The Bakker and Women Thread Returns

[Shryke]

There's obviously some larger purpose to everything going on back in the empire while Kellhus is away.

It's tough to say how necessary Esmi's POV is till we see the last book of TAE.

[sologdin]

well, there's been no incest plot yet. and if he buries esmi in book VI, then we can have orestes/elektra plots for finale.

[Lyanna Stark]

I[t]'d be interesting if anyone who found the series lacking in women with agency found improvements in the second act.

The problem would be to get someone to volunteer to read them, I guess? ;)

Regarding characterisation of women, we start out with Esmenet and Serwe soon after, which are two exploited women buying into the system. Then we are shown just how exploited they are, how negative that is, how they rely on male protection, how this is purchased with their bodies and their beauty as they have no other value than flesh. I mean, do we really need two whores/sex slaves to show us the exact same thing, over and over and over? When it should not be news how women are objectified and often exploiter in RL and have been through history? For the sake of this, both female characters are equipped with a pretty one track mind so that we never lose sight of what they are in the story for: to illustrate how women are exploited and oppressed by the system. OK fair enough.

Then we have Istrya rape alien, the evil, depraved mother who cannot get any power of her own, and that doesn't just make her manipulative, but it drives her to such lengths as to commit incest with her own son to gain some of his power. So we already have two women, described as flesh flesh flesh and only through flesh can they secure something in the world they are so oppressed in. Then Istrya comes in as the third, to illustrate....the same thing, more or less.

So ok, women are oppressed, we get it, really really really oppressed. For no obvious reason either (at least no compellin reason, even in most really sexist societies women have some niche where they are at leat valued, even if it is just for baby producing), they just are, in all areas.

And we have the heavy handed sexualisation on top of that. Women's only weapon is sex, flesh, being flesh. That reduces any higher personality to biology, to Other, to the animal side, to immanence. Especially in light of Simone de Beaviour's text "The Second Sex" one has to wonder why Bakker (who is certainly familiar with her work) goes to such lengths to force all three of his (very few) female characters into this role so very strongly.

It's also notable how totally free of any notion of their own oppression women are. They never reflect much upon it, as if being female automatically removed any higher brain function that didn't have to do with biology. Hence why Esmenet being "intelligent" is surprising. We are *told* that she is, but her total lack of higher reasoning, or anything concering an analysis of her situation, gainsays this. Cersei is often slammed for being dumber than a brick, but despite buying into a patriarchal system, Cersei is able to give an accurate analysis of her own situation as oppressed in her "sold and ridden like a horse" speech.

Being aware of your situation as being oppressed or disadvantaged doesn't prevent you from buying into the system, or continuing to emulate and perpetuate it. Bakker totally misses this subtlety or any nuances when he makes Esmenet, Serwe and Istrya to victims of oppression without any self awareness.

I can understand the "you cannot pull yourself up by your bootstraps" commentary, but that gets overridden by the heavyhandedness and that the victims of said oppression seems to have the self awareness of automatons when it comes to their own oppression. It needs a man to tell Esmenet she is oppressed. In ASOIAF, Cat, Sansa, Arya, Brienne, Asha, Dany, Arianne and Cersei all express thoughts and critique of the patriarchal system in one way or another. They are reflecting on their situations and tie disadvantages to the fact that they women, not men. This doesn't negate oppression, or solve their problems, or present them with bootstraps to pull themselves up with. And they manage to do this on their own, without needing a man to explain it to them, but through the use of their own deductive powers and experience.

[Sci-2]

In ASOIAF, Cat, Sansa, Arya, Brienne, Asha, Dany, Arianne and Cersei all express thoughts and critique of the patriarchal system in one way or another. They are reflecting on their situations and tie disadvantages to the fact that they women, not men. This doesn't negate oppression, or solve their problems, or present them with bootstraps to pull themselves up with. And they manage to do this on their own, without needing a man to explain it to them, but through the use of their own deductive powers and experience.

I was thinking about this during the drive home last night. We know there are noble women, we know there are witches and priestess. We encounter the last, but only in the second trilogy...and even she ends up utilizing sex as her main weapon in some of the most ridiculous circumstances.

Also, are any females friends with each other?

[Datepalm]

I've said it a million times, and i'll say, I imagine, a million times more (and no, i'm not volunteering to be the one to read more Bakker to see if he gets better.) The sexism he is fighting (ON HIS BLOG) is a strawman sexism, and he's using an actually sexist horse to fight it.

follow:

1. Created this hypersexist reality so he can pat himself on the head by showing that, yes, rape is bad and the patriarchy, gasp, is oppressive. Thank you, breaking news in Saudi Arabia in 1953 on next.

2. Lovingly display hypersexist reality, indulging in every rapey, fetished, frank miller cliche of meticulously detailed displays of nubile, sexualized, beaten, used, penetrated, broken, fucked, etc female bodies.

3. Have a man explain to women that this is bad.

4. Have women baheve with passivity, stasis, lack of comprehesion and general idiocy until it gets through her to her.

5. Have her than simper at him, and fuck him in gratitude.

6. Have cake.

7. (probably fuck it)

8. Smear cake over someones breasts, then eat it.

Basically, the actual tools Bakker uses in his writing - not because he wants to, no, because he has to, otherwise we just won't get it (it us, moron, not him) - sexualization, objectification, violence, sexual violence, evo psych, intellectual denegration, etc, are actual modern issues that women deal with in western societies, particularly in, yeah, cliched fantasy novels. The stuff he's supposedly oh-so-brilliantly revealing and deconstructing - being raped is not great - not so much.

Thank you Bakker. How would I - actually, nevermind, it's not fore me. How would any man, since they entire sum of their ability to interact with women is rape, ever understand that women are opressed without you?

ETA clarity and numerals.

[Reposado]

Also, are any females friends with each other?

are any males friends with each other? are there friends in the bakkerverse, or at least, do the types of characters that have power in earwa, the type of people that would have a friend?

[Lyanna Stark]

Dp,

You missed the random MFF threesome wish fulfilment under point 2 ;)

But yes the Saudi Arabia model of oppression is puzzling. Does oppression not seem bad unless it's utterly brutal and all encompassing? Are modern people unable to spot it unless it isn't?

[Datepalm]

Doh! Shame on me.

[Francis Buck]

are any males friends with each other? are there friends in the bakkerverse, or at least, do the types of characters that have power in earwa, the type of people that would have a friend?

Akka and Xinemus? They're the only ones that come to mind.

[Sci-2]

Proyas and Akka, sorweel and his slave, sorweel and his tutor, sorweel and the prince of zeum, even Proyas and killjoys [Kellhus] to an extent.

eta:

The key to getting this iteration of this thread right is to start from the proposition that Bakker is guilty (on a crime relating to women or a crime of your choice, no relation to women required). Then you work your way backwards to find out what crime he committed.

Actually, Locksnowe, I think it's this kind of "ever are men deceived!" type reasoning that makes people think engaging with Bakker or his fans on criticisms of the text is worthless.

[David Selig]

You know, I tried to start reading The Darkness That Comes Before yesterday, mostly to see what the fuss was all about, but discovered that Bakker's online persona has really made me prejudiced towards his work. Though the overly pompous style either. Both combined really made an impression of more smugness that I could tolerate at this point and gave it up soon.

Unfair, I know, I should give it another try soon.

[Sci-2]

Curious, can you post the passage you found pompus?

[MinDonner]

Is this about the female characters, Bakker himself hypothetically alienating female readers, or a combination of the two?

*raises hand* count me as someone who mostly enjoyed the first trilogy, but was put off from continuing by both Bakker's performance in the first batch of threads, as well as the fact that issues were highlighted that I'd been mostly ignoring (save for a nagging feeling of "this is kind of fucked up and uncomfortable") but could no longer unsee. Actually I've had TJE on my Kindle for about 2 years now and have always had better things to do than read it.

[Lyanna Stark]

Hahaha it seems DatePalm, MinDonner and myself will have to fight it out who's going to sacrifice themselves for the greater good and plow the second series :P

[Datepalm]

I did the vampire sheikh. Min did like 900 American barbarian books. Debbie did Dallas...I think that leaves you.

[Lyanna Stark]

Ow self owned! I guess I have to use my maternity leave for something!

[Maithanet]

As someone who still likes Bakker, I'm glad I don't read his blog. Just FYI, if anyone hasn't read them, the first Bakker and Women threads from 2009 (after TJE but well before WLW) are very enlightening and are here: (Bakker's first post is on page 9, and was largely ignored. His second post is one page 16, under Pierce Invararity). Part II.

The strange thing about the Bakker and Women discussion is that based on my recollection of Bakker's posts on the last Bakker/Women threads, it seems like he was well aware of the sexism, but thought of it as high level satire, ie a criticism of misogyny. But then he was caught unaware when his carefully constructed story was quite legitimately criticized for displaying covert/unintended sexism, as well as the intended overt sexism.

I do believe that Bakker intended the series to be a criticism of patriarchy, I just don't think it was particularly successful. You might say that Bakker's own blind spots/overconfidence wrt his treatment of women in the story led to much of his story being misconstrued. For example, he said that Emsi, Serwa, Istriya represented the Whore/Maiden/Harridan, as found in literature. But several people (Kalbear I remember in particular) found this just baffling, becuase this Whore/Maiden/Harridan triumvirate isn't exactly well known. I don't think Bakker even really elaborated on where this grouping came from, but he seemed to think that this was something people would "get" with a careful reading. In addition, even if we go with these three being some sort of useful group, why is are Maiden and the Harridan also so sexualized? Bakker's answer to this was pretty unsatisfying, to me anyway.

Thus, that discussion with Bakker indicated to me that he overreached, and wasn't really careful enough in putting these characters together. That's ok, no story is perfect. But Bakker's refusal to admit his own shortcomings in the series is pretty unfortunate. Compare that to the Abercrombie and Women thread which criticized the characters of Terez and her lady-in-waiting as being stereotypical lesbian ice queens. Abercrombie fully admitted that this was a reasonable reading of the characters, even if it wasn't a sexist trope he had at all intended to evoke. In addition, he said that in retrospect the scene would have been much stronger if Terez had been more or less the same, but her Lady-in-waiting was instead portrayed as more friendly and accommodating. This would both silence the criticism of the stereotypical lesbians, and also make the scene where she is threatened that much stronger, since the reader is more likely to have a reaction when Glotka threatens her if she had some personality. Abercrombie's post can be found here:

Exact Abercrombie quote

Leave Terez exactly as she is in the text, if you will, and look at Shalere, who's a much more minor character, she's very like Terez, as I recall - icy, haughty, contemptuous and scornful towards Jezal. Now imagine if she were pleasant, polite, gracious, warm towards Jezal. 'Your Majesty I can only apologise, the Queen is not herself today. Has not been well. The whole thing is so difficult. For you both. I don't know how you manage. The strain must be terrible. I will speak to her.' Jezal reflects that if only all Styrian women were so charming. Shalere's husband will be a lucky man....

Already it's a different, more varied and more interesting dynamic. The character is more real, the approach by the women towards their desperate position is more subtle and believable, the relationship between them is more believable, Terez' defence of Shalere is more believable, Glokta's use of their relationship is still more unpleasant. And you've at least got a lesbian in the text who doesn't come over as a frosty man hater. I'm not saying it's fixed by any means, but it's surprisingly much better for a minor change. Obviously you could go a lot further.

[Datepalm]

Ow self owned! I guess I have to use my maternity leave for something!

I'm pretty sure that's what maternity leaves were made for. Theres some kind of feminist commentary here I can't quite wrap my head around right now, but it's there!

If you do a Bakker read thread, I will do another Sandra Hill.

[Madness]

+1 on Thoughts. I'm genuinely curious, though I realize only a few of you are interested in devoting any time to analyzing this.

What are the actual moments of issue? Why? [is] it assumed that depiction equals endorsement equals behaviour?

How is Bakker normalizing gender discourse? Is he at all? Men are raped as well as women, one quite visceral in TTT, one of the few instances of male on male rape I can think of, in SFF.

[Maithanet]

Anyways, I guess I forgot to make my conclusion in the previous post. I'm mostly just trying to say that I love a lot of the ideas and writing in Bakker's work. I am entirely fascinated to see the No-God, the Consult, etc and where the plot goes from there. But Bakker's weaknesses as a writer are compounded by the attitude towards criticism he has displayed online. And that is unfortunate, becuase a good dialogue between author and audience can really help the audience appreciate your work, as evidenced by the Abercrombie and Women discussions.