R. Scott Bakker: What am I missing?

[zach]

these are valid points, but I just wish that bakker had (for instance) turned around and made the guy who gets raped after his wife at the end of wp enjoy it just as much as she had... it seems like if he was going to make that point he might as well have gone all the way, you know?

mostly I'm just frustrated that I've gotten sucked into another series that I have to wait years to see a conclusion to. bah!

[Xray the Enforcer]

these are valid points, but I just wish that bakker had (for instance) turned around and made the guy who gets raped after his wife at the end of wp enjoy it just as much as she had... it seems like if he was going to make that point he might as well have gone all the way, you know?

I agree with this -- the gender disparity regarding the rapes (whose rapes are graphically depicted vs. whose are coyly talked around) is galling. Now, either Bakker was clueless as to the rather sexist slant of his approach (I hope), or he deliberately chose to only be graphic with the women (an idea I find repellent, and it says way more about him than it does about Earwa). The better approach to illustrating the bad-ness of the Inchoroi (while simultaneously helping to deflect criticisms of sexism and the glorification of using women as titillation objects) would have been to balance either the graphicness of the rapes (all graphic, or all not graphic), or to at least specifically approach one of the male/male situations with the same voyeuristic fervor as he does with Esmi or the doomed nomad's wife. I mean, it's not like I enjoy reading that shit either way, but Bakker (Mr. Fancy Philosopher) of all people should know the import of his choice.

[Larry.]

Hrmm...it's been over a year since I last re-read the books, so my memory may be a bit fuzzy in places, but I seem to recall thinking that Bakker had more male-on-male sex/rape than most any other "mainstream fantasy" writer has had. And I don't recall extremely detailed versions of female rape being any longer than that one I saw cited that mentions the end of TWP. But maybe I need to re-read it with this in mind?

But there was a thought that occurred to me, one that I don't know (as I'm not going to go back and read 20 pages' worth here) has been mentioned here, but has there been a discussion about how male rape is viewed as being fundamentally different from female rape in our society? Forty or fifty years ago, female rape was rarely ever more than just hinted at in stories and there were (unfortunately) some stigmas attached to it that caused the rape victim to suffer even more. I think much the same is true of male rape. Outside of the prison sex jokes, what much do you hear of it? I worked with male teens who had been raped, among other things, and that was something that they (for the most part) could never admit to another, at least not willingly. It just is not a topic talked about in our society, although that too is slowly changing.

I wonder if that attitude might be at the root of this and not any latent sexism. I just don't know.

[Xray the Enforcer]

I wonder if that attitude might be at the root of this and not any latent sexism. I just don't know.

Honestly, it could be. Although that's still a sexist view -- sexual violence is a power play, no matter what the gender breakdown. That men should be more or less traumatized or stigmatized than women by a rape is a societal construct. And in any case -- being more willing to discuss male/male rape than other fantasy authors does not really mitigate what Zach and I (and Kalbear, IIRC) have protested: Esmi's two encounters with the Inchoroi + the nomad's wife (and Serwe, to a certain degree) vs. Cnaiur's obliquely-described escapade, the off-hand description of what happened to the captives and the fade-to-black POV of the nomad. It's the descriptional disparity, tbh, not the fact that one or the other occurred.

Anyway, just more fuel for the fire, as it were.

ETA: but you do make some interesting points, Larry. It's hard to divorce oneself from all the societal baggage. I certainly haven't done it.

[zach]

that is true about bakker's greater willingness to discuss male-on-male sexual activity than other fantasy authors (the only other one that comes to mind is mieville in iron council). as laudable as that is, though, the problem of degree arises again: if he's willing to discuss it in the first place, why isn't he willing to be as explicit about it as he is with male-on-female rape (or sex in general)? esmi and serwe's various sexual experiences, consensual or not, and the rape of the nameless woman at the end of wp are dealt with rather explicitly, but the rape of the husband or conphas by cnaiur (or cnaiur by moenghus, which might be the most vague of all) are mentioned only in passing.

while I certainly agree with your observations about male rape in our society, I don't really feel like that's much of an excuse for bakker, because he's clearly willing to cross lines like that. actually, it seems like that stigma is a large part of what drives cnaiur as a character, so it would presumably be something that bakker is aware of.

[Happy Ent]

I agree with this -- the gender disparity regarding the rapes (whose rapes are graphically depicted vs. whose are coyly talked around) is galling.

Ok, I had left this thread in disgust, but since Xray is now here...

A few pages back I have tried to refute this claim, as well as the claim that Bakker's rapes in general are more detailed than Martin's. There is simply no evidence for this. Martin's scene of "female raped by victorious barbarian" is many, many paragraphs, while Bakkers is ... nothing. Not an adjective. The camera mercifully fades to black. (Not to mention the "rape is good when the victim learns to enjoy it" stance found in Martin, the happy and content sex slaves and whores found in Martin, etc., etc.)

The only point about detailed rape scenes I would understand is the rape by Inchoroï. These are rapes between species, not between sexes, so I find the whole discussion from a gender perspective silly beyond measure in the first place... but I'll play along for the sake of the debate. With Xray.

Unless I am mistaken we have two scenes where an Inchoroï in male form rapes/seduces a human woman, and one scene where an Inchoroï in female form rapes/seduces a hunan man. Is the difference in which these scenes are described the point? Or am I fumbling in the dark and just share Bakker's supposed blindness?

[zach]

Unless I am mistaken we have two scenes where an Inchoroï in male form rapes/seduces a human woman, and one scene where an Inchoroï in female form rapes/seduces a hunan man. Is the difference in which these scenes are described the point? Or am I fumbling in the dark and just share Bakker's supposed blindness?

I suppose I'm not as worthy of debate as xray, but it's not just those scenes, it's also the one where a male inchoroi rapes a human male; where human males rape one another; and where human males rape human females.

but yes, it's the difference between descriptions in those scenes: the ones involving women tend to be explicit, whereas the ones involving men tend to occur largely off-screen, as it were.

[Xray the Enforcer]

Aw shit. I have to actually run from the computer right now, but Happy Ent, I am happy to elaborate later my take on these things (and, BTW, I do agree with your points about Martin), and maybe try to clarify my position a bit. I'll drop you a PM when I make a reply, so you can (if you choose) continue to ignore the thread.

[Happy Ent]

the ones involving women tend to be explicit, whereas the ones involving men tend to occur largely off-screen, as it were.

That's what I don't get. I am wary of "tend to occur" arguments.

So far, this thread has seen a lot of selective memory about what Bakker actually wrote (for example in case of Serwë's first rape by Cnaiür) and extreme sophistry when it comes to defining rape in those scenes that involve some degree of magical consent. Did Serwë rape Akka? Did the Inchoroï rape Esmi? Did Inchoroï-as-Serwë attempt to rape Kellhus? I am ideologically opposed to expand the definition of rape to be very inclusive of these things (because it demeans rape victims, just like calling everything "racism" or "fascism" trivialises a lot of atrocities). But for the sake of this thread I'm willing to go along. But I need these terms defined beforehand, otherwise it's not a fair debate.

I have tried to clean up these arguments by using precise quotes with references etc. However, this is only to refute universal claims. On no account do I want this thread to derail into us counting adjectives or lines. However, if there is a galling imbalance between sexes it should be very, very easy to demonstrate. Numerically I expect a standard deviation, if not an order of magnitude.

But as I said before I expect a book (1) in a pre-modern setting and (2) where a major character is a female sex slave and another is a whore to have more male-on-female rape. In fact I would be extremely uncomfortable with a book that claims that in such a setting male rape were just as usual as female rape. But not even this gender imbalance that can be demonstrated (to me, who wants it to be true). But convince me that I'm wrong, I am in no way invested in this argument and easily swayed by data or precise argumentation. (Hint: use words like glorify in their standard meaning.) As I said, I'd expect (and, as a feminist, applaud) the detailed description of the horrors of male-on-female rape in a pre-modern society. I just don't see it in Bakker's books.

What remains (and holds some interest to me) is the following argument that sometimes crops up: by choosing to write a book in a pre-modern setting and doing in honestly and (in my mind) accurately, Bakker has made some kind of moral mistake. I am astounded at this argument, having seen it before only in the most ludicrous of places, but I'm up for debating it. We will be able to merge two of the most vibrant threads of the Literature forum, and my appetite is certainly whetted.

[zach]

But as I said before I expect a book (1) in a pre-modern setting and (2) where a major character is a female sex slave and another is a whore to have more male-on-female rape. In fact I would be extremely uncomfortable with a book that claims that in such a setting male rape were just as usual as female rape. But not even this gender imbalance that can be demonstrated (to me, who wants it to be true). But convince me that I'm wrong, I am in no way invested in this argument and easily swayed by data or precise argumentation. (Hint: use words like glorify in their standard meaning.) As I said, I'd expect (and, as a feminist, applaud) the detailed description of the horrors of male-on-female rape in a pre-modern society. I just don't see it in Bakker's books.

ignoring your condescension as much as possible in that post, I will just reply that it isn't the numerical discrepancy between male-female rape and male-male rape that is worrisome, but the difference in explicit detail.

disregarding the instances that you wish not to include as rape, there are still a number that I have referenced earlier that you seem to have disregarded in attacking me for the phrase "tend to occur."

the scene at the end of the warrior prophet, for example: the woman's rape gets a couple of paragraphs about her moaning and climaxing and so forth. the man's rape gets "And when the Sranc made a womb of Aengelas himself, it asked-with each raper's thrust, it asked..." (600). likewise, cnaiur's repeated rapes of serwe (I'm not sure why you wouldn't include that as rape) recieve a lot more attention to detail than does his rape of conphas, or his own relations with moenghus. that last is perhaps explainable because of its role as an uncertainty throughout much of the story, but I'd say it still stands as an example.

like you, I'm not invested enough in this argument to go back through the books and pick out quotes and page numbers for each of those instances, but I just want you to see where I'm coming from.

[Larry.]

After reading all the comments that followed my last one, I think I have an idea for a blog entry that I'll write later today. But in regards to this particular issue, the first thing that comes to mind is that "escapism" apparently isn't the end-all, be-all of reading fantasy fiction

[Happy Ent]

ignoring your condescension as much as possible in that post,

I'm sorry, no condescension was intended. Your contributions to this thread have been very good.

disregarding the instances that you wish not to include as rape,

I said no such thing. I just want to know the rules so I can argue. Did the Inchoroï rape Esmi? Did Esmi rape the soldier at the market? Did Serwë rape Akka? Or was it her who was being raped, by Kellhus? Did the skinspy-as-Serwë rape Cnaiür?

I don't know, and I don't care. But I hate arguing in the blind, with words I don't know the semantics of. I'd find it easier to use rape in its narrow sense (for example, Cnaiür raped Serwë and Conphas).

likewise, cnaiur's repeated rapes of serwe (I'm not sure why you wouldn't include that as rape) recieve a lot more attention to detail than does his rape of conphas,

As I said, the former I actually looked up and there is no detail in the books about them. Nothing. About the Conphas rape we at least get to know the exact sexual position and a description of his soiled bed on the day after. There are quite a few more rapes of Serwë, so there may be a detailed one in there. I don't know. But I would be surprised if the differences were huge. Yes, Serwë gets raped a lot of times. But even her first, central rape (which has an important plot point in that it triggers Kellhus moral intuition) is not described, while the parallel scene in Martin drags on and on.

[zach]

well, thank you, and apologies for accusing you of condescension.

like xray, I agree with you about martin... it's a sadly common characteristic of fantasy.

as for the definition thing, sorry again for misinterpreting you, I thought you were arguing (as others have on this thread) that the inchoroi seductions of esmi in particular don't count as rape. to me, it seems like they pretty clearly should, but her profession and the inclusion of magic make it such a convoluted discussion that it really isn't worth arguing over.

dylanfanatic, would you link to that blog post if/when you make it? I'd like to read it, as that's a very interesting discussion which that vandermeer/bakker (I think?) conversation touched on a while back. I'm fascinated by the idea of a more concrete use of speculative fiction as something more substantial than escapism, and while it seems to pop up more in conversations about science fiction that fantasy, I feel that it can be useful in terms of both.

that said, this entire thread drives home what a masterful job creating ambiguity bakker has done with this series. I, for example, came away hating kellhus and thinking he was a particularly odious villain, while others clearly feel just as strongly in the opposite direction.

[Larry.]

Yeah, I'll post it in a link somewhere, I suppose. Rate this is going, seems like there'll need to be a new thread before I get it written. But I'll certainly have it posted by late tonight and the link to the blog itself is in my sig space.

I should add that I consider some of "fantasy" reading/writing to be put the playing out of values and norms that we see in everyday life. In some aspects, it seems to be almost an ersatz religion (or of some of the functions of religion) for many. But that will have await another time before I write out my thoughts in full, since I'm still developing those. Oddly enough, this reflects some of the email exchanges Bakker and I had in 2004-2005 on this issue, but sadly those are lost with my old computer.

[Larry.]

OK, I wrote the blog piece as promised. Click here for something that might be worthy of some discussion outside this post. I dunno. I'll leave that up to others here.

[delete this account pls]

I for one, found Conphas' rape by Cnauir, as graphic and explicit as any other in the books. I was really surprised to find that some people thought the scene was ambiguous.

[Kalbear]

A sidenote - I did have a problem with Martin's explicitness for its own sake. I didn't and don't like it in the books. If I'm not bringing it up now, it's because the thread isn't about Martin. As I said before, I didn't have as much of a problem because there isn't as much first person focus on it in Martin's books as there is in Bakker's books.

Dylan, you left out quite a bit of the argument in your blog. I guess that's your right and all, but the focus on rape (and more detailed rape of women) was only one aspect of the argument.

[Larry.]

I covered what I set out to cover, since the focus of the piece, as I made quite clear in the first paragraph, was one specific point taken from one specific controversial piece of writing. Considering that my article's purpose was not to defend PoN but to talk about how many people perceive things within fantasy novels, especially when it comes to traumas such as rape, I would imagine that if I had covered most everything that people had problems with PoN, my article would have had a totally different focus than the one I intended from the beginning.

[Xray the Enforcer]

OK, quick update. I am going through the texts and trying to get some concrete data to clarify my earlier (and somewhat murky) comments. In the meantime, we've broken the 400 post barrier and thus I'll close the thread. Feel free to open another one, or I will once my data is collected. I'll be honest -- I won't get this done until next weekend, likely (busy time at work), but feel free to continue the discussion even though I'll be mostly MIA.