Arakasi Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Yes everything you've said has already long been discussed or dismissed and we're past that stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
needle Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote]I am really taken aback that this is an aspect of the series that people find controversial. I've not gotten the impression from the novels that women in Earwa are categorically inferior - spiritually, intellectually, characteristically, or in any other way. I see no evidence of misogyny.[/quote] *sigh* maybe not just your female readers that ain't getting it, Scott? Archie, please read the threads. You might learn something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacen Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Archibald Merriweather' post='1692617' date='Feb 19 2009, 13.41']NO. doesn't it come out tomorrow here?[/quote] Just got a call from Barnes and Noble, they got my copy on hold. Anybody in the U.S. should check their local store. Hopefully I can read the book now without constantly analyzing it for whiffs of misogyny :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote]Just got a call from Barnes and Noble, they got my copy on hold. Check your local store. Hopefully I can read the book now without constantly analyzing it whiffs of misogyny[/quote]Heh. Good luck with that. In all seriousness, look for the following in the book (not super spoilery, but is some) SPOILER: TJEhow many times people refer to fate/coincidence as the whore Esmi's role in general, her relation to the world and how she thinks of herself (both as a mother and as a whore) Mimara's attitude towards men Akka's attitude and thoughts about Mimara The whole Nannaferi bit and what she thinks about Esmi's place in the world the general language of the book, especially the insults Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Kalbear' post='1692615' date='Feb 19 2009, 11.41']Eef, would you like to sing along? [i] "Boy the way Glen Miller played songs that made the hit parade guys like us we had it made those were the days and you know where you were then girls were girls and men were men mister we could use a man like Herbert Hoover again didn't need no welfare states everybody pulled his weight gee our old Lasalle ran great those were the days! [/i][/quote] Bwah! And his name is Archibald! (Actually, the joke may be on the thread as this seem to be "Archie's" first post. I smell Bunk.) The sad fact is that I kind of love that song, except for, you know, the sentiment expressed in the lyrics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archibald Merriweather Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='needle' post='1692627' date='Feb 19 2009, 15.01']*sigh* maybe not just your female readers that ain't getting it, Scott? Archie, please read the threads. You might learn something.[/quote] i mean no evidence of misogyny on the part of Mr Bakker. to be clear, though, it has been established in these many threads that Mr Bakker's admitted intention was to write a novel wherein the women - as a group, categorically - are inferior beings? which is to say that they are literally inferior - not that they have an inferior social status, but are literally inferior beings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote]to be clear, though, it has been established in these many threads that Mr Bakker's admitted intention was to write a novel wherein the women - as a group, categorically - are inferior beings? which is to say that they are literally inferior - not that they have an inferior social status, but are literally inferior beings?[/quote]Yes. By Bakker's own word. Several times. The basic concept is that what if the world existed not as a romanticized fantasy medieval times, but as if a premodern, sexist world did - and what if that was objectively correct? What if God existed, was provable and was a sexist dick? What if women were objectively inferior? Not socially but literally? This is one of the nails that the book hangs on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Archibald Merriweather' post='1692653' date='Feb 19 2009, 14.16']to be clear, though, it has been established in these many threads that Mr Bakker's admitted intention was to write a novel wherein the women - as a group, categorically - are inferior beings? which is to say that they are literally inferior - not that they have an inferior social status, but are literally inferior beings?[/quote] Yes. Reading the posts in the thread will also lead to the same conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archibald Merriweather Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Kalbear' post='1692662' date='Feb 19 2009, 15.21']Yes. By Bakker's own word. Several times. The basic concept is that what if the world existed not as a romanticized fantasy medieval times, but as if a premodern, sexist world did - and what if that was objectively correct? What if God existed, was provable and was a sexist dick? What if women were objectively inferior? Not socially but literally? This is one of the nails that the book hangs on.[/quote] i never even had an inkling. that thought never entered my head. not even for a second. i assumed that the inferior position of women in the novel was a social one, not that they were literally inferior, like monkeys or rats. that just made the world a lot less interesting. i really, really wish i never read this thread. this sort of belies his insistance that he'd written esme sympathetically, and romanticized her etc - she's quite literally a subhuman? jesus christ! is this something you noted from the texts? did you make that realization yourself, i.e. "in this world bakker has created, women are sub-human", while reading the novels? sincere question. i am so baffled right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archibald Merriweather Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='TerraPrime' post='1692663' date='Feb 19 2009, 15.21']Yes. Reading the posts in the thread will also lead to the same conclusion.[/quote] right - reading hundreds of posts on dozens of pages of dialogue would have led me to the same conclusion as the simple one question-one answer method i just used, which is why i took that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Archibald Merriweather' post='1692673' date='Feb 19 2009, 14.29']right - reading hundreds of posts on dozens of pages of dialogue would have led me to the same conclusion as the simple one question-one answer method i just used, which is why i took that route.[/quote] Yet, after being given the answer, you continue to question and ask for more clarification, like [quote]is this something you noted from the texts? did you make that realization, i.e. "in this world bakker has created, women are sub-human"?[/quote] It's disruptive the flow of discussion to have to repeat the content of the previous 150 posts, not the least of which is that paraphrasing is always fraught with the risk of introducing errors. Reading the author's own words on this subject, contained in this thread, is the best way to go. Which is what we suggested you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archibald Merriweather Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='TerraPrime' post='1692681' date='Feb 19 2009, 15.32']Yet, after being given the answer, you continue to question and ask for more clarification, like It's disruptive the flow of discussion to have to repeat the content of the previous 150 posts, not the least of which is that paraphrasing is always fraught with the risk of introducing errors. Reading the author's own words on this subject, contained in this thread, is the best way to go. Which is what we suggested you do.[/quote] that is a personal question, addressed to that particular poster. it's your recommendation that i sift through the dozens of pages of text to see if this one guy came to that revelation himself? are you someone with an inordinate amount of spare time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Archibald Merriweather' post='1692671' date='Feb 19 2009, 12.27']is this something you noted from the texts? did you make that realization, i.e. "in this world bakker has created, women are sub-human"? sincere question. i am so baffled right now.[/quote]I admit I didn't notice it myself, not until others brought it up from the interviews and pointed out specific passages that supported it. I just thought that the world was exceptionally misogynistic and sexist. But others did, and it certainly is a running theme throughout the series. And to be clear - it's kind of vague how women are inferior, what that actually means or what it does to them. Esmi is no less intelligent for having this spiritual inferiority, for example. Kellhus blithely ignores it and lies about it. I think it could be an interesting question: if women are deficient in some spiritual way, does it change anything? Should it? But it can also be taken as the text, and the text saying 'women are inferior, objectively' is clearly a hard pill to swallow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edda van Heefmstra Ruston Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 You're forgetting that this is the third thread. We put a lot of genuine effort into this, most of us, so disregarding all of that (and the multiple times that very question has been asked and answered) is... dismissive, to put it mildly. Finn, if it had been 'Archibald [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bankstown_Bunker"]Bankstown[/url]', or Drummond or Hochwald or York, I'd've agreed with you. As it is, I think it's someone who was genuinely curious, but couldn't be arsed to read the discussion, and so the humour in the Display Name is lost on him. Kal - "People seemed to be content Fifty dollars paid the rent Freaks were in a circus tent Those were the days Take a little Sunday spin Go to watch the Dodgers win Have yourself a dandy day that cost you under a fin Hair was short and skirts were long Kate Smith really sold a song I just don't know what went wrong Those were the days" Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyanna Stark Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Archibald Merriweather' post='1692682' date='Feb 19 2009, 21.34']that is a personal question, addressed to that particular poster. it's your recommendation that i sift through the dozens of pages of text to see if this one guy came to that revelation himself? are you someone with an inordinate amount of spare time?[/quote] Yes, I believe that is the recommendation. And it is easy to find if you bothered to follow the discussion at all. This is why some forums have a week of membership before posting is allowed: so you actually read the discussions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Archibald Merriweather' post='1692682' date='Feb 19 2009, 14.34']that is a personal question, addressed to that particular poster. it's your recommendation that i sift through the dozens of pages of text to see if this one guy came to that revelation himself? are you someone with an inordinate amount of spare time?[/quote] No, but I am someone who knows something about internet etiquette. What you're doing is akin to walking into [i]The Fellowship of the Ring[/i] at the movie theater when Boromir just got shot, and asking the person sitting next to you "Who's that that just got killed?" "That's Boromir." "Who's Boromir?" "He's one of Frodo's ring companions." "Frodo has a ring?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archibald Merriweather Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote name='Kalbear' post='1692688' date='Feb 19 2009, 15.36']I admit I didn't notice it myself, not until others brought it up from the interviews and pointed out specific passages that supported it. I just thought that the world was exceptionally misogynistic and sexist. But others did, and it certainly is a running theme throughout the series.[/quote] That's precisely what I thought. [quote]And to be clear - it's kind of vague how women are inferior, what that actually means or what it does to them. Esmi is no less intelligent for having this spiritual inferiority, for example. Kellhus blithely ignores it and lies about it. I think it could be an interesting question: if women are deficient in some spiritual way, does it change anything? Should it? But it can also be taken as the text, and the text saying 'women are inferior, objectively' is clearly a hard pill to swallow.[/quote] I've read all of Bakker's posts (not the entire threads though) and he still seems ambiguous as to the nature of this inferiority. I am stuck - i just find it unbelievable that the women in these novels are literally sub-human. He responds to the question "Why write a world where women are literally inferior to men - not because of society, but because of simple existence?" with an explanation that could just as well be a defense of creating a world in which women's "inferiority" was not categorical but social, which is how the book reads (to me). If the women in the novel are sub-human then they are categorically not "women" and the work cannot be misogynistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ran Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 Lets stay on topic. Archibald, Just accept that you've annoyed people and move on, rather than antagonizing further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacen Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 I really haven't followed this monumental three-part thread very closely, but it seems like many of you are convinced the Bakker books are misogynistic. Does that also mean you're done with Bakker, and you aren't going to keep reading his series? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 19, 2009 Share Posted February 19, 2009 [quote]If the women in the novel are sub-human then they are categorically not "women" and the work cannot be misogynistic.[/quote]I don't think this follows at all. Fantasy is allegory, after all. Representations are not actual, and it's fine that they're not, but it doesn't make the representations any less...well, representative of the actual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.