Jump to content

Bakker XXXVIII: Where The Posters Are Damned


Madness

Recommended Posts

The statement you are referring to (Cnaiur rape of Conphas) was stupid and horrible and I am sure Happy Ent (who is a great Poster in these threads btw) regrets making it.
It was not Happy Ent. 

 

Anyway, even though you have been a great poster as well in the Bakker threads over the past 7/8 years I am quite aware that you have somekind of love/hate relationship with the books. Which is ok. 

 

I do have some pretty conflicted feelings about the books, mostly due to the author. Bakker will not be getting any more money from me, at least not directly. 

 

I stated recently what I really like about the series and why I continue to find entertainment out of them. The entertainment I get does not preclude them from being criticized. I don't really understand this argument; why can someone not like something AND criticize the parts they do not like? I mean, sure, it's typically expected that fanbois don't do that and have zero bad things to say about something, but I'd think it's a good thing to actually be able to point out the flaws in something that you enjoy, and not enjoy things without examination. 

 

I've criticized the hell out of GRRM's books and the show, including to the man's face. I can still like or even love something that has flaws. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How precisely is he making that point? Where is the ridicule? Heck, in the thread before we spent a few pages arguing about whether or not Akka was a misogynist - doesn't that the argument occur make it pretty clear that at best, Bakker is doing a pretty bad job of making the point you think he's making? After all, if you're not supposed to root for Akka (as he is a representative of said social system) why are so many people wanting to defend Akka? 
 
Furthermore, this is pretty problematic as an interpretation because of another thing Bakker has said - which is that Kellhus represents modernity, but is also bad. Why is he bad? Well, because Kellhus is doing things like emancipation and breaking of slave structures not because it's a good thing, but because he needs the resources. Which is Bakker's theory on how industrialization brought along emancipation. (let's not get into how that's actually completely wrong; that's his stated theory). So if you're right we should be rooting for Kellhus as our representative of modernity - but it's pretty clear that Kellhus is also very much in the wrong, being a sociopath, fucking over characters left and right, etc. 
 
It's certainly an interesting idea - that all of this is designed as a giant 'screw you' to fantasy allegory. My suspicion is that the point was not well made.


No Kalbear, Bakker surely is not absolutely wrong with his statement about how and why industrialisation brought along emancipation. Women didnt get Voting rights in most European countries post 1918 for altruistic reasons.

Anyway that's not Earwa related.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it was not Happy Ent

I only remember HE making such a statement back in 2013.

Anyway, it's a stupid statement. For me Cnaiur (who is a horrible and weak person all things considered) and his rapes of Serwe and later Conphas are horrible to read.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Kalbear, Bakker surely is not absolutely wrong with his statement about how and why industrialisation brought along emancipation. Women didnt get Voting rights in most European countries post 1918 for altruistic reasons.
No, they got them for a whole lot of other reasons - but very little had to do with needing them in the workforce. Especially considering that industrialization was by 1918 pretty long in the tooth, having gone on for almost 100 years at that point. 

 

Heck, France gave women the right to vote in 1944. Switzerland in 1971! I'm going to go out on a limb and state that France was pretty well modernized by that time, as was Switzerland. Sweden gave women the right in 1718, by comparison - which again had nothing to do with industrialization or modernization (though to be fair, it was taken away about 60 years later). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never really understood why people are so convinced Bakker's depiction of women was 'unrealistic.'* The vast majority of female characters are prostitutes or slaves, so life is likely to be pretty awful.

We never saw any higher caste women (aside from the Empress), or lower caste women not in the sex trade, so how can anyone tell how like medieval Europe this world is?

My recollection is also that Bakker was bemused when it was suggested his depiction of women was untrue to medieval times. I can't remember him saying he tried to make things worse for them across the board set against what he imagined a pre-modern world to be like.

* where realistic means something like 'true to life in medieval Europe.'
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they got them for a whole lot of other reasons - but very little had to do with needing them in the workforce. Especially considering that industrialization was by 1918 pretty long in the tooth, having gone on for almost 100 years at that point. 
 
Heck, France gave women the right to vote in 1944. Switzerland in 1971! I'm going to go out on a limb and state that France was pretty well modernized by that time, as was Switzerland. Sweden gave women the right in 1718, by comparison - which again had nothing to do with industrialization or modernization (though to be fair, it was taken away about 60 years later). 


It depends how you define modern society. Sure as hell it's more than just the materialistic aspect. A state can have all the material gadgets and still be a reactionary shithole.

Most European societies, even post 1945, have to be considered reactionary in many cases at least up to the 1960s.

Anyway, this discussion is too complex and it is not Earwa related.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We never saw any higher caste women (aside from the Empress), or lower caste women not in the sex trade, so how can anyone tell how like medieval Europe this world is?
Because they should be present and are not. 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It depends how you define modern society. Sure as hell it's more than just the materialistic aspect. A state can have all the material gadgets and still be a reactionary shithole. 

 

Then you're making my point, which is that it has very little to do with the level of industrialization, no? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then you're making my point, which is that it has very little to do with the level of industrialization, no? 


And here it depends how all-encompassing you define the term "industrialization", i.e. do you include the at the same time occuring social ideologies of free labour capitalism, socialism, democratic participation as well? Everything is connected with everything.

Kalbear, that topic is too complex with so many variables.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here it depends how all-encompassing you define the term "industrialization", i.e. do you include the at the same time occuring social ideologies of free labour capitalism, socialism, democratic participation as well? Everything is connected with everything.

Kalbear, that topic is too complex with so many variables.

and that is why bakkers reduction of it to simply women in the workforce were needed due to industrialization is incorrect. It's not even a proximate cause, much less an actual one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Bakker in particular gets accused of misogyny? For what? For portraying the suffering of a young girl like Serwe? Ridiculous.

Serwe is actually a good example, she exists in 1.5 books and the author requires her to experience non consensual sex with the three primary male viewpoint characters, Achamian, Cnaiur, and Kellhus. The scene with Achamian is especially egregious and does nothing to advance plot or character.

Kellhus is the worst though since he uses the Imperius curse on every character he meets, and uses it to make women have sex with him and "enjoy" it (that sort of thing worked out really well for voldemort's mom).

:D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Serwe is actually a good example, she exists in 1.5 books and the author requires her to experience non consensual sex with the three primary male viewpoint characters, Achamian, Cnaiur, and Kellhus. The scene with Achamian is especially egregious and does nothing to advance plot or character.

Kellhus is the worst though since he uses the Imperius curse on every character he meets, and uses it to make women have sex with him and "enjoy" it (that sort of thing worked out really well for voldemort's mom).

:D


Never read HP ;). Anyway, I just took Serwe as an example of a person who suffers horribly. She is maybe not the smartest but is a person with a good heart. And I feel for her. She is a sex-slave and was abused half her life.

She had to suffer quite a lot of ridicule and humiliation by certain users here in the past (back in the B+W threads she was called a whore, delusional and much more).

Serwe is a victim. And Bakker has the courage to show us her suffering through her own eyes! I would wish GRRM had had the courage back in the GOT days instead of this creepy first night scene with Drogo and the disturbing "my sun my Stars" love relationship between Dany and Drogo. The disturbing thing is that GRRM really intended it to be a love relationship!

The more I think about it, the more I can appreciate the radical progressiveness of Bakker's approach. Wouldnt be surprised if in 20/30 years from now PoN/AE will be considered as a genre breaking masterwork while other works currently very popular will disappear in mainstream obscurity.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about it, the more I can appreciate the radical progressiveness of Bakker's approach. Wouldnt be surprised if in 20/30 years from now PoN/AE will be considered as a genre breaking masterwork while other works currently very popular will disappear in mainstream obscurity.


Now, your just being a fanboy, lol. :) I actually agree, that it will be appreciated one day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, there's the ad hominem that I was expecting. 
 
I literally - like the post you quoted - say that I don't have a problem with it.
 
You implied it when you said that Bakker isn't doing a romanticized version of feudalism, unlike (say) GRRM. Who...isn't doing a romanticized view of feudalism. 
 
Confirmation bias. Many board members have had a Kellhus or Kellhus-like boardname. Many have thought that Kellhus was the coolest ever. One poster posted at one point that his favorite part in the books was Cnaiur raping Conphas. The Bakker and Women threads are filled with people who love Kellhus and love how realistic the setting is. 
 
The reason you're not finding many in these threads is pretty much because they've been weeded out and sent to other forums where they can practice their fanboi happiness. But hey, go over here and see the happiness that exudes from the fans.


I was the one who made that statement, and from that time certain members have consistently used it as a talking point to describe how base and vile Bakker fans are. As I've pointed out (on the original thread, and more than once since then), I presented my original post using the disturbing smiley that depicts the act, then explained why when the manufactured outrage came a-billowing -- the rape as a 'favorite part' in that it serves as a climax to Conphas and Cnaiur's relationship and certain psychological complexes developed across the three books. It's also effectively written and was rather shocking on the first read. Of course the rape itself is horrible, as all rape is, but the explanation as to why was naturally discarded because it became such a tasty "proof" -- the Bakker reader likes rape! Bakker fans are so (fill in the blank as needed). And so it rears its head, years and years later, the misrepresentation and facile 'proof,' not unlike what we see by the GOP water carriers in the politics thread every. day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because they should be present and are not.


If Bakker wrote like GrrM that would be the case, but he doesn't.

We only get a couple of characters per kingdom. It did not strike me as particularly strange that the Queens and other noblewomen don't really feature given that.

Pick up any book on the First Crusade and count the number of female nobles who feature.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...