Jump to content

Archived

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

Happy Ent

Bakker XXI: Attack of the Maximum Fun-Fun Ultra Super Happy People

Recommended Posts

That's why they kill the mark and make it unrecognizable. Taking the face is odder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always associated the face-taking with Mek's face cloak, since they're pretty close in the text; I know it doesn't make any sense, but I never made the connection between skin-spies stealing faces and, well, skin-spies stealing faces.

I don't really think it is a mistake, though - Bakker seems to have had the whole face-changing mechanics pretty well down in TDTCB, so it wouldn't make a lot of sense for it to be a GOTMism. On the other hand ... do we actually know that they don't need the faces to help them change their appearance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with Trisk. Pretending to be Geshrunni is all well and good until someone finds out Geshrunni has been identified as dead in the river.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Borrowing Wrath's quote:

I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor ... ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury.

So we know that this is Mek via author's non-canonical revelation, but we would have been able to safely assume he was Consult on the "for the No-God."

One of the more common theories about the No-God is that it's somehow Nau-Cayuti or was him. Mek would have fought against Him when Nau-Cayuti was also fighting the wars that "authored this wilderness" but as part of the Ancient North's war against the Consult. So he didn't mean that he, Mek, changed sides. He was all Consult once he helped found it. But he did fight against the No-God back when NG was NC. So it may not be an author's mistake at all but rather a hint hidden in the prologue of the first book about who the No-God was. And if you think of the possibility that the "for and against" bit was about someone else being on either side rather than Mek...it starts to be seen in a different light, neh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me saying "I have ridden against the No-God" (and bragging about it) implies more than he got confused and fought some sranc a couple of times, or that he helped Seswatha escape in secret. It implies that he "officially" joined and fought with the other host against the No-God and the consult's host, in battle. And if that happened, did the rest of the consult not see it? Or do they not care now that he's back on their side?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me saying "I have ridden against the No-God" (and bragging about it) implies more than he got confused and fought some sranc a couple of times, or that he helped Seswatha escape in secret. It implies that he "officially" joined and fought with the other host against the No-God and the consult's host, in battle. And if that happened, did the rest of the consult not see it? Or do they not care now that he's back on their side?

Well, it's possible he did in fact switch sides for a significant length of time. The Consult could have killed him after he returned to the fold for that but perhaps doing so would cause all the Quya on their side to rebel.

eta:

I'm with Trisk. Pretending to be Geshrunni is all well and good until someone finds out Geshrunni has been identified as dead in the river.

Yeah that makes the most sense. I was thinking the skin spy kept the face as a memento for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always associated the face-taking with Mek's face cloak, since they're pretty close in the text; I know it doesn't make any sense, but I never made the connection between skin-spies stealing faces and, well, skin-spies stealing faces.

I don't really think it is a mistake, though - Bakker seems to have had the whole face-changing mechanics pretty well down in TDTCB, so it wouldn't make a lot of sense for it to be a GOTMism. On the other hand ... do we actually know that they don't need the faces to help them change their appearance?

I cannot provide a link to it at the moment, but I think there may have been some inderteminance of how skin spies do their thing at that point in writing. I would have to find a quote, unless Madness knows of what I speak already?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or do they not care now that he's back on their side?

If he just kills a bunch of sranc if he switches sides again, who cares?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if that's right...if it means that Seswatha stole into the Ark because he already knew about the possibility of the No-God...how the Hell did he know? And how would he know that only a laser would work against it?

The glossary says that he believed it to be the only weapon that could defeat the No-God.

until it was stolen by Cet’ingira (see Mekertrig) and delivered to Golgotterath c. 750. Then in 2140 it was stolen again by Seswatha (see Apocalypse), who believed it to be the only weapon capable of destroying the No-God.

I'm going with Mekertrig told him about the Heron Spear and the No-God.

Another possibility is, whatever is sending Achamian the dreams is the same thing that brought Seswatha to Golgoterath and the Heron Spear. The two journeys mirror each other (with one exception). Seswatha takes Nau-Cayuti (his son secretly) on a false/apocryphal journey to find his concubine, and Achamian takes Mimara (his daughter secretly) on a false journey to find the coffers, they all end up in Golgoterath.

The difference is that Nau-Cayuti was turned into the No-God by the Consult (this is shown by Celmomas telling Seswatha that the end of the world is his burden -> his son, and that he sees Nau "Galloping through the hearts of my people, stirring them to wonder and fury!" -> that's the No-God). Mimara on the other hand is female, and she's pregnant with the eye of the God. Somehow she will turn into the Yes-God and destroy the consult, and Bakker's claim that we need to wait till the end of the series before criticising his female characters will still not make any sense but we'll at least know what he meant by it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another possibility is, whatever is sending Achamian the dreams is the same thing that brought Seswatha to Golgoterath and the Heron Spear. The two journeys mirror each other (with one exception). Seswatha takes Nau-Cayuti (his son secretly) on a false/apocryphal journey to find his concubine, and Achamian takes Mimara (his daughter secretly) on a false journey to find the coffers, they all end up in Golgoterath.

The difference is that Nau-Cayuti was turned into the No-God by the Consult (this is shown by Celmomas telling Seswatha that the end of the world is his burden -> his son, and that he sees Nau "Galloping through the hearts of my people, stirring them to wonder and fury!" -> that's the No-God). Mimara on the other hand is female, and she's pregnant with the eye of the God. Somehow she will turn into the Yes-God and destroy the consult, and Bakker's claim that we need to wait till the end of the series before criticising his female characters will still not make any sense but we'll at least know what he meant by it.

O_o

I'm going with Mekertrig told him about the Heron Spear and the No-God.

I'm thinking this as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O_o

Sorry, I forgot to say that by the time Achamian's daughter turns into the Yes-God, Achamian's son Moenghus (remember he had sex with Serwe that one night) will have arrived at Golgoterath and he, like Nau-Cayuti will turn into the No-God. TUC will end with an epic battle between the two of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Serwe was already pregnant when she and Akka copulate.



So, like Micheal said to Billy Jean, Lil' Moe is not his son.



eta: forgot Billy Jean was the woman, not an alt for Micheal.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me saying "I have ridden against the No-God" (and bragging about it) implies more than he got confused and fought some sranc a couple of times, or that he helped Seswatha escape in secret. It implies that he "officially" joined and fought with the other host against the No-God and the consult's host, in battle. And if that happened, did the rest of the consult not see it? Or do they not care now that he's back on their side?

Hmmm...I don't read it that way. To me it's more like "Here's how big a deal I am, manling. You know that OG they call the No-God? The baddest motherfucker on the planet? Well me and him have been fighting on both sides of this shit you can barely understand."

I rather like my theory the more I think about it. I've always looked at that line and thought "How did Mek fight on both sides?" and I think most others did too. And all along perhaps we should have been thinking "when was the No-God actually on the other side of the Consult? Before he became the No-God, perhaps?"

Could turn out to be wrong of course, but if correct, that's some nice subtle misdirection from Bakker. The reader is going to think of the No-God as the big bad that was always on the "bad" side and so is primed to think that Mek, the erratic, must have been the one flipping sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...I don't read it that way. To me it's more like "Here's how big a deal I am, manling. You know that OG they call the No-God? The baddest motherfucker on the planet? Well me and him have been fighting on both sides of this shit you can barely understand."

For the record English Isn't my first language so I could be way off.

I rather like my theory the more I think about it. I've always looked at that line and thought "How did Mek fight on both sides?" and I think most others did too. And all along perhaps we should have been thinking "when was the No-God actually on the other side of the Consult? Before he became the No-God, perhaps?"

This is very interesting. I guess I was just too quick to call [it] a mistake because it fits perfectly if you'd only replace the word No-God with Inchoroi. But if this is something that Bakker did on purpose, then well done to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Random thought -> I wonder if the Whirlwind has any symbolic attachment to God in the Book of Job?





If he just kills a bunch of sranc if he switches sides again, who cares?





This is my current prevailing theory. Mek switched sides a few times, but the Consult purposefully had him leading legions of Sranc [away from the more precious Wracu and Bashrag].



So Shae and the Inchies would just laugh about their silly friend. "Oh Mek, there he goes again fighting against the Whirlwind..."


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't see that line to Kellhus actually just meaning "I forgot I was hellbent on the extermination of the entire world and got side-tracked killing a sranc tribe." The whole quote speaks of grandiosity.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't see that line to Kellhus actually just meaning "I forgot I was hellbent on the extermination of the entire world and got side-tracked killing a sranc tribe." The whole quote speaks of grandiosity.

Making the Enemy both pathetic and threatening is Bakker's forte.

The Consult is the doddering, abusive, drunken relative who is just bigger than your childhood self.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've just finished my first reread of the series and I have a few questions:



Nil'giccas was an erratic and is now dead. Who is it then that Sorweel and co. are going to meet?



Are the only known forms of sorcery in the series Gnostic, Anagogic (including Daimotic), Psukhe, and Aporetic?



It mentions in WLW that the new Grandmaster of the Mandate has mastered a 'metagnostic cant' - is that like the teleportation that Kellhus and Serwa are capable of?


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've just finished my first reread of the series and I have a few questions:

Nil'giccas was an erratic and is now dead. Who is it then that Sorweel and co. are going to meet?

Are the only known forms of sorcery in the series Gnostic, Anagogic (including Daimotic), Psukhe, and Aporetic?

It mentions in WLW that the new Grandmaster of the Mandate has mastered a 'metagnostic cant' - is that like the teleportation that Kellhus and Serwa are capable of?

Welcome!

Sorweel and Co. are going to Ishterebinth which is the last surviving Nonman mansion. There are questions as to how many of them are Erratic versus Intact and to what extent they've turned to the Consult or not. Speculation abounds, but we'll have to see.

I believe you covered it on the forms of sorcery though there are several different anagogic schools.

Your final question is good because while it sort of implies it, it doesn't completely confirm it. I think the definition of the metagnosis is that it has the 2nd inutteral string. But Serwa does one too which is teleporting, so yeah, I think that's the only kind we know of at this point. But Saccarees doesn't perform one on camera, so to speak, in WLW.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I've just finished my first reread of the series and I have a few questions:

Nil'giccas was an erratic and is now dead. Who is it then that Sorweel and co. are going to meet?

Are the only known forms of sorcery in the series Gnostic, Anagogic (including Daimotic), Psukhe, and Aporetic?

It mentions in WLW that the new Grandmaster of the Mandate has mastered a 'metagnostic cant' - is that like the teleportation that Kellhus and Serwa are capable of?

1.) We don't know. There's clearly something fishy going on with Ishterebinth, since they're lying about their king (or they're somehow being deceived themselves). According to Nil'giccas, Ishterebinth has turned to the Consult. Whether that's true, or half-true, or not true at all, we just don't know.

2.) To my knowledge yes, though might also be able to throw in the "divine" magic used by the likes of Porpsarian and Psatma, which seems to be in a class of its own (and it may be incorrect to think of it as "sorcery" at all).

3.) Yup. Historically there were only legends of such things, namely a Nonman named Su'juroit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×