He steers you where you want to go. Example, Kellhus is dead. Now, we know that while dead he is not done. But, you could've known that from, "Kellhus is dead." Just like that which comes after determines which comes before. While true, its not in all instances. Seswatha came before the Mandate. Nonman before Men. 1st apocalypse before the 2nd. Both are true, and that is Callan S's point. You all need to take whatever Bakker says with a grain of salt, period. He doesn't seem, to me, to be one to show you his hand.

[Darth Richard II]

Well, to me, it looks like the author answered a question you had, abnd you didn't like the answer so are now doing mental gymnastics to try and change it to something else.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

13 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Well, to me, it looks like the author answered a question you had, abnd you didn't like the answer so are now doing mental gymnastics to try and change it to something else.

No, it isn't. He does this in many instances. He leaves room for him to go the opposite direction. Another example. In the AMA, he was asked if Ajokli is who Kellhus sees in his visions. He never said yes. I'm paraphrasing here, but something along the lines of, "That would be a good proposition.". 

Now, that we know Kellhus's isnt done, I think we will see him in the Outside. Where might you ask? My guess, under a tree, framed by a night sky that doesn't move with a mountain behind it like a lady's back. Bakker said at the Con that it wasn't Ajokli's power that caused Kellhus to use magic without the Mark. It was because his knowledge and sorcery had become so great it was indistinguishable from the World(that in itself has tons of implications). I'm betting Kellhus carved out his own little hiding place in the Outside, one very similar to those in his dreams. Another takeaway from the Con, Kellhus didn't come into any sort of contact or manipulation with Ajokli until after the Circumfix. So, the haloes have absolutely nothing to do with Ajokli.

[Darth Richard II]

edit: gone

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

21 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

edit: gone

Say what you gotta say. I'm a big boy.

[Callan S.]

1 hour ago, Darth Richard II said:

Well, to me, it looks like the author answered a question you had, abnd you didn't like the answer so are now doing mental gymnastics to try and change it to something else.

The issue is for myself I can say 'maybe' to this, but you don't appear to think it could apply to you. Are you considering it could be you (or even both of us) doing mental gymnastics?

Conversations where B keeps treating A as capable of mental gymnastics but B doesn't treat themselves as capable of doing that are pretty damn lopsided affairs...really just a form of gas lighting.

[redeagl]

So, The next series will at least be 3 books BUT one of them will focus on just Koringhus's son. That's apparently the first one we are getting too .

[Kalbear]

So I'm curious, @Michael Seswatha Jordan - how do you square Bakker's love of ambiguity with his well-publicized note that TUC was going to be where the 'g-string' comes off in the strip club? What part of removing the g-string implies ambiguity?