Jump to content
lokisnow

Bakker LVI: the Rectum of Creation

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Wik said:

Its been so long since I read it, but I am guessing this is some kind of shot at the chapter/section that featured him lol

Nah, even simpler.  Surprised even with context you don't remember.  He only talks in allcaps.  Presumably it's just Bakker's attempt to capture the booming voice or something.  

But now it occurs to me that I can't recall if the MRA dragon in TUC talks the same way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Triskele said:

Nah, even simpler.  Surprised even with context you don't remember.  He only talks in allcaps.  Presumably it's just Bakker's attempt to capture the booming voice or something.  

But now it occurs to me that I can't recall if the MRA dragon in TUC talks the same way...

The MRA dragon talks in all bold rather than all caps, actually.

I always found it interesting how Bakker's dragons had distinct personalities. The dragon in Akka's dreams in PoN had a pseudo-Shakespearian way of talking. Wutteat was a lazy troll. MRA dragon was horny.

Edited by Cithrin's Ale

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol, didn't Cleric say something to Akka about Wutteat like "He plays you.  He has grown too wicked to part from his horde."  

Since time immemorial, since the days of the mighty Cunoroi, ever have men have been heeded to not feed the troll.  

Edited by Triskele

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Triskele said:

lol, didn't Cleric say something to Akka about Wutteat like "He plays you.  He has grown too wicked to part from his horde."  

Since time immemorial, since the days of the mighty Cunoroi, ever have men have been heeded to not feed the troll.  

Ahhaha ha yeah, and doesn't the MRA dragon make his first appearance guarding a bridge? Where he kills the dude that found the magic sword Serwa eventually picks up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume it's been discussed in these threads that the Whale Mothers are a metaphor for factory farming, yes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Let's Get Kraken said:

I assume it's been discussed in these threads that the Whale Mothers are a metaphor for factory farming, yes?

Actually, no, I don't think it was ever brought up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a metaphor for boob jobs, plastic surgeries and other distortions for the gratification of the male gaze.

Plus it wouldn't matter if they weren't physically distorted, it'd still be shit. What did the original generations of dunyain give up and leave latter generations to suffer? Or did they give anything up or was it just forced in the name of a shorter path?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Callan S. said:

I think it's a metaphor for boob jobs, plastic surgeries and other distortions for the gratification of the male gaze.

Plus it wouldn't matter if they weren't physically distorted, it'd still be shit. What did the original generations of dunyain give up and leave latter generations to suffer? Or did they give anything up or was it just forced in the name of a shorter path?

...is this a joke?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Darth Richard II said:

...is this a joke?

It would explain the ill-considered G-string comment... 

Spoiler

Ok not really. 

 

Edited by Let's Get Kraken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have to say, sometimes the takes I read about this series are so remarkably different than mine that it does really break me out of the feeling that I can actually ever empathize with another human. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Darth Richard II said:

...is this a joke?

Why do you always choose these responces? What does it protect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I've finally got around to reading The Unholy Consult (and its gigantic glossary). I swear, I had to restrain myself from throwing the book across the room when I came across that "ending".

"That's not how you finish a series, Mr Bakker!"

(Yes, I am aware that it's the ending of a sub-series. I still feel that a sub-series warrants a better resolution).

Edited by The Marquis de Leech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have recently accepted TUC to be THE ending until Bakker releases something that explicitly proves it's not. And, it's not a bad one? I mean, what did people really expect? That good guy Kellhus will destroy the evil bad Consult to save the world, and then he ascends to become some sort of higher God. And the third series is just some metaphysical wankery about Souls and The Outside hahaha. 

 

The series is called THE SECOND APOCALYPSE for fuck's sake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

(Yes, I am aware that it's the ending of a sub-series. I still feel that a sub-series warrants a better resolution).

I'm curious what would constitute a "better resolution" though.  One where the No-God does not rise?  Or one where Ajokli does not have such a role?  Or is it little Kel's "sudden" relevance that is an issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, .H. said:

I'm curious what would constitute a "better resolution" though.  One where the No-God does not rise?  Or one where Ajokli does not have such a role?  Or is it little Kel's "sudden" relevance that is an issue?

I am not actually fussy, so long as there's at least some catharsis involved. Something that actually feels like an ending, rather than "rocks fall, everyone dies No-God rises, everyone dies, plot threads left hanging."

Edited by The Marquis de Leech

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

I am not actually fussy, so long as there's at least some catharsis involved. Something that actually feels like an ending, rather than "rocks fall, everyone dies No-God rises, everyone dies."

Well, I mean, I certainly have things I wish were in the ending (like Mimara taking a more active role) but I think that is part of Bakker's "point."

So, I mean, was the way the No-God came to be something of deus ex machina?  Yeah, I guess, but it was foreshadowed somewhat.  I mean, Kellhus even flatly tells us at one point that he knows as a fact that the No-God must rise.

Now, why does it end the way it does?  I don't know.  Why does Mimara have no chance to do anything?  I don't know.  But my guess is that The Aspect Emperor is about Kellhus.  That is, Kellhus' failure.  Because he does fail.  He could have averted it all, really.  But he didn't.  So, TAE is about the failure of the "rational" in the face of atemporal "doom."  Or, is it a question of the nature of Kellhus' failure?

Here is something I wrote elsewhere about this: "The notion here, that is problematic, seems to be the "notion of time" and the "notion of causality."

That is to say, could it be, that the "paradox" of little Kel being the No-God, in the sense that he always was, despite the fact that he was also, not always the No-God, be a case of our implicit enforcing of our a priori notion of time?  Not only that, but of our notion of causality?  And more specifically, about necessity and contingency?  In this sense, of course Kel was always the No-God, as he was never not going to be the No-God.  Not because he always was, but because he always would be.

In the same sort of way, the No-God would always rise, not because it must, but because it would.

I like this, because it means Kellhus wasn't fated to fail his spiritual test, the call to sacrifice, but rather he simply was just a failure.  Not predetermined to be so, simply determined, then in that moment.  There was a choice, it wasn't that he couldn't make the "right" choice, it's that he wouldn't."

Now, maybe that word salad doesn't actually mean anything, but it seems to me that it might.  I've tried to point out that I think Kellhus is a failure in an "Abrahamic sense," a spiritual sense, but I was rather quickly dismissed here with that, so I quit bothering.

In the end, I don't know if the end of TAE is good, because I don't know exactly what Bakker was after with the ending.  However, it is likely that he hit something like the target he was after, to show that Kellhus was specifically not a savior, not an "answer" to the problem of the No-God.  Maybe a good ending requires catharsis, I don't know.  I don't know what a "good ending" even means to me, let alone to anyone else.

So, I don't know if TUC's end was good.  I'm still trying to figure it out...

Edited by .H.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×