R. Scott Bakker: What am I missing?

[Jora]

I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but Amazon says that the next book will be called The Great Ordeal: The Aspect-Emperor Book One. Can't wait!

SPOILER: The synopsis on the Obit site

Now Anasurimbor Kellhus is the Aspect-Emperor. But is he a living god . . . or a demon from hell?

Focus your attention on the second sentence.

[Baeraad]

I feel somewhat outnumbered, but let me make at least one more attempt to argue...

Added just before posting: Oh, and please forgive me if I seem to get crankier the further along the post I go. I really don't, it just gets later and I get more tired.

Kellhus spends the first half of the first book barely escaping death from some fairly low level baddies.

This is true. In the first book, there were a number of times when it seemed like Kellhus was in genuine danger, eliteness notwithstanding. However...

SPOILER: No-God

1. His army nearly dies in the desert, they need to rely on an "inside traitor" to take one fortress or they will die during the siege.

2. Other humans betray him and leave him hanging. The ones who were bringing the supply fleet (memory failing me here, it's been a while)

3. Then, literally, he is left hanging, the equivalent of crucified alongside his bride, who is killed.

4. He finally faces off against an equal, Moenghus, and only wins because Moenghus chose an arcane path requiring "feeling" instead of "intellect." Kellhus got lucky that he hooked up with Akka instead of the Scarlet Spires or Chishaurim.

SPOILER: No-God

1 & 2. Even so, he never fails, does he? In fact, he comes out of all of it stronger than ever. Which means it's either all part of his master plan or the gods are watching over him. I'm not sure what would be worse.

3. That one was definitely part of his master plan. All it proves is that he's not always capable of carrying off his schemes without discomfort to himself. Which is something, I suppose, but not really enough to satisfy me.

4. Lucky nor not, he now has the perfect magic, making him superior to all other Dunyain as well as all other sorcerers.

In fact, I can sum up by saying that the fact that when Kellhus isn't powerful enough to win, he wins anyway because of luck... that fact doesn't help any. It just makes it look even more like someone (the gods or Bakker, depending on how you look at it) won't allow him to lose. Which is what I'm first and foremost complaining about, not his power level as such.

SPOILER: No-God

1. The rogue mandati, Akka.

2. The rest of the Mandate sorcerors

3. Has he faced one of the higher level baddies? There were Sranc, then the skinspies, then something bigger in the Consult army.

4. The Consult generals

5. The Inchoroi themselves

6. A demon on the level of that which Akka faced

7. The gods of Earwa (you know Kellhus will go "outside" eventually

8. The No-God

9. Plus whatever is on the other side of that southern mountain range

SPOILER: No-God

1. One Mandati? Kellhus can do threefold Cants, which I have no idea what it even is, just that it's completely badass and he's the only one who can do them. Actually, even without threefold Cants, I would have assumed that Kellhus would with a minimum of training be the best sorcerer in the world and capable of taking apart any dozen lesser men.

2. As of the end of TTT, they're eating out of Kellhus' hand.

3/4/5. He's faced an Inchoroi, if I didn't completely misunderstand that part. Barring the No-God, the Inchoroi are supposed to be the baddest of the bad. Said Inchoroi didn't even hope that it could take him down, it just wanted to mess with him while sending an assassin after someone else. Which failed, by the way, since Kellhus foresaw that and the assassin ran into a trap.

6. Again, if Akka can face something, I daresay Kellhus won't have any problems with it.

7. Eh? What? Kellhus is pally with the gods. He's their chosen one. Why would he pick a fight with them, or vice versa?

8. As I've hinted elsewhere, I fully expect the No-God to have some major emotional hangups (as hinted in the dreams of the final battle of the First Apocalypse) and Kellhus using those to good advantage.

9. What are the odds that it will be more impressive than anything that's turned up so far?

And, of course, my argument remains that these are all things you expect will happen. I expect that things will remain more or less the same, which means that even though the level of resistance might increase (somehow), Kellhus will just develop more over-the-top powers that means he can breeze right through it anyway.

Interesting. We have discussed this quite often on this board, and mostly we seem to come to the conclusion that the Dunyain will side with the Consult. All speculation, of course, but the final confrontation between Kelly and you-know-who in TTT makes it quite clear.

That would certainly make things more interesting, which is why I'm inclined to doubt it. What Kellhus actually said was that

SPOILER: The end of TTT

his father is going to hell, and would side with the Consult because of that, if allowed to live. The other Dunyain are less certain. If Kellhus can be redeemed (because I seriously doubt he's going to hell), then why not the rest of them also?

Then you can consider the case of Cnaiür.

That turned out pretty well for Moenghus, though. Cnaiür, exactly because he hated Moenghus so incredibly much, did a lot to help Kellhus get to him - which was what Moenghus wanted to happen.

Sure Kellhus is so powerful that those who wake up to him will have extreme difficulty fighting back, but he's the Dark Lord after all.

Why is he a Dark Lord? In fact, how is he a villain? He's an evil, girlfriend-stealing piece of shit, certainly, but that only bothers people who get too close to him. I'm sure he'll make an excellent regent, based on the sensible realisation that a prospering kingdom makes the King more powerful than a decaying, taxed-into-oblivion one. He'll defeat the No-God, not because he necessarily gives a crap about anyone else, but because he wants to keep the world alive so he himself can live in it - and because he's bound to be rewarded with entry into Heaven (or the Three Seas equivalent) upon his death if he pleases the gods.

SPOILER: No-God

I wrote earlier under spoiler tags of one example of how it's affecting the plot.

SPOILER: No-God

You did, yes, but I'm doubtful about the No-God helping Kellhus along. I got the distinct impression that it's the gods who're helping him along. If the No-God was alive, wouldn't the womb plague have returned?

Except Bakker has said in interviews that Kellhus is not sharing his philosophy, and he's very staunchly non-Randian.

Possibly I would modify my views if I could read an interview like that.

Though I want to point out that Kellhus is not Randian. Randians are all about serving their own most basic instincts - Kellhus appears to be so logical that he's not entirely sure what he's serving, since he sees everything as meaningless.

There is literally nothing that Kellhus says that can be taken at face value.

His moral advice is tailored to what he wants people to do, yes. Kellhus is most certainly not about moral. The observations about human nature he hangs that advice on, though? Yeah, I think Bakker is entirely behind those.

he certainly believes that Kellhus is not what you'd call a good guy.

How about "beyond good and evil"?

They still disapprove, they just are using him. I'm not sure what your point is there.

My point is that they act as if Kellhus is not for them to approve or disapprove of. Like he's so exalted that it's childish to even wish that he'd behave like a decent human being.

SPOILER: End of TTT

Akka's voice is the one that, at the end of the book, condemns and rejects Kellhus.

SPOILER: End of TTT

Out of desperation and heartbreak, yes. Bad reasons. I somewhat expect Akka to end up working for the Consult.

SPOILER: TTT

why couldn't be see what a problem Cnaiur would become? Why couldn't he win over Akka? Why did he almost die in the first chapter we saw him in, against the old race? Why did he have to make a leap of faith in TWP?

SPOILER: TTT

Cnaiur is not a problem. Akka has served his purpose. That chapter was a long time ago. I didn't see a leap of faith, I saw Kellhus being smarter than everyone else again.

Hmmm... considering the future allegience of the Dunyain and the relative abilities of the Consult, I think I already answered those in my replies to Ser Paladin and Happy Ent, right?

Ask Martin, I suppose. Or ask Donaldson, who is also a master of doing that.

I'm afraid I don't understand. When did either Martin or Donaldson do anything of the sort?

the way you're describing it, well, someone like Gandalf is a Mary Sue.

Funny you should mention it...

No, my feelings for Tolkien aside, Gandalf has some severe limitations on him, regardless of whether they're in terms of actual power or just what he's allowed to do according to his superiors. His plans go awry on occasion. And there are forces in the world that are not only stronger than him, they're so much stronger that he doesn't dare to even try to face them. Kellhus, on the other hand, would have snatched up the One Ring, unlocked all its power and remained completely uncorrupted because of his complete clarity of thought.

[Kalbear]

I'm afraid I don't understand. When did either Martin or Donaldson do anything of the sort?

When did Martin or Donaldson turn fantasy perspectives on their ear and do something that people didn't expect or change the direction of the story? Let's see - Ned's Death, Red Wedding, Tywin's death, Jaime becoming good...do I really need to go on here? Donaldson started with his protagonist raping a young girl and then actually finding redemption later and radically has changed how the Land works in each volume along with those that dwell there.

I was saying that authors - particularly good authors - change their goals and motivations and plots all the time. They mislead to surprise. Or, as is the case with Bakker, they make ambiguous to make you unsure where things are going.

And on the Inchoroi:

SPOILER: inchoroi

He didn't face an Inchoroi at the height of its power. he faced a synthese. They had to use synthese because they were so far away from their home; closer by, they're far more powerful (as witnessed by the end of TWP). And like you said, Kellhus hasn't even done that yet; he's just fought against what they did to Esme. We have no idea what their magic is like, what their power is like, other than the little bit of seduction we've seen.

[unJon]

SPOILER: End of TTT

Out of desperation and heartbreak, yes. Bad reasons. I somewhat expect Akka to end up working for the Consult.

SPOILER: End of TTT

I don't think there is any way that Akka works for the Consult. All foreshadowing points to him being the second coming of what's his name: Seswatha or whatever. He's going to be the No God's and Kelhus's biggest enemy. Which doesn't mean that Kelhus and the No-God will be on the same side. Just that all three will be antogonistic to each other.

I really view Akka as the protagonist of PON trilogy.

[Arakasi]

I agree. Akka is the protagonist and I like him a lot. I just can't stand the Kelhus storyline though, which sadly is as big a part of the books as Akka.

[Ser Paladin]

I honestly don't get the complaint about Kellhus always winning. He's arguably the protagonist, Akka notwithstanding.

Gandalf's worst outing is a draw with the Balrog. No "L"s for our friend Mithrandir. And I don't remember Aragorn losing, but maybe it's squirreled away in Lost Tales somewhere. Luke Skywalker loses a hand, but otherwise overcomes outlandish odds with minimal training and innate powers. I'd put that "Empire" scene alongside Kellhus's crucifixion as a setback, not a loss.

From the training wheels section of the fantasy shelves, I get the impression Drizzt never loses. Indiana Jones doesn't have any notches in the loss column. Bond? Rake? Hari Seldon? Paul Atriedes? All consistent winners.

Not every protagonist has to lose to be believable. I don't know why a string of victories is an automatic cause for damnation. How do you feel about Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, and the Yankees.

[AverageGuy]

FWIW, I don't think Baeraad's denying that there are other Mary Sues out there.

OTOH, I've got the feeling that it's been pretty well set up that Kellhus isn't good and is probably headed for a fall. Therefore, I don't really see him as a Mary Sue.

And that's my acronym allotment for the day.

[Bastard of Godsgrace]

I don't believe DUnyain as a group are going to side with Conslut. Their goals just aren't compatible. Dunyain don't care about presonal immortality. Their project is basically eugenical and making everybody in the world infertile would sort of defeat it. Besides Consult will certainly realize how dangerous Dunyain are, and probably will try to wipe them out before they have time to learn sorcery.

Renegade Dunyain may be different cup of tea, though.

The Great Ordeal? It certainly supports theory that First Apocalypse is foreshadowing of the Second and Achamian is new Seswatha.

As for the question if Kellhus is protagonist or antagonist of the series, I think the jury is still out. I rather don't see him becoming new No-God, as many on Bakker board believe. If I had to choose, I would put my money on him being a protagonist who screws things up by being overconfident, which leaves Akka to clean his mess and save the world. But of course Bakker may surprise us all.

[Happy Ent]

Dunyain don't care about presonal immortality.

Not yet. Because they haven't yet understood that religion is correct in the Three Seas. There really is an afterlife, and an Outside. And if you have Sinned then you are Doomed to Eternal Torture. All true, in Bakkerworld.

Whether the Dunyain care about personal immortality is not the point. The point is that their souls are immortal, just like anybody else's. But they don't know that. Yet. The Dunyain philosphy (mundane, deterministic) is flat out mistaken. For example, magic works. The Outside exists.

Our friendly neighbourhood eugenic monks don't know any of this. Indeed, their entire epistemology denies it. But Kellhus understands. And so do the Inchoroi, much to their unpleasant surprise. Now, the Inchoroi are Doomed to Eternal Torture because they are sinners. Übersinners. By authorial fiat, the only way do save your soul from eternal damnation is to "close the world" from the outside. Apparently, you need to bring the number of souls on the planet down below some critical threshold to do that. Aha! Easy enough, think our Alien Sex Fiends, and implement their scheme of summoning the No-God to stop all Life, while they tentacle-rape some Japanese schoolgirls in the meantime. It's a pretty good plan, provided you are an übersinner in the first place.

Now look at it from a Dunyain perspective. The monks will soon learn that they are wrong. That's not so bad and mainly leads to them having to learn new things, like magic. I'm sure they'll cope. Maybe someone will even teach one of them the Gnosis. (I hope not.) A bigger problem is that they are all Doomed to Eternal Torture. Why? They are sinners. We get some brief glimpses into a Dunyain anatomy lesson in a Kelly flashback, and later we see an interrogation chamber featuring two skin-spies and a human child and woman. On the übersinner scale, a Dunyain clocks in right below an experienced Sranc, if only because they don't really put their heart into it. Problem is, they have souls, unlike the Sranc.

But the Dunayin aren't that many, so the Consult plan must look pretty good to them. Kill everybody else. After that, the world could be populated by a small group of eugenicist monks, two aliens, and a gazillion soul-less Scrancs. Logos for the win!

[Bastard of Godsgrace]

But the Dunayin aren't that many, so the Consult plan must look pretty good to them. Kill everybody else. After that, the world could be populated by a small group of eugenicist monks, two aliens, and a gazillion soul-less Scrancs. Logos for the win!

But that would only work if they may regain fertility afterwards. We know to little about No-God to say if it would be possible, but I rather tend to doubt it. Dunyain goal is to create self-moving soul (and they know they don't have one yet) not personal betterment. Question is if they are willing to accept damnation in order to achieve this goal. I think that to orthodox Dunyain the answer must be "yes". Of course, some may disagree, so we may see schism in Dunyain ranks.

It all can be moot, though, since the more important question may be who will be the boss in proposed alliance. I don't see either Inchoroi or Dunyain accepting second place.

[Nerdanel]

Why is he a Dark Lord? In fact, how is he a villain? He's an evil, girlfriend-stealing piece of shit, certainly, but that only bothers people who get too close to him. I'm sure he'll make an excellent regent, based on the sensible realisation that a prospering kingdom makes the King more powerful than a decaying, taxed-into-oblivion one. He'll defeat the No-God, not because he necessarily gives a crap about anyone else, but because he wants to keep the world alive so he himself can live in it - and because he's bound to be rewarded with entry into Heaven (or the Three Seas equivalent) upon his death if he pleases the gods.

This brings us again to Sauron. Sauron was amazingly intelligent, highly rational, and in his fair form could be very persuasive if he wanted to. It's not clear if he had Dûnyain-like talents, charm spells, or both, but it doesn't change the outcome. We are talking about someone who was brought as a prisoner to Númenor and after a while was effectively running the place while being the high priest of a new state religion.

Switching the discussion to Mordor, which was entirely his, you might think Sauron would have been a good ruler, and he certainly was an effective one, but his subjects weren't happy at all. Namely, Sauron in his rationality decided on a system of production relied heavily on slave labor. Slaves might not be as enthusiastic as free people and need to be overseen, but on the other hand slaves don't use much resources for themselves. Sauron's armies were - elite troops excepted - not particularly well armed or trained, but they were very large and new disposable soldiers could be produced with relatively little expense in time and materials. The well-trained, well-armed armies of the good guys were badly out-matched by Sauron's cannonfood, particularly when it was reinforced by Sauron's spellcasting from afar to make it more ferocious in battle. This is to say, a horrible repressive system may not always be a bad decision by a ruthless ruler who is sure of his own ability to resist coups and especially when there isn't much need for the commoners to innovate anything, as the ruler is far smarter than them and the technology level of the world low.

Sure Sauron could spend a while convincing people to see his point, but if he could just force them, all the more effective. The Shortest Path strikes again.

I haven't read that far, but I cannot have avoided getting spoiled in the respect of (and it's not that surprising after all, really)...

SPOILER: TTT

...that Kellhus learns Gnosis. And that just happens to mean that he's automatically damned according to the official line. That would mean that reaching salvation by any means would be forbidden for him, unless he happens to take the view of Akka's childhood friend, but even in that view he can't work for salvation, because if he aimed for it he wouldn't deserve it. So Kellhus's only way to avoid hell (or non-existence, if he still doesn't believe in hell) is to find some way to avoid dying, even of old age. I think figuring out immortality by himself would be a non-trivial task, even for him, so he could use some outside help.

I haven't read TTT, so correct if I'm wrong, but from the first two books I get the idea that there isn't some specific limit to the number of people on the planet that applies to things. From the very start of the first Apocalypse when the population levels were still high, no children could be born. I think the No-God's presence operates by blocking both incoming incoming and outgoing souls, so that no new children can be born (unless, say, people figure out how to use the souls already in the world and trapped in whore's shells) and the dead do not go to their normal afterlife. Instead, the dead can be resurrected by the No-God if he wishes to. But to operate like that, the No-God needs a lot of energy, and that seems to mean souls and/or suffering. So I don't think the population needs to be reduced to a certain level, but rather that is what inevitably happens when the No-God rises in power, unless he needs a continuous input of real world suffering and it would be more sensible for him to figure out how to make a Hell on earth without too many genocides.

Obviously the No-God hasn't returned in force, but...

SPOILER: Warrior Prophet

...he certainly isn't out of the action either, technically dead nor not (if he can really die). I think at the moment he can only affect the world in topoi and even there not that strongly, but he can send dreams, and even talk through dying people (in italics) and do resurrections, like with Saubon (look, I checked out the name!). There is a topoi in Mengedda and I think that during the course of the book another one gets made in Caraskand.

[IheartTesla]

I think Bakker has already shown the weakness of the Shortest Path in a symbolic fashion. At one point, everyone has to go from place A to place B. Most choose to take a shortcut, but this one person leads his troops along a road the long way around and ends up at place B well before anyone else. The shortest path turns out the longer one.

I didn't think there was anything particularly subtle about the way Bakker went about stating this, and part of my problem with the books was the notion of how Kehlus's shortest path was incredibly tortuous.

[Nerdanel]

I didn't think there was anything particularly subtle about the way Bakker went about stating this, and part of my problem with the books was the notion of how Kehlus's shortest path was incredibly tortuous.

I think Bakker hits the reader on the head with philosophy sometimes, which I don't like. On the other hand, consider the varied reader reactions, perhaps the philosophical points Bakker is making aren't so obvious after all... It's a hard line to walk. I'd prefer if the philosophy was left entirely implicit, though.

Re: Kellhus and his philosophy. Sometimes it amazes me how someone so smart can be so stupid. Well, I suppose he has trouble questioning his own preconceptions. I think it's going to get him killed eventually.

[Nous]

Though I want to point out that Kellhus is not Randian. Randians are all about serving their own most basic instincts - Kellhus appears to be so logical that he's not entirely sure what he's serving, since he sees everything as meaningless.

Kellhus is not a Randian, true. That Randians are all about serving their own most basic instincts is false, though. ("Whatever "Randian" means). Incidentally, from Bakker's books it would be pretty easy to discern his anti-Randism--his fundamental worldview is about as far from hers as it's possible to get. And I'm not confusing Bakker's own opinions with Kellhus'.

Kellhus is so overwhelming because of his absolute commitment to his goals. Super-intellect, strength, magic powers and the like help a lot, but his ruthlessness is the one thing that puts him so much above all others. You can see this when you compare Kellhus and the Inchoroi. The Inchoroi are close to typical fantasy baddies (though with an extra dose of perversion thrown in.) They may have intelligence and power, but they are arrogant, needlessly sadistic and slaves to their desires. Kellhus has no ego. He would become a sranc sex-toy and easily pretend to love it if his intellect told him doing so would help him to reach his goals--and wouldn't think twice about it afterwards. Now, Kellhus' conditioning has been unravelling, and this may bring some meaningful conflict to the future series. If Kellhus and the Inchoroi continue as they are, I don't see that the latter have much chance, unless they get lucky. It's like pitting an out-of-control six-year old against a Kasparov-Deep Blue hybrid in a chess match.

[Nerdanel]

I think Kellhus is a tool and doesn't know it. He's basically a more advanced version of a skin-spy. His Conditioning he's so proud of makes him awfully predictable for someone who understands what makes him tick and is able to handle his level of intellect.

I could say more, but I fear the discussion would inevitably lead to TTT spoiler territory, and I haven't yet read that book. (WHEN is it coming out in mass market paperback?)

[Werthead]

The Thousandfold Thought will be released in paperback by Orbit in the UK on 3 May 2007. The USA publisher (Overlook) doesn't do mass-market paperbacks. None of the trilogy is availably in MMPB. What the situation is in Canada, I don't know.

[Nerdanel]

Sometimes it's really nice to live in Europe.

Oh, and thank you for the information.

[Baeraad]

On a general note... there's a lot of arguments why things will become different from now on, why the way the Three Seas is set up ensures it. They are excellent arguments. However, if we look at it from a different angle, what will happen is not what the worldbuilding seem to ensure, what will happen is what Bakker wants to happen.

So I ask, what possible reason does Bakker have to now give Kellhus noticeable opposition? He could have made the Consult much stronger to start with. He could have made Kellhus a bit weaker (he has already grown stronger over the course of the series, and I'm sure he'll grow a lot stronger between this series and next), enough to ensure dramatic tension. He did not. Clearly, he is comfortable writing like this. Why should he start writing differently now?

I've seen a lot of predictions at this point. Here's mine, if anyone's interested: Kellhus will defeat the No-God. There will never be any doubt about him being able to do it, but every single battle, military and political, will nevertheless be described in loving detail. Most people will worship Kellhus, but a few dissenting souls like Akka and Cnaiur will sneak around, angst a lot about what Kellhus has done to them and about how neurotic and puny they are compared to him, and make inefficient attempts to attack him. The only uncertainty in the books will be whether or not these dissenters will find some sort of peace in the end, or whether they'll be killed or emotionally destroyed fighting battles which are important only to themselves.

I guess we'll see. But how many here finished TWP and said to themselves, "okay, things went kind of easy for Kellhus this time around... but hey, this was just setting the scene for next book, in which he faces his father, who's just as powerful as he is. Then there'll be fireworks, you can bet on it"? I'm just curious.

When did Martin or Donaldson turn fantasy perspectives on their ear and do something that people didn't expect or change the direction of the story? Let's see - Ned's Death, Red Wedding, Tywin's death, Jaime becoming good...do I really need to go on here? Donaldson started with his protagonist raping a young girl and then actually finding redemption later and radically has changed how the Land works in each volume along with those that dwell there.

I was saying that authors - particularly good authors - change their goals and motivations and plots all the time. They mislead to surprise. Or, as is the case with Bakker, they make ambiguous to make you unsure where things are going.

Ah, you mean like that. I can't say I consider the examples equivalent, though. Martin's world always had room for many different ways of seeing things, right from the first book. Covenant was always as much sinned against as sinner. The twists that happened, happened within the established parameters of those stories.

If, on the other hand, Kellhus becomes vulnerable or genuinely villainous, I'd consider that breaking away from everything that's happened so far. It would be a completely different story, with completely different rules.

SPOILER: End of TTT

I don't think there is any way that Akka works for the Consult. All foreshadowing points to him being the second coming of what's his name: Seswatha or whatever. He's going to be the No God's and Kelhus's biggest enemy. Which doesn't mean that Kelhus and the No-God will be on the same side. Just that all three will be antogonistic to each other.

SPOILER: End of TTT

What possibly effect can Akka have on the Consult, not to mention on Kellhus? He's one sorcerer. He's helpless.

I said I won't be surprised if he joins the Consult, but I should add that I won't be surprised if he doesn't, either. As I said earlier in this post, he might just run around angsting a lot and scheming inefficiently against Kellhus and/or the Consult. I can't imagine him having any effect one way or another, though.

I honestly don't get the complaint about Kellhus always winning. He's arguably the protagonist, Akka notwithstanding.

Gandalf's worst outing is a draw with the Balrog. No "L"s for our friend Mithrandir. And I don't remember Aragorn losing, but maybe it's squirreled away in Lost Tales somewhere. Luke Skywalker loses a hand, but otherwise overcomes outlandish odds with minimal training and innate powers. I'd put that "Empire" scene alongside Kellhus's crucifixion as a setback, not a loss.

From the training wheels section of the fantasy shelves, I get the impression Drizzt never loses. Indiana Jones doesn't have any notches in the loss column. Bond? Rake? Hari Seldon? Paul Atriedes? All consistent winners.

Not every protagonist has to lose to be believable. I don't know why a string of victories is an automatic cause for damnation. How do you feel about Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, and the Yankees.

I'd really rather not use Gandalf as my example of a good character, because I don't like Tolkien, but the Balrog at least managed a tie, meaning it was as powerful as he was (or it got lucky, which is also fine by me). Earlier than that, Saruman locked him up and prevented him from helping his friends, which almost got the One Ring captured by Sauron as a result. I repeat, Gandalf has limits.

Rake is a Sue in Gardens of the Moon - after that he's not really active enough to count one way or another. Bond gets beaten up and thrown in cells a lot. Hari Seldon? He got chased around by things bigger and badder than himself, won some very costly victories which only gained him a chance to continue his research, and ultimately, his legacy came to nothing (stupid Gaia freaks).

How do I feel about sport stars? I ignore them, on account of hating sports. But I see what you mean, and I answer that real people can win all the time, because we know they can lose. This is reality. In reality, people have the potential to lose, even if they never actually do. There's no big author sitting up there putting everyone else down to make Michael Jordan look cooler. There's no universal rule stating that Michael Jordan will always win. Reality has nothing to prove. Fiction does.

SPOILER: TTT

...that Kellhus learns Gnosis. And that just happens to mean that he's automatically damned according to the official line.

SPOILER: TTT

The official line is wrong, though. Kellhus figures that out in TTT. In fact, sorcerers are more holy than other people. Kellhus would have no problem on that account. And the gods choosing him as their prophet does rather hint that they're okay with him.

Kellhus is not a Randian, true. That Randians are all about serving their own most basic instincts is false, though.

Well, it's my interpretation rather than how they'd describe themselves, but... Their sole interests seem to be to breed and make money. Sounds like basic urges to me.

Edited to include one argument I forgot about.

[Arakasi]

I disagree that Bakker will have Kelhus continue unopposed to the end of the series. I'm sure there will be opposition and better opposition at some point. Especially when he goes up against the Inch and the No God, for they are powerful beings. I somehow think in my heart that Akka will win out. Although I'm not sure. This is where I divert from Baeraad. To me the series doesn't become redeemed if Kelhus gets opposition. Because books 2 and 3 have already been soured for me. It wouldn't even make sense if Kelhus became fallible, given his strength up to now. I'm sure there will be some powers who can match him in power, but I doubt they will in intellect, which is the biggest issue I have with him. His foes will beat him (if they do) because they are more powerful, but they will never be smarter than him (with possible exception of Akka).

And please stop comparing Sauron to Kelhus. Sauron is the villian in LotR and a god. Comparing him to a mortal doesn't work. Comparing their positions in the series doesn't work, because Kelhus is the main character while Sauron is not. Probably why few authors write their mains as the powerful guy, because it just ruins tension.

[Vercint]

I think there's too much focus on kellhus and his abilities going on here... kellhus is more a force of nature than a real chraracter; Akka is the protagonist, and if you're looking for the character that Bakker has invested his own ideas in, Akka is your man, not Kellhus. To focus on Kellhus and his superhuman, seemingly invincible, abilities, is to miss the point; he is a representation of what a perfect human might be like, what such a man might be capable of... not a representation of a real man, not someone we reasonably relate to, nor even desire to be like. Akka is the main character because he is the one we can reasonably relate to, because he is a human caught in a world beyond his capacity to comprehend or control, just like us...