Bakker XLVI: Make Eärwa Great Again

[Kalbear]

Quote

 

“YISUN was questioned once by their disciples at their speaking house. The questions were the following:

‘What is the ultimate reason for existence?’

To which YISUN replied, ‘Self-deception.’

‘How can a man live in perfect harmony?’

To which YISUN replied, ‘Non-existence.’

‘What is the ultimate result of all action?’

To which YISUN replied, ‘Futility.’

‘How best can we serve your will?’

To which YISUN replied, ‘Kindly ignore my first three answers.’ ”

-Spasm 8

 

From Kill Six Billion Demons

Kinda digging those answers tho

[.H.]

8 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Edit:. Rereading that perhaps my response was flippant.  I think Bakker very much intended the reader to consider and compare in what way they are both 'victims of Esment' or whatever.  Akkas a great character because on the one hand he's this extremely powerful sorceror of the rank who is privy to secrets that have built and ruined empires, tutor to a living god, and has been present for the most historically momentous events of his generation, and at the same time he's this pathetic, self-righteous, self-pitying, petulant bitter man who can't let shit go.  I think that his claim about them both being victims serves to ask the reader to consider how ludicrous this statement is.

Well, what about the idea that Akka is fostering a false equivalence as a way to engender a sense of camaraderie with Mimara?  I mean, indeed, Esmenet hurt both of them, so they are both victims (in a sense), just not to the same degree at all.  He is just rationalizing being a twit, really.

In his mind, they both have experienced loss and again, in his mind, Akka believes these things to be relatable (but I do not think even he thinks them equivalent).  Of course the "losses" are not equal, Akka being pretty damn privileged and Mimara arguably being an embodiment of poverty, Akka having lost a companion and Mimara her liberty, dignity, personal sanctity and so on.

But I don't think it's the point for us to try to equate the two.  The point is that Akka is trying to sway Mimara's opinion of him, with the wedge that is Esmenet.  He harbors resentment against her and so does Mimara.  The fact that Mimara's is (rationally) morally justified and Akka's is petty is a nice subtext for us to look at after and see Akka's manipulation of Mimara, via their broken relationships with Esment.

[Callan S.]

9 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Not sure I understand the question.  It's much worse to be sold into child prostitution than to have a spouse leave you for someone else.  If that's not question, I'm sorry.  If the question is which is worse, and you aren't sure, or you think it's not the sold child prostitutw slavery, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Edit:. Rereading that perhaps my response was flippant.  I think Bakker very much intended the reader to consider and compare in what way they are both 'victims of Esment' or whatever.  Akkas a great character because on the one hand he's this extremely powerful sorceror of the rank who is privy to secrets that have built and ruined empires, tutor to a living god, and has been present for the most historically momentous events of his generation, and at the same time he's this pathetic, self-righteous, self-pitying, petulant bitter man who can't let shit go.  I think that his claim about them both being victims serves to ask the reader to consider how ludicrous this statement is.  

My example is someone being forced to ride at the back of a bus because of racism is a victim of racism and so is someone who was beaten by a racist for racist reasons. Is one worse than the other? Yes. Is one of them NOT a victim? If anyone says yes, then I don't know what to tell them. How could relative levels of abuse mean one abused person is victim but another abused person is not?

And it's from there that I read that quote. It's victims finding a mutuality. If anything I think it's Mimara that would be the one to reject any sense of mutuality between them. Not us. But that's probably why the Survivor's talk to the judging eye is like a letter.

Really I think the characterisations leave lots of hooks to hang a hat upon, all sorts of different hats. Akka's depiction includes a lot of hooks, I agree. But who decides what goes on them?

[Darth Richard II]

8 hours ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

The two examples that you gave are both instances of people being victimized by the same system to different degrees. That doesn't really match up with Achamian and Mimara.  Its more like a child prostitute compared with a well treated house slave. Both are victims of the same social forces, but one has it worse than the other.

Achamian wasn't a victim of Esmenet at all, that's why what he said was so ridiculous. Yes, she did hurt him, but it wasn't comparable with what happened to Mimara and shouldn't have even been brought up in the same breath. To borrow a Tarantino quote, "it ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport."

I probably shouldn't jump in to this but I will. I agree with you 100 percent here. I'm also fairly certain it's meant to portray akka in a bad light, cause if it isn't, well, I dunno anymore.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

8 hours ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

The two examples that you gave are both instances of people being victimized by the same system to different degrees. That doesn't really match up with Achamian and Mimara.  Its more like a child prostitute compared with a well treated house slave. Both are victims of the same social forces, but one has it worse than the other.

Achamian wasn't a victim of Esmenet at all, that's why what he said was so ridiculous. Yes, she did hurt him, but it wasn't comparable with what happened to Mimara and shouldn't have even been brought up in the same breath. To borrow a Tarantino quote, "it ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport."

Yea, I admitted to not understanding you're point, to an extent. I was more just weighing in on what causes me to cringe, what hit home. I want trying to equate the two. And, it why I reacted the way I'd did to Kalbear(sorry, I felt I was being unjustly attacked, I see (hopefully) that waset you're intent, my sincere apologies.).

What bothers me and what I fail that "some" of you guys are not seeing, is that why it's so cringe worthy to me, is its something I could experience, have experienced  (not in my current relationship). I mean isn't it human nature to have things you can relate to, naturally effect you more? Why is this so hard to see? Does it make me insufferable in snow many of your eyes? I just see it as what it is, human nature.

Esme, Serwe, and.Mimara all have horrible existence at some point throughout the books. I feel immense compassion for them. Some hate reading Serwe's, I love her. She shows us the frailty, suffering and it truly incomprehensible to me, yet I can't place.myself in her shoes, I can't equate her feelings as one who has walked her path. 

I just feel that my statement, which was meant to show you nothing more, than what I find the hardest to read because I could feel those same feelings of.unbound hatred. It was not to compound on Kraken's OPPO, just add my thoughts to more suffering throughout the books and which strikes a cord with me.

I just wish that questions would be asked, rather than attacked and made to look like a uncompassionatex asshole. Which I am not. I have a daughter, and a loving wife who I would literally die for. It hurts to be equated or thought of as not seeing the plight these woman face.

[lokisnow]

I cringed at that but I have never sympathized with Akka regarding Esme. Akka's actions told her that the possibility that old books MIGHT exist that he might get to look at for the reason that he was curious and wanted to have a looksie (he literally just wants to browse the stacks for odd ducks) was more important to him than she was. That his idle selfishness results in him destroying his precious books, being tortured, his best friend being blinded tortured and eventually dying from it, and yes his devoted wife waited for him for days choosing to be abandoned in the desert to die of exposure even after she'd heard he'd been killed on the possibility that he might still return to her, the woman he abandoned for no good reason. Of course Esme went with kellhus when he returned to fetch her, and so as a widow she remarried but this time for status and wealth and power rather than marrying for love as she did at first.

So no I've never felt any sympathy for Akka. He brought it on himself, which is why he wallows in it so very much, he knows it's his fault.

 

[matt b]

I'll also add that to me, I don't see how Esmi did anything wrong. She herself is a victim, a victim of Kellhus. When you're on conditioned ground, consent isn't a possibility. To blame Esmi is to blame the victim for the crime committed against her, IMHO.

[Callan S.]

On 1/28/2017 at 0:49 AM, Let's Get Kraken said:

The two examples that you gave are both instances of people being victimized by the same system to different degrees. That doesn't really match up with Achamian and Mimara.  Its more like a child prostitute compared with a well treated house slave. Both are victims of the same social forces, but one has it worse than the other.

Achamian wasn't a victim of Esmenet at all, that's why what he said was so ridiculous. Yes, she did hurt him, but it wasn't comparable with what happened to Mimara and shouldn't have even been brought up in the same breath. To borrow a Tarantino quote, "it ain't the same fuckin' ballpark, it ain't the same league, it ain't even the same fuckin' sport."

Yeah, it's not the same social force. It is the same person. If person X beats one person with a baseball bat and slaps another in the face, is one not a victim because the other suffered far more? A kind of meaning inflation?

And of course there is the second layer. Esme was starving when she did what she did - she was basically going through a psychotic episode (not that we really know the psychosis of starvation the first world). To attribute he some kind of control during that time is really the willpower fantasy raising its head. And Kellhus is the master manipulator. 

The real victims are all the men she killed around the brothel Mimara was found in - and all the children forceably separated from their parent in the process. Wouldn't that be a thing for an author to do - to let the reader run down one line of judgement on Akka, only to show that judgement as judgable itself? 

[Castel]

6 hours ago, matt b said:

I'll also add that to me, I don't see how Esmi did anything wrong. She herself is a victim, a victim of Kellhus. When you're on conditioned ground, consent isn't a possibility. To blame Esmi is to blame the victim for the crime committed against her, IMHO.

No one can escape the delusion of agency. and it's not like Akka necessarily understands how bad the Dunyain control can get.

[Callan S.]

12 hours ago, lokisnow said:

I cringed at that but I have never sympathized with Akka regarding Esme. Akka's actions told her that the possibility that old books MIGHT exist that he might get to look at for the reason that he was curious and wanted to have a looksie (he literally just wants to browse the stacks for odd ducks) was more important to him than she was. That his idle selfishness results in him destroying his precious books, being tortured, his best friend being blinded tortured and eventually dying from it, and yes his devoted wife waited for him for days choosing to be abandoned in the desert to die of exposure even after she'd heard he'd been killed on the possibility that he might still return to her, the woman he abandoned for no good reason. Of course Esme went with kellhus when he returned to fetch her, and so as a widow she remarried but this time for status and wealth and power rather than marrying for love as she did at first.

So no I've never felt any sympathy for Akka. He brought it on himself, which is why he wallows in it so very much, he knows it's his fault.

 

His selfishness lead to him being tortured? Kind of reminds me of the old version of Cinderella I was told recently, where at the end the sisters try to suck up to Cinderella as she has new found wealth with the prince. And crows come and peck out the eyes of the sisters. So too are the torturers here, flocking in on the selfish, apparently?

And I guess if he'd clung to her 24/7, it'd be okay? IRL don't we spend time away from our partners occasionally?

[Larry of the Lawn]

I mean me and my ex spent a lot of time on our own separate activities, but I'd be a bit hesitant to leave her with a legion of genocidal jihadis in the midst of a bloody crusade while I went book shopping hundreds of miles away.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

Wow. Can't one thing bother someone more than it would bother someone else, without calling into question which one is worse? It's like things like this always gets turned into questioning ones morality around here. 

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

I guess Akka is the most relatable character to me, which leads me to sympathize with him. You have to remember Akka felt as if Kellhus and him were best of friends. He protects him from the Mandate, and the man ends up stealing his wife the moment he's gone. If anything what makes me cringe is Akka then, after learning of Esme and Kellhus he still kneels to him, teaches him. Little do I blame Esme when thinking on the situation. She sat at their camp by herself while the army moved on, waiting on Akka. So yes, I'd agree with @matt b that Esme is as much a victim as Akka is in the whole situation.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

1 minute ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

I knew someone who worked at Hanscom Airforce base a few years ago who told me, on the day of the incident mind you, that the worst part of the Boston Bombing was that he had to stay late at work. Staying late at work bothered him more than children dying and people having their legs blown off, because one of them directly effected him and the other didn't. To use your train of thought from earlier, he could "connect" with one more than the other.

I think that, yes, if we're going to discuss a statement like that, or like what Achamian said about Esmenet, it's important to take a look what what incident is objectively worse. Enslavement, child rape, and mass murder are worse than being dumped. Terrorism is worse than being inconvenienced at work. Comparing the emotional distress of either of these two things with the other is ridiculous, whether the reader/listener personally connects with one over the other or not.

OK fine I understand that. Though this is a book. Where each reader has different connections to different characters. No where in this whole conversation have I ever said that Akka losing Esmenet was worse than the life of Mimara, can we agree on that? Hell, we don't even see any of it in the book. We don't even see the burning and killing Esme orders. But, we do experience Akka's loss, in detail. So, while the life of Mimara and what was done in her name is outrageously worse than Akka losing Mimara, we don't experience it as a reader, don't experience her pain. We do Akka's though, and that to me, is why I find it cringe worthy. I'm not, or never have, equated the two. Though, you guys have acted as if I have. 

[matt b]

1 hour ago, Castel said:

No one can escape the delusion of agency. and it's not like Akka necessarily understands how bad the Dunyain control can get.

Well, if anyone in the Three Seas has any idea how bad Dunyain control can get, it's Akka (and Cnaiur). But yes, it's certainly understandable for Akka to see things the way he does. I was trying to talk about it from the reader's POV, though, not Akka's.

[Castel]

13 minutes ago, matt b said:

Well, if anyone in the Three Seas has any idea how bad Dunyain control can get, it's Akka (and Cnaiur). But yes, it's certainly understandable for Akka to see things the way he does. I was trying to talk about it from the reader's POV, though, not Akka's.

Arguably even readers do it a bit. I mean,Kellhus clearly conditioned the path for Akka and yet we still find his shit tedious. 

[lokisnow]

If the apocalypse is a dream of the future and never happened, then nau cayuti is a girl

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 hours ago, lokisnow said:

If the apocalypse is a dream of the future and never happened, then nau cayuti is a girl

Cue Kellhus dying in Akka's arms, mumbling about his progeny in Ishual, Akka speculates that one of Kellhus's brood will be shoved into the carapace, camera pans to lil Kel, Mimara, Serwe, lil Moe, and the crab-handed boy.  The end.  

And the next series that must not be named: The Dreams of Seswatha That Haven't Happened Yet But Are About to Happen, That Famous Old Lying Liar who Lies (TDoSTHHYBAAtHTFOLLWL)

[lokisnow]

It kinda works too, history's big lie being that it has been "recasting" an important female role as a male one.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

11 hours ago, lokisnow said:

It kinda works too, history's big lie being that it has been "recasting" an important female role as a male one.

I don't see that as how TUC ends. But, I'm with you, Mimara is the most important character left. Either, as H has said, to answer and therefore undo the No-God, or maybe the dead fetus might be the key to the No-God. But, I do feel we will see the No-God rises and fall in TUC. Mimara has grown into one of my favorite characters. They talk about Bakker not writing strong women...Mimara is the embodiment of a strong, free-willed women, who seems to be directing her own fate, even if she is being led to where Kellhus needs here.