Bakker LI - The Darkness That Lies Ahead (TUC Spoilers!)

[unJon]

10 minutes ago, Rhom said:

All this tells me is that either he's a lying liar who lies... or the scene is terribly written.   

Or your ingroup genre reading comprehension is reacting to the new way of learning Bakker is throwing down. 

No weepers on the slog. 

[odium]

Funny I should read your response to my last quote today, Ajûrbkli. I was just reading 10 minutes ago about how in the original draft for the Matrix, humans were used as processing cores and not batteries, but in the 90s they thought this was an overly technical story element that most viewers wouldn't understand and modified the idea.

Every time I come back to this thread I'm reminded about how frustrating TUC was for me as a longtime fan of the series. No matter how much we endlessly orbit the idea of whether or not what happened was coherent or made sense within the narrative, I think that it is almost objectively true that everything was accomplished with absolutely piss-poor storytelling.

The book was named after antagonists that scarcely appeared and barely received more than a few pages of exposition, in favor of a massive, heavily overwrought section on an army descending into cannibalistic chaos. The major plot arcs were either aborted, ignored, resolved by deus ex machina, or never explained. Practically none of what happened in the preceding books even really mattered. No matter how much Bakker waxes on about how the end of TUC was the end of his original adolescent vision for TSA (it certainly feels that way, so he at least accomplished that), it felt like mediocre sequel bait.

So many of the flaws in the previous books depended on TUC: characters who seemed like they were included for no real reason, inconsistencies or elements that felt like foreshadowing for things that never ended up being explained... And all of this compounded by the tragedy of an AMA that makes so many of these shortcomings painfully clear as exactly that, and Bakker's response to criticism being "But I have taught you a new way of seeing MEANING itself..."

It gives me a little bit of an aneurysm when I think too much about it.

[Hello World]

By the way, in case you haven't listened to the podcast linked recently, Bakker talks about this idea that meaning dies at the end of TUC or something and how he expects readers to react. To his credit, he says that he expects readers to fall into three categories: those who get what he was going for and like it, those who get it but don't appreciate it, and those who didn't get the point at all. From reactions I've seen on Goodreads and pre-AMA discussions, most fall in the third category.

[Dora Vee]

Well, I for one, loved the ending, but I will admit that it was for the wrong reasons. Then again, I did have a tendency of thinking #teamconsult pretty damned often in the Empire chapters.

[Callan S.]

I'm not sure if it's broadly recognised, but 'good' storytelling runs off a bunch of conceits. For example, in good storytelling you don't have any 'loose ends'. Everything gets tied up at the end, no part of the buffalo goes unused.

This is bullshit. This isn't how reality goes. Good storytelling is actually high bullshit.

And incredibly satisfying.

But that's the point - if you think of Golgoterath as a topos of meaninglessness in a meaningful world, the whole approach was to experience leaving a meaningful world and entering a meaningless world. One where the power to see Kellhus's eternal torture status was possible - but just doesn't happen. We just miss the bus - there isn't a story too it, we got there late or the bus was early and we missed it. Although the movie 'Sliding doors' used missing public transport as a conceit itself for exploring two different timelines.

I dunno if I get what the guy means by a new way of looking at meaning. But traditional storytelling is sacarine - it's very sweet. It's like softdrinks and beer - beer is bitter, black as pitch...wait, no, that's war! But beer is bitter. And you gotta admit, Mimara just barely missing her chance to spy Kellhus was bittersweet, after all the shit she'd gone through.

[odium]

Well, that's all swell, but if that was Bakker's aim (and it seems that it was at least something like that) then he missed the mark completely. If Golgotterath was supposed to be the well of meaninglessness, maybe he should have taken more care to avoid so many meaningless storylines that never even reached Golgotterath, from characters dying to the bland Momemn crises and so forth. I can grok and appreciate the idea that upon reaching the deepest topos on Earwa, the timelines where the second coming of the No-God is prevented just sort of guttered out and ceased to be achievable, or however else you want to frame the notion. I definitely see what Bakker was going for. I've read too much about his philosophy (not that I've understood it very academically) on TPB, too many interviews, too many of these threads and too much of TSA to not understand at least a little of what he wanted to achieve.

I just think it all was hanging on the thread of how well he executed TUC, and IMO it failed miserably.

[Darth Richard II]

Wait, so, Bakker sucks on purpose?

[Darth Richard II]

16 minutes ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Well, I'm fairly new to the series and all, so I may not be wise to Bakker's fifth dimensional, medium defying, genius meta-discourse methods, but I've always found that "readers just didn't get it" is the biggest cop-out method of hand-waving artistic criticism there is, short of "well the critics may not have responded, but the fans love it!".

Yeah, although we;ve been over this like  times at least, but some peopel are going to bring out that defense even if the next series turns out to be nothing but, I dunno, Bigfoot porno, or something.

[Maithanet]

11 hours ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

Well, I'm fairly new to the series and all, so I may not be wise to Bakker's fifth dimensional, medium defying, genius meta-discourse methods, but I've always found that "readers just didn't get it" is the biggest cop-out method of hand-waving artistic criticism there is, short of "well the critics may not have responded, but the fans love it!".

I think "readers don't just get it" is even worse.  There's nothing wrong with making something with lowbrow mass appeal that critics hate.

Bakker has taken "the readers don't get it" to previously unattained heights, since he writes very ambiguously and then gives statements in his AMA that seem directly contradictory to the text.  Or he includes things that no one could reasonably be expected to "get".  I remember that when he was posting here as Pierce Inverarity (many years ago) that he said that the three women in the first trilogy were meant to represent the "whore, waif, harridan" triumvirate.  But people pointed out that they'd never heard of this triumvirate of female characters, it's not exactly something people look for.  And that Istriya (sp?) doesn't really fit for harridan, since she was actually not a woman but a skin spy monster.  And why do all three women use sex as essentially their only method to get what they want?  His answers in the Bakker and Women threads, showed that Bakker had thought carefully about how his characters are presented and what that means, but that he had significant blind spots which frustrated a careful reading.

That criticism goes double for TUC.  Bakker was ambitious, and at times he was very good, but really missed the mark on a lot of stuff.  Surprisingly IMO, he was at his best when he was doing the typical fantasy stuff.  The awe of seeing golgotterath for the first time or Kellhus destroying the Horn were great.  But really all of Aspect Emperor suffers from poor storytelling, poor characterization, and poor plotting.  Lots of things have buildup with no payoff.  This series tries to achieve great things, but in the end the more you think about it, the less sense it makes. 

[odium]

but Maithanet, R. Scott Bakker has achieved the greatest thing of all

he has taught us that poor storytelling, poor characterization and poor plotting is merely a new way to experience meaning

[Maithanet]

14 minutes ago, odium said:

but Maithanet, R. Scott Bakker has achieved the greatest thing of all

he has taught us that poor storytelling, poor characterization and poor plotting is merely a new way to experience meaning

Of course.

I really struggle with how harsh to be in my assessment of the series.  Parts of it are truly excellent, and I've enjoyed every one of his books.  I like that Bakker aims high and actually challenges the reader.  But I felt like every book of Aspect Emperor has been getting worse.  I went back and read some of Warrior Prophet after reading TUC and I was like "oh yeah, I remember when this series was really great." 

I think my biggest issue with the last book was the Consult.  I have always liked the Consult, I like their motivations, I like their loathsome alienness, I like that they have limitations and make mistakes.  A pet peeve of mine is fantasy series with an all-powerful villain who inexplicably never wins.  The consult is not that.  I had no problem with the Space Janitors idea, but in the end, they weren't just regular guys who only half understood their technology, they were just nothing.  They did nothing of consequence in the entire second series, and then they succeed through a weird combination of luck and deus ex machina (Why was Kelmo there at the exact right moment?  Why did Kellhus bring Kelmo to Golgotterath at all?  Why did Kellhus seeing Kelmo cause him/Ajokli to lose control of the Chorae?  Why did Kelmo reactivate the No-God?)

These aren't minor questions, and expecting the reader to just ignore them is kind of insulting.  So much of this series requires careful reading and rereading to figure out what is going on, and then in the end the plot doesn't even hold together?  Disappointing.

[redeagl]

To be fair, you have to have a very, very high IQ to understand Bakker's books.The story is extremely subtle and without a solid grasp on philosophy and literature, most of the story will go over the typical reader's head. There is also Bakker's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the characterization and prose. The prose for example, drew heavily from Greek literature. The fans understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of Bakker's choice of words. To realize that it's not just hard, it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence, people who dislike Bakker's books truly ARE idiots. Of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the MEANING in Kellhus's existential cataphrase, "Truth Shines." which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev's Russian epic " Fathers and Sons". I am smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Bakker's genius wit unfolds itself on their e readers or physical copies.What fools... How I pity them... And yes, by the way, I DO have a Bakker tattoo in certain private parts, and no, you can not see it unless you demonstrate your Bakker faith. Nothing personal.

[Kalbear]

9 minutes ago, redeagl said:

To be fair, you have to have a very, very high IQ to understand Bakker's books.The story is extremely subtle and without a solid grasp on philosophy and literature, most of the story will go over the typical reader's head. There is also Bakker's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the characterization and prose. The prose for example, drew heavily from Greek literature. The fans understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of Bakker's choice of words. To realize that it's not just hard, it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence, people who dislike Bakker's books truly ARE idiots. Of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the MEANING in Kellhus's existential cataphrase, "Truth Shines." which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev's Russian epic " Fathers and Sons". I am smirking right now just one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Bakker's genius wit unfolds itself on their e readers or physical copies.What fools... How I pity them... And yes, by the way, I DO have a Bakker tattoo in certain private parts, and no, you can not see it unless you demonstrate your Bakker faith. Nothing personal.

The best part about this post is that I cannot tell if it's actually meant to be truthful, meant to be sarcastic, or meant to be funny. 

[Hello World]

What the fuck? I laughed so hard and I have no idea if he's being sarcastic or if he's that delusional.  

[Rhom]

36 minutes ago, redeagl said:

To be fair, you have to have a very, very high IQ to understand Bakker's books.The story is extremely subtle and without a solid grasp on philosophy and literature, most of the story will go over the typical reader's head. There is also Bakker's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the characterization and prose. The prose for example, drew heavily from Greek literature. The fans understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of Bakker's choice of words. To realize that it's not just hard, it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence, people who dislike Bakker's books truly ARE idiots. Of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the MEANING in Kellhus's existential cataphrase, "Truth Shines." which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev's Russian epic " Fathers and Sons". I am smirking right now just one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Bakker's genius wit unfolds itself on their e readers or physical copies.What fools... How I pity them... And yes, by the way, I DO have a Bakker tattoo in certain private parts, and no, you can not see it unless you demonstrate your Bakker faith. Nothing personal.

 

[redeagl]

It's as clear as the holy shining truth how serious I was. 

[.H.]

The question really is, post of the year, or post of the century?

[Lies And Perfidy]

2 hours ago, redeagl said:

To be fair, you have to have a very, very high IQ to understand Bakker's books.The story is extremely subtle and without a solid grasp on philosophy and literature, most of the story will go over the typical reader's head. There is also Bakker's nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into the characterization and prose. The prose for example, drew heavily from Greek literature. The fans understand this stuff, they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of Bakker's choice of words. To realize that it's not just hard, it says something deep about LIFE. As a consequence, people who dislike Bakker's books truly ARE idiots. Of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the MEANING in Kellhus's existential cataphrase, "Truth Shines." which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev's Russian epic " Fathers and Sons". I am smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Bakker's genius wit unfolds itself on their e readers or physical copies.What fools... How I pity them... And yes, by the way, I DO have a Bakker tattoo in certain private parts, and no, you can not see it unless you demonstrate your Bakker faith. Nothing personal.

i'm actually mad it took this long for someone to do this meme

 

well played

[Dora Vee]

26 minutes ago, .H. said:

The question really is, post of the year, or post of the century?

Or a new Copypasta.

[Gronzag]

He's joking.

But on a more serious note, I do believe that majority people here have at least above average IQs, and yet we still can't figure out what a hell is going in in these books.