larrytheimp

Bakker LII: Ol' Golgotterath Blues

394 posts in this topic

IIRC he says if he gets run over by a bus, assume she's dead. Otherwise Sewa is still potentially in play.

I dunno if I'm being lulled by dunyain wiles, but as the first true dunyain woman (sorry, gunna call it, Thelli doesn't quite count) I'm seeing her as a kind of element that the dunyain were missing and made them so very weak (ignoring for now the monsterousness of the whale mother treatment). Still bloody cut throat, as she would kill Sorweel if she knew he would betray the cause, but strident feeling along with calculation instead of just exacting calculation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm seeing her as a kind of element that the dunyain were missing and made them so very weak

Well, the only weakness Kellhus displayed was being blind to a takeover by a God. I don't know what having women would have changed in his character. Especially since he showed no problems dealing with and conditioning human women at all. 

Edited by Hello World

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Hello World said:

Well, the only weakness Kellhus displayed was being blind to a takeover by a God. I don't know what having women would have changed in his character. Especially since he showed no problems dealing with and conditioning human women at all. 

Well, if there's one thing that the news has recently brought to the public eye, it's that societies which teach men to be predatory about sex (see Esmenet's thought about recognizing the sranc as something she's known all her life), also create an environment in which women have to be on guard all the time. Maybe a Dunyain woman would have sensed Ajokli's invasion for what it was?

Edited by Let's Get Kraken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this review on Goodreads and thought it was hilarious. But is it true? Did Bakker go overboard with the gay snuff porn this time? Is there really a dragon who yells "I like cunny"? Is it just a massive cliffhanger for the next series of novels that leaves all major questions unanswered?

 

Quote

 

 
I wanted to like this so much. SO much. I love his other books. But it's awful in my opinion, just wretchedly awful. 

It's about 30% super gross and repetitive gay snuff porn, maybe more...expect the first 40% of the length of the book to be little else. Bakker repeats the same lines over and over and over with a lot of arbitrary italics to try and lend weight to certain phrases (the Meat! vile angel! argh). Always verbose, he takes it to the next level here, framing scenes of mass gay rape and necrophilia with ponderous musings about the shitty nature of the human soul. Bakker, for some fucking reason, felt the need wax on with not just phallic imagery, but romance erotica language like "his manhood" and "throbbing phallus" and "turgid horn"...too many times to even count. Entire major storylines that have been built up over the last 2-3 books get dropped like red herrings. Major characters die, but not in the George R Martin school of "OMG!". It's more like "what, that's it???" Whole story arcs just fizzle into literary blue balls. And when you come up towards the end and you're still baffled but you've got another 20% to go so your figure there's still time...NOPE! That last 20% of the book is appendixes! Yes, there is good info there, but I shouldn't have to read The Unholy Silmarillion to understand the book I just spent days reading.

And as usual, Bakker has issues with writing female characters. They're all dependent on male characters and largely useless outside of their interactions with them, with one exception, which I'm not naming for spoilery reasons. Her character has strong development, but was still pockmarked with dumb things like (when describing her genitalia, because of course he does) "the downy hair of her cursed sex". No reason, it's not cursed in any relevant sense, Bakker apparently just felt like saying that. And while her character is one of the best, she nevertheless feels like fan service, like "look, I can write a strong female...so I'm gonna make this chick basically a superhero to offset all the whores and pregnant women who depend on men in this series". She still dies in obscurity for what seems like no reason at all. And a dragon literally yells "I LIKE CUNNY!" lmfao

It's a lot of pornographic pontification about blah blah the soul blah blah the holy blah blah ejaculating on a corpse blah blah human nature. That may seem like a given, but this book took it to the nth degree. It wasn't just shocking, it was incredibly boring and repetitive. And most of the book just makes no sense at all.

Yeah, I'm mad at this book. I am such a big fan, and I feel not only let down, but honestly a bit offended that this was even published in this state.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ser Drizztos said:

Did Bakker go overboard with the gay snuff porn this time?

Actually, as much as I actually loved the Gay Cannibal Holocaust, it was a bit much. Yes, there is a dumb "Cunny" dragon, but Serwa takes care of him. Yes, it's a cliffhanger. The review is not off, but they clearly disliked it far more than I did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see it as a cliffhanger to be honest. The Consult won, the Ordeal is done, Kellhus is done. Whether the No-God succeeds in closing the world or not is to be determined in the years and decades to come. 

The only cliffhanger is the fate of some major characters.

Edited by Hello World

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point to consider. The manuscript wasn't being published because the publisher thought it was absurd to publish something that bad and in need of front to back 100% rewrite?

"they haven't assigned me an editor!" Mmhm sure. Your editor read the cannibal rape holocaust and whale mothers and nuclear bombs and was like "nope." ;) lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lokisnow said:

Point to consider. The manuscript wasn't being published because the publisher thought it was absurd to publish something that bad and in need of front to back 100% rewrite?

"they haven't assigned me an editor!" Mmhm sure. Your editor read the cannibal rape holocaust and whale mothers and nuclear bombs and was like "nope." ;) lol

Wasn't that whole publishing clusterfuck debunked a while back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if there's some string of British code in the culture there - as if dragons must be dangerous, yes, but they must be polite! They can't just shoot their mouth off and say any old disgusting thing! "Oh, I say!" Monocle falls off

( On a side note the dragon, to me, seems an excellent reference to angry male teenage virgins, turned misogynistic on the drive of their lust and incapacity to do shit about it. But it'd also be a sin to have a fantasy creature be an metaphor for people in real life )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Callan S. said:

( On a side note the dragon, to me, seems an excellent reference to angry male teenage virgins, turned misogynistic on the drive of their lust and incapacity to do shit about it. But it'd also be a sin to have a fantasy creature be an metaphor for people in real life )

It was too on the nose to be called a metaphor and I think most readers were either laughing out loud at the absurdity of the scene or going "WTF!" or both that they failed to take it as any serious commentary on anything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That dragon would have been better off saying "I like turtles!" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

Unless all dragons must adhere to tropes, it just seems like if the dragon is an asshole, he shouldn't say anything that breaks tropes. But we've dealt with Cnaiur for several books, who breaks barbarian tropes over and over. Are we really surprised at any character having a personality so dynamic it fucks with tropes attached to it, in a Bakker book? Or are dragons supposed to be nicer than men/barbarians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Callan S. said:

Why?

Unless all dragons must adhere to tropes, it just seems like if the dragon is an asshole, he shouldn't say anything that breaks tropes. But we've dealt with Cnaiur for several books, who breaks barbarian tropes over and over. Are we really surprised at any character having a personality so dynamic it fucks with tropes attached to it, in a Bakker book? Or are dragons supposed to be nicer than men/barbarians?

I don’t think it’s that. I think the cognitive dissonance of a dragon that likes human “cunny” (how do the anatomies even work together??) caused the laughter mechanism or the WTF reaction to kick in for many readers. Once either of those mechanisms engage, you’ve lost the ability for the reader to engage in some deeper meaning. 

 

So basically the execution failed to deliver whatever the fuck Bakker wanted to deliver with that scene. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the dragon was humorous, or fucked up in some tourettes way, or interesting, or had any kind of reasonable, memorable backtalk - then it'd be fine that it's not speaking in GRAND ELOQUENT DRAGONESE. Breaking tropes is fine when you do it well. 

It was stupid. Using 'cunny' like it's some 2nd grade swear word just found out was inane. It wasn't interesting. And because it wasn't interesting, it made everyone look behind the curtains. 

It broke suspension of disbelief. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, unJon said:

I think the cognitive dissonance of a dragon that likes human “cunny” (how do the anatomies even work together??) caused the laughter mechanism or the WTF reaction to kick in for many readers.

But he doesn't like it - he doesn't even get what's going on. He's just repeating phrases like a parrot, like a 11 year old on voice chat in counter strike, just spouting profanity. He's a dragon but he has no class.

Crass characters just don't break my suspension of disbelief - in fact it's all too easy to imagine crass occurring (in such a nasty world) more often than classy, it fits - in a horrible way. You think better of a dragon, then he's basically trash. It's like projecting competency onto Kellhus.

The thing was a brute - it wasn't there to talk anyway, it was there to burn a bunch of bad ass mages and bite people in half - and it did.

Wish people would ask how the bag that hides chorae got into that chamber, but the dragons distracting from it. I'm assuming it's that bag, so Serwa sort of repeats the sins of her father just before he does them himself - ie, she thinks she sees all, is every surface of the chamber - then a hidden variable pops up and almost caps her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mind the GamerGate dragon tbh. The big phallic dragon fighting a burnt up witch while shrieking MRA rhetoric, I get it. Didn't mind that it was obsessed with human, uh, let's say sexuality either. Doesn't make any less sense than dragons obsessing over gold.

The dialogue was distracting, but it didn't ruin the scene for me that much. But yes, using the word cunny so much was very distracting.

Edited by Let's Get Kraken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Callan S. said:

Wish people would ask how the bag that hides chorae got into that chamber, but the dragons distracting from it. I'm assuming it's that bag, so Serwa sort of repeats the sins of her father just before he does them himself - ie, she thinks she sees all, is every surface of the chamber - then a hidden variable pops up and almost caps her.

People have asked. It’s been talked about in these threads. Best guess is that Kelmomas did it on his way to the Golden Room. He is the one that noticed Sorweel drop the bag after all. 

And you like the dragon. We get it. YMMV. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, unJon said:

And you like the dragon. We get it. YMMV. 

The critiques of it always seem to treat it as if the dragons words have no grounding in the actual setting, as if it was all very meta. Even if its words are grounded in the setting, no one has to like the dragon. But I think the lack of grounding is a bad way of looking at it - there's fair reason to think what it said is drawn from the setting. Whether anyone likes the dragon even when they see it's words are grounded, that's up to them. To me it seems a bad critique to treat the words as meta rather than derived from the setting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now