Jump to content

Bakker XXIX: Erratics and Impossible Erections


Anatúrinbor

Recommended Posts

For something to read literally you need to go back to a bit earlier in the scene.

"Healing his innumerable scars."

Moënghus was literally absorbing the "strength" out of Cnaiür's swazond--thereby "healing them".

Good stuff. As Lockesnow has pointed out, we've continuously assumed Earwa is a naturalist world with some magic thrown in and souls bolted on. When we see something that contradicts this (topoi, WLW, heart miracle), we assume it's a deviation in a reality that still largely conforms to our own expectations. Bakker even plays it sneakily, presenting certain deviations as potentially faked (heart miracle) or conforming to horror movie set up (Wight, heart in eye).

Yet it seems that Bakker has continuously seeded the text with clues that the regularities (I hesitate to use natural laws given the whole World as God's dream, objective-Inward -> subjective-Outside stuff) of Earwa may include the regularities we signify with the words "laws of physics" but also includes ways in which human emotions & rituals can shape the world without scarring the onta...which suggests the onta is not as similar to a naturalist picture as the reader assumes.

In short, Earwa is a genuinely enchanted world - something we don't necessarily find in most fantasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short, Earwa is a genuinely enchanted world - something we don't necessarily find in most fantasy.

Nailed it.

Also of note, that healing might be an on camera physical healing. Interesting that this lack of healing on kellhus' part is why xinemus does not believe. To take this literally suggests that moe can do what Kellhus cannot.

On the other hand, essentially does experience an on camera psychic healing from Kell his when she's shriven by him, so he can effect some healing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the case the text does an incredibly poor job of making this abundantly clear. Compare how sorcery is effortlessly described in minor, odd detail to things like "healing the innumerable scars'.



If true, this would also make the series even more unfilmable.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, It seems like the presence of something like, say, sorcery, in the text, but loaded with a mechanistic (or at least partly so) nature could have blinded us to said enchantment.

But, assuming we're right, the world of Earwa is commentary on the genre. Fantasies like Narnia had enchanted worlds - a piece of metal could acquire a teleology and grow like a tree into a lamp post. Same with mythology where a flower or animal can transform into a person, or fairy tales where a kiss can break a curse.

Yet a lot of epic fantasy has eschewed that kind of world, at least in part. (Interestingly enough, a largely naturalistic picture is pretty much necessary for urban fantasy, and hidden land fantasies like Harry Potter)

You can have ghosts, unicorns, and so on but from what I've read rarely can you find fantasies where your average villager's superstitions are confirmed to have any much accordance with the setting's reality. In fact it's often the opposite - the religious zealot or ignorant villager ends up being wrong about many things if not everything.

Sorcery in many works is mechanistic in that some combination of words/gestures/ingredients allows one to bend what is usually - barring some fauna/flora & mages - a naturalistic world. Thus magic is also a violation of expected regularities - Bakker's just more honest about this being a kind of violence against the assumed metaphysics.

OTOH, we do have fantasies like those of Valente and Vandermeer that give us enchanted worlds but these worlds are very bold in their declaration of enchantment. Bakker decided to draw us into a tale of a skeptic confronted by a world that has things like gods and souls. Yet the reader assumes this world is only enchanted to the extent we'd expect from most epic fantasy - enough magic for cool effects and plot McGuffins.

Ideally if this analysis is correct the payoff of having a genuinely enchanted world will come in TUC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so, for the RSB, clute & grant's 'thinning' exists only in the skeptics' erroneous scientistic reading of the setting, which as yet contains marvels. C&G's 'wrongness' certainly touches earwa, but the 'dark lord' that creates it are modern reader and their textual proxies. who therefore are the 'secret guardians' who will protect the 'land' from us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely a skeptic in that setting is just as legitimate as a believer in ours.



Considering that it is, for the most part, the believers who actually command the group and get things done in the real world, I find it fitting that the cynics wield such power in this fantasy milieu.



The Earwan 'scientific' minds are denied oblivion by religion and Earth's believers are denied an afterlife by science. :)


Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's the case the text does an incredibly poor job of making this abundantly clear. Compare how sorcery is effortlessly described in minor, odd detail to things like "healing the innumerable scars'.

If true, this would also make the series even more unfilmable.

Somewhat agree. I've read the first two books with each worldview, and the books are well crafted enough to be thoroughly amenable to the enchanted world reading. However there is very little to direct the reader to the Narnia type of reading; rather, the reader is very specifically directed by the author into the westeros reading. This happens because kellhus of the prologue has a very 1999 north American smirking perspective in his tone and outlook, particularly his colonial, patronizing attitude to the poor primitives and their superstitions. This means buying into kellhus' perspective which is very similar to a reader's perspective is what happens to almost evetyone. Granted kellhus is proven decisively and totally wrong at the end of the prologue, but the mold is already etched in stone at that point and no reader really adopts a Narnia approach whilst rejecting the westeros approach in response to the revelations of the prologue finale.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In short, Earwa is a genuinely enchanted world - something we don't necessarily find in most fantasy.

Which is electric (scuse the pun) when it turns out to be enchanted as in a nanotech projection of a supercomputer AI, with every 'person' on the world simply being a sub routine. No more sin against dirt!

Well, that gives away my guess. But even if it turns out true, it's not a spoiler since no ones gunna believe it. Which is the point.

But see Bakkers latest post where he praises the sci-fi movie 'Her' for taking the viewer into the experience of anthropomorphising the Samantha AI. Enchanting her, one might say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This happens because kellhus of the prologue has a very 1999 north American smirking perspective in his tone and outlook, particularly his colonial, patronizing attitude to the poor primitives and their superstitions. This means buying into kellhus' perspective which is very similar to a reader's perspective is what happens to almost evetyone. Granted kellhus is proven decisively and totally wrong at the end of the prologue, but the mold is already etched in stone at that point and no reader really adopts a Narnia approach whilst rejecting the westeros approach in response to the revelations of the prologue finale.

Adept mapping of the psychology there, in that etched in stone observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...