The Judging Eye VIII (spoilers)

[Madness]

I agree with Nerdanel about Seswatha's heart and Kellhus' dreaming Mandati dreams. I can't think of any reason, advantage, or otherwise that Kellhus would want Seswatha's life in dream. Especially, if you buy as many do here, that Kellhus is responsible for Achamian's path, through Mimira, Traveller, or any other scheme - I don't but that's probably wistful thinking on my part-, and thus, Kellhus would think that Achamian is handling any information the dreams have.

On the "What Has Come Before," I always figured that it serves as... a very uncritical history of Earwa from "consensual humanities" point of view. I take it all very, very lightly, and base pretty much none of my speculations on it. To each their own.

[Spring Bass]

This is a fairly blunt statement on Bakker's part about the Inchoroi motives. Just makes me wonder' date=' this sounds like they already came here with that motive in mind, to cause annihilation so there would be no more eternal damnation and "seal the World". [/quote']

I'm not so sure that they came intentionally. The descriptions of the arrival of the Incu-Holoinas in the glossary of TTT make it sound pretty clear that it was a crash-landing, and that most of the Inchoroi died in the process. I suppose they could have been aiming for a controlled landing (particularly since space is huge and its unlikely that they'd just wander by a habitable planet), although I have no idea how you'd land a gigantic hundreds of meters long starship.

I'm pretty sure Outer Space in the Bakkerverse is like Outer Space in our universe. Remember Achamian's comment to Esmenet about how the Inchoroi told the Non-men about how other stars were suns, with other worlds orbiting around them? Then there's Aurang/Aurax's (can't remember which brother) comment about blotting out the world with his finger.

It'd ultimately help to know more about the Inchoroi's back-story. Like when they realized they were damned in Earwa.

[Madness]

I feel like we were sketching the foundations of the question, GB, earlier in this thread. I guess, if I thought about it, I'd say they probably figured out they were damned when Shauriatas and the Mengaecca discovered the Ark. Perhaps Mekeritrig knows about damnation, he's allegedly who told the Mengaecca about the Ark during the tutelage. I'm not even sure the Nonmen believe in damnation though - By the evidence so far, I'm inclined to say that only the human perspective could have formed the argument for the Consult's formation. You know, Shauriatas turns up: Hey, you creatures here don't know anything about curing damnation, do you? Inchoroi are all, damnation? Shauriatas gives them an up and down: Oh, yeah, you guys are fucking damned. You need to hear this. Let's all solve this together, a human, a Nonman, and two crazy space rape monsters.

[Rhadamanth]

I'm not even sure the Nonmen believe in damnation though

Well, there was that part in TJE when the Ghost King Under the Mountain says:

"Hell-hell."

Still kneeling, Cleric gazes up at the impossible figure, anguish and indecision warring across his expression.

"Damnation-shun, Cousin-sin. How-How? How-How could-could we-we forget-get?"

A sorrow flattens the glittering black eyes. "Not I. I have never forgotten..."

[Curethan]

Curethan, your clarification didn't clarify. I don't see what you mean at all. So is the Outside governed by human will? Is human damnation governed by the outside, which is mutable? Is there some kind of feedback loop and both are mutable?

Sorry, been working OT and preping for uni and haven't had much time.

I don't think I can illustrate the difference between what I suggest and your interpretation of "believe hard enough in your subjective reality and recieve wish fulfillment" any more clearly. But still, I'll try and sumarize some of my musings and interpretations.

First, I want to touch upon that fact that grasping the objective realities RSB had tried to make distinct from or own is difficult because our interpretion of our own reality is based on our own subjective experience and is by no means certain, which makes it difficult to secure frames where we can say "this is absolutely different". Also, the narrative is bound in subjective points of view that provide varying levels of reliability in their interpretations. But I think it's safe to begin with the first quote (from Nietzsche) as providing a point of departure.

"I shall never tire of underlining a concise little fact which these superstitious people are loath to admit - namely, that a thought comes when "it" wants, not when "I" want..."

Suggesting that thoughts have an existence seperate to the thinker.

In Earwa, beliefs have objective weight. By and large, they determine the thoughts and actions of men. They also bind the soul to an outside agency that has a subjective existence in the outside (as an aspect of god) and can use its objective reality within Earwa to alter causality in order to favour it's subjective existence. Due to the fact that they presumably (in most cases) predate the supremacy of man, their current anthromorphic interpretation (as gods etc) provides some evidence that the subjective nature of belief (i.e. the personal interpretation of inherited belief to align with an individual's circumstance) has a very minor effect on the evolution of said belief.

The interplay of subjective and objective realities is most clear in the instances where metaphysical power is used. E.g. sorcery, where objective reality is changed via the inter-relation of objective meaning with subjective interpretation - this is why spells take the form of analogies, ritualised cants, geometeries etc: they are all manifestations of subjective experience that possess objective force.

The fate of an individual soul is fluid, beyond the objective truth that something in the outside will end up 'owning' it. The base fate appears to be damnation, but the gods/belief systems offer different methods and forms of absolution if you are PIOUS according to their desires. There is some method of feedback and evolution tied into the souls that are the conduit between Earwa and outside and these transactions are largely controlled by the outside entities through scripture, belief and the occasional manipulation of causality. The inchies' methods support this (they are trying to shut the gods down entirely), the history of prophets and scripture too.

Consider an Earwan child. Before it develops a sense of self, it has a soul (suggested by the no-god's achievement in causing still births via disrupting the cycle of souls). Once it develops an identity and a subjective frame of reference, its soul belongs to whichever aspect the parents/caregivers have indoctrinated it to (some form of baptism type thing?). Then it is discovered to be a sorcerer. Now its soul belongs to whichever outside agency that is concerned with the portfolio of sorcerous damnation. Say that subsequently this child learns the Daimos... now his soul is bound to the Ciphrang that he has forged a contract with. Then the 2nd apocolypse happens and the inchies win... where is the soul bound now? - nomnomnogod.

Age is clearly shown to provide weight and power in the Great Names, supporting the idea that accretion of power is one of the objective truths in Earwa. The collorary is that it also causes inflexiblity and that this 'accretion' slows expontentionally. The most objective of belief systems is scripture, handed down over countless generations without subjective reinterpretation. And yet, eventually, its seems that occasionally scripture must be re-interpretted and re-written (Inri Sejenus, Fane etc...) perhaps simply to preserve some dynamism to stimulate some variety or flavour within the status quo.

"The past possesed weight. Where the young were like flotsam, forever drawn into the current of passing events, the old were like stone. ...more than anything it was boredom that rendered the aged immune to the press of events."

Normally, this would result in a mostly stagnant society with a lot of sound and fury but no real change as the various belief systems vie for supremacy. (Note the ditinct lack of any advancements since the tutelage in the 3 seas).

Kellhus represents something new. After the circumfix he has been co-opted by a belief in the outside. I suspect that this is TTT, that it now possesses him as its prophet.

Sorry again - a few other things I wanted to touch on, but no time, and no time to proof this - hope it makes some kind of sense.

ETA re: the inchies, might be interesting to throw in that Aurang says they were born for damnation's sake and he is a son of the void men call heaven. And the nonmen had a scriptual damnation against sorcery (at least certain forms of it) mentioned in the Mangecea entry of TTT glossary - so yeh, damnation amongst nonmen predates the inchies.

[Galactus]

RE: Belief shapes reality.

Planescape did it better.

[unJon]

Lots of wrongness here. Let me help enlighten.

On the "What Has Come Before," I always figured that it serves as... a very uncritical history of Earwa from "consensual humanities" point of view. I take it all very, very lightly, and base pretty much none of my speculations on it. To each their own.

This can't be right, because the same What Has Come Before section says Kel cracked and is crazy pants. That is certainly not "consensual humanities" point of view.

I'm not so sure that they came intentionally. The descriptions of the arrival of the Incu-Holoinas in the glossary of TTT make it sound pretty clear that it was a crash-landing, and that most of the Inchoroi died in the process. I suppose they could have been aiming for a controlled landing (particularly since space is huge and its unlikely that they'd just wander by a habitable planet), although I have no idea how you'd land a gigantic hundreds of meters long starship.

The Void is a big place. Comparatively a planet is an itsy bitsy teeny weeny place. The chances of hitting a planet without intentionally aiming at it are asymptotic to zero. A crash landing is indicative of landing badly, not accidentally running into a planet you didn't realize was directly in your path.

I feel like we were sketching the foundations of the question, GB, earlier in this thread. I guess, if I thought about it, I'd say they probably figured out they were damned when Shauriatas and the Mengaecca discovered the Ark. Perhaps Mekeritrig knows about damnation, he's allegedly who told the Mengaecca about the Ark during the tutelage. I'm not even sure the Nonmen believe in damnation though - By the evidence so far, I'm inclined to say that only the human perspective could have formed the argument for the Consult's formation. You know, Shauriatas turns up: Hey, you creatures here don't know anything about curing damnation, do you? Inchoroi are all, damnation? Shauriatas gives them an up and down: Oh, yeah, you guys are fucking damned. You need to hear this. Let's all solve this together, a human, a Nonman, and two crazy space rape monsters.

This is backwards. The Inchies teach the Mengaecca about how to close the world from damnation. The inchies were trying it long, long prior to meeting Shariatas. That's how all the non-men women got killed off.

[Madness]

I really want to reply to Curethan's post or add to it as the case may be.

As it is, I just wanted to say good point to Rhamadanth and retort to unJon.

I really need to work on my communication. If you took all of Earwan understandings of the "world" - or say, the perspectives we've had as characters - then the "What Has Come Before" would read something like that consensus. I don't think Kellhus is mad, and that is chiefly what stopped me from including those passages in my speculations. Kellhus, in my opinion, is either Dunyain through and through, or as I once wished, a man who was Dunyain and now just uses those powers to save the world lol.

Likely, Bakker will surprise us all there.

Seriously though, I can't imagine that Bakker would use those passages in those ways. He's just using writing mechanisms, like the "What Has Come Before" type introduction to pay homage to authors he's enjoyed, and some of us have enjoyed, and because they're interesting and effective mechanisms in and of themselves. Think about all the authors who have quotes at the start of chapters, maps, history, "What Has Come Before," or some more overt ones like the Tolkien and Herbert. I certainly plan to imitate the many authors who've influence me if I ever try and write something.

If anything, the "What Has Come Before" is probably just there to fuck with us, like much else, as Bakker is.

EDIT: I forgot about your second point.

Aurang and Aurax from what I remember are found by Shauriatas and the Mengaecca hiding out in the most obscure places of the Ark because they're still terrified of slaughter at the hands of Nonmen. I'm almost positive that Shauriatas helped Aurax recover the pieces of the Tekne that they lost because neither of the Brothers Inchoroi were necessarily specialists. I don't even think its certain that Cet'ingira (Mekeritrig's natural name or a human given one if I remember right) was in cahoots with the Inchoroi before the Mengaecca broke the Nonmen glamour. Cet'ingira might have just been seeking a more "alternative" solution to the species issues than his brothers in Ishterebinth and told the Mengaecca whispers of the Ark because he couldn't do it himself.

I'm really inclined to think that the Inchoroi created damnation, at least the Tusk's version of it, without realizing the true dimensions of Earwa's metaphysics - remember, you could just debunk me, in my mind, by debating the whole Earwa & Belief thing. They probably didn't even understand what they'd done until they "saw" it through a human/Nonmen perspective. Maybe, the Nonmen understood the metaphysics and lived in a very beautiful metaphysically described reality - obviously the semantics aside, we or them, live in a very defined existence, despite the metaphysical possibilities. If it's less a possibility in Earwa and more an actuality then who knows. But the Nonmen could have known and then when the Inchoroi came and used human minds unknowingly - essentially gave the tribes organized, old testament style belief and united them - plus warred extensively to try and kill the Nonmen. The Cuno-Inchoroi conflict could easily have been species survivalism at work with grand metaphysical implications.

[Shryke]

This can't be right, because the same What Has Come Before section says Kel cracked and is crazy pants. That is certainly not "consensual humanities" point of view.

As I said when TJE first came out and this came up:

I think it's pretty obvious that the "What Has Come Before" section is meant to be what we, the readers, were supposed to have thought happened in the first series. That is, after all, the point of those type of sections in books.

This is backwards. The Inchies teach the Mengaecca about how to close the world from damnation. The inchies were trying it long, long prior to meeting Shariatas. That's how all the non-men women got killed off.

Where does it say this? We have no concrete details on the Inchoroi's motivations for the Womb-Plague. Not beyond just wiping out a hated enemy anyway.

Shaeonanra, leader of the Mengaecca when they formed the Consult, does seem to have proclaimed his finding a solution to the damnation of sorcerors around when they were excavating the Ark, but that doesn't mean he learned it from the Inchoroi. The appendix indicates he was obsessed with avoiding damnation long before that and that it was he who figured out how to make himself (and presumably the rest of the Mengaecca/Consult) immortal.

[Nerdanel]

It's one thing to be vague or misleading in the What Has Gone Before and another to lie outright. Since the section is written in omniscient POV it must be accurate. (If it isn't, Bakker is an awful writer since adding weasel words like "some people thought" isn't hard at all.) And since Bakker himself wrote those sections and Bakker is human, there is a chance that he accidentally slipped in something that wasn't outright confirmed in the text.

It looks like that has happened. The following things can thus be considered fact:

- Kellhus did crack.

- The Inchoroi knew of damnation and a way to avoid it before they came to Eärwa.

The implications are interesting indeed. Kellhus may be insane, but the form and depth of his insanity are uncertain. (My theory is that Kellhus is gradually becoming an Erratic like the Nonmen. As of TJE him forgetting things hasn't yet progressed to things that would be obvious to the people around him, but he appears to have become more impulsive, or, shall we say, erratic. It's also interesting that Kellhus's children are progressively more damaged goods according to their birth order.)

Shaeönanra might well have figured out how to avoid damnation independently, as he is supposed to have been a smart fellow.

[Shryke]

No, it does not have to be accurate. It merely has to state what someone reading the previous books is supposed to know.

It's like if the Two Towers contained a "What Has Come Before" section. It would most certainly state "Gandalf died in Moria and is gone" but that would not be completely accurate, would it?

[Nerdanel]

No, it does not have to be accurate. It merely has to state what someone reading the previous books is supposed to know.

It's like if the Two Towers contained a "What Has Come Before" section. It would most certainly state "Gandalf died in Moria and is gone" but that would not be completely accurate, would it?

It would not state that because that would be a lie. It would instead state something like "Gandalf fell into abyss and was lost" which gives the same impression of Gandalf being gone without introducing falsehoods.

By the way, those What Has Come Before appear to have been directly inspired by Donaldson's What Has Come Before sections. I don't read those either, but I think I would have learned on the forums if they contained lies. It is important to remember that being truthful doesn't equate to revealing everything, and Donaldson can keep a secret over several books. On the subject of Donaldson, Lord Foul, the main villain of the Thomas Covenant books, has the quirk of never telling an outright lie, but he is skilled in deceit nevertheless. That kind of thing, which can also be employed by tricky authors like Bakker, functions by letting the target's unstated assumptions to do the work. For example, the reader might "know" that no one could survive the fall from the bridge in Moria or the reader might "know" that Kellhus is always right in what he tells to people about themselves.

[unJon]

Where does it say this? We have no concrete details on the Inchoroi's motivations for the Womb-Plague. Not beyond just wiping out a hated enemy anyway.

Shaeonanra, leader of the Mengaecca when they formed the Consult, does seem to have proclaimed his finding a solution to the damnation of sorcerors around when they were excavating the Ark, but that doesn't mean he learned it from the Inchoroi. The appendix indicates he was obsessed with avoiding damnation long before that and that it was he who figured out how to make himself (and presumably the rest of the Mengaecca/Consult) immortal.

What "hated enemy"? The Non-men raised up the Inchoroi as a respected people, as great healers. The Inchie's then tried to wipe them out. It's a simple deduction to figure out why they wanted to wipe them out when we know that (i) Inchies are in fact damned and (ii) killing enough of the world population gets you undamned. What we know of Shae is that he tried to avoid damnation for a long time, but didn't figure out the answer until he had gone to see the Inchies. It was after he met the Inchies that he came back proclaiming that he had found a way to beat damnation. This really does not take a rocket surgeon to figure out what the overwhelmingly most probable deduction: The inchies knew about closing the world and told Shae. Not the other way around. My solution fits the facts, yours explains nothing.

Not to mention that you rely on the appendix, which you must think is "truth", but not on the What Has Come Before, which explicitly says that the Inchies knew about damnation thousands of years before Shae.

[Calibandar]

Guys ( specifically Shryke and Madness), on the "What has gone before" section in TJE, I think Nerdanel has the right of it. I think there is a surprise in it, which may lead some of us to think it should not be taken seriously. I too was surprised to read that in it, Bakker suddenly says that Kellhus had seen beyond the Thousandfold Thought of his father, but in doing so, had gone mad. A bold statement.

This does not mean however that somehow this piece, not written by some editor, but by Bakker himself, has any less validity than anything he says in the narrative proper. It is Bakker's own , brief summary of the history of Earwa. I do not believe it contains outright falsehoods. Certainly everything else in that summary seems to match what we have seen in the first trilogy, so there is no reason to think we are being duped IMO. It is Bakker bringing readers up to speed after the three years since he published TTT in 2006, and now starts a new trilogy. It was to me the best sign that of Kellhus' ambiguity sofar.

The statement that The Inchoroi came to the seal the World against the Heavens is quite blunt, and clear. Now, it doesn't really fit with what we have theorized before. It may also not matter much if they know of eternal damnation before they came, or if they only realized it when they crash landed. I'm just raising the fact that it is plainly stated in this section that they came to Earwa with this objective. Maybe it is phrased oddly. Maybe it's an easter egg. Maybe this ties into what we will learn in WLW about The Black Heavens.

I think what it could tell us, if the Inchoroi came deliberately to the planet ( even though they crash landed), is that Earwa is some sort of centre world, somehow very important to what happens outside of Earwa. Or, we can simply assume that the Inchoroi crash landed on a planet that they never wanted to be on, and Bakker's own statement in TJE that they came with the purpose to seal the World against the Heavens is nonsense. However that doesn't seem very likely, does it?

In summary, we used to think that the Inchoroi crash landed here and then realized they would be damned on this world, and then came up with their grand plan of annihilation. This little comment in TJE leads me to think that they may have come here with that plan in the first place. Now, what that difference could mean, or if that matters at all, I do not know.

Madness:

I guess, if I thought about it, I'd say they ( The Inchoroi) probably figured out they were damned when Shauriatas and the Mengaecca discovered the Ark

This is backwards, as has been stated by Unjon. It states specifically in The Judging Eye that the Mangaecca learned "at the hoary knees" of Aurax and Aurang that damnation for sorcerers could be avoided, by shutting out The Judgement of Heaven. It then says that they joined forces with the two last Inchoroi, made a Consult, and bent their skills "to the aborted designs of the Inchoroi" relearning the Tekne and ultimately raise the No-God.

Guardsman Bass

It'd ultimately help to know more about the Inchoroi's back-story. Like when they realized they were damned in Earwa

Well I think we have the answer to that. Either they knew it when they came here, or they found out as soon as they has crashed on Earwa. Certainly not later than that.

[Shryke]

What "hated enemy"? The Non-men raised up the Inchoroi as a respected people, as great healers. The Inchie's then tried to wipe them out. It's a simple deduction to figure out why they wanted to wipe them out when we know that (i) Inchies are in fact damned and (ii) killing enough of the world population gets you undamned. What we know of Shae is that he tried to avoid damnation for a long time, but didn't figure out the answer until he had gone to see the Inchies. It was after he met the Inchies that he came back proclaiming that he had found a way to beat damnation. This really does not take a rocket surgeon to figure out what the overwhelmingly most probable deduction: The inchies knew about closing the world and told Shae. Not the other way around. My solution fits the facts, yours explains nothing.

Not to mention that you rely on the appendix, which you must think is "truth", but not on the What Has Come Before, which explicitly says that the Inchies knew about damnation thousands of years before Shae.

Wha? You need to reread the Cuno-Inchoroi wars man. The Non-men slaughtered the Inchoroi when they first met them. Then they had a huge war with them. Then the Inchoroi disappeared for like a generation THEN returned and offered themselves as healers. By this point, most of the remnant of them were dead.

So yeah, they very much had a reason to hate the Non-men.

[Shryke]

It would not state that because that would be a lie. It would instead state something like "Gandalf fell into abyss and was lost" which gives the same impression of Gandalf being gone without introducing falsehoods.

No, that's not true at all. A rehash of the previous part of the series does not have to state what's true, it has to state what the reader would know.

It would, in fact, HAVE to lie about stuff the reader thinks to be true because otherwise it's a spoiler for the rest of the series coming afterwords.

So yes, The Two Towers would tell you Gandalf is dead because that's what the reader would think at that point and telling him anything else would be spoiling the rest of the book.

[Calibandar]

Triskele

I'm a little exhausted at the moment, so this will be hardly coherent, but is there some suggestion that maybe the Fanim have the superior belief system somehow?

I've considered this as well. The reason is that there appears to be a One God in Earwa. But then since we have several theologies at work, we also see that there are most likely other Gods and Goddesses as well. It is interesting to consider if the Fanim are in fact correct, or if they are partially correct, namely that yes, there ia a One God, but no, there are actually other deities as well.

So in short, the Fanim are monotheistic, and believe in One God.

Inrithi faith is also about "the unity of of individual deities of the Cults as Aspects of God". They believe that The Hundred Gods are aspects of The God, whereas the Fanim think those are all false idols. At this point it is unclear ( of course ) who is correct. However, we seem to be learning that Psatma Nanafferi's Goddess is actually real, and that she has endowed The White Luck Warrior. Now, if the Fanim are saying that those sort of deities don't exist, they are plainly wrong. If they are saying that they are demons, or as it says in the appendix, that they think they are "renegade slaves of the One God", then they may be either right or wrong. We don't know that yet.

But in any case, both Inrithi belief and Fanim belief refer to a One God, or "The Million Souled" as the Inrithi prophet referrred to him.

We know that this was after he had been studying within the Ark, but we don't know for certain whether it was something the Inchies taught him, something he figured out on his own, or a collaboration.

Honestly this is not very relevant. We know that Shae learned it from the Inchoroi. How and when he proclaimed it strikes me as irrelevant.

[Helian]

No, that's not true at all. A rehash of the previous part of the series does not have to state what's true, it has to state what the reader would know.

It would, in fact, HAVE to lie about stuff the reader thinks to be true because otherwise it's a spoiler for the rest of the series coming afterwords.

So yes, The Two Towers would tell you Gandalf is dead because that's what the reader would think at that point and telling him anything else would be spoiling the rest of the book.

I agree, but that's the problem with stating outright "Kellhus is mad". This is certainly *not* something the reader would know - or even believe, as the heated discussion on this board shows. So why include it? It does seem a little odd of Bakker to proclaim Kellhus' madness at that point - even if it is indeed true, as I suspect. I am very curious to find out, though...

[Calibandar]

Shryke

No, that's not true at all. A rehash of the previous part of the series does not have to state what's true, it has to state what the reader would know.

Well, even if that is true, the reader does not "know" after reading TTT that Anasurimbor Kellhus "has gone mad". And yet that is exactly what Bakker writes in the "What came before" section.

So already in this summary section, Bakker is stating things that the reader who has finished the first trilogy absolutely does not know, invalidating your point that it is just a summary of what we already know.

I think the realistic thing to do here is just accept that Bakker may have spilled a few beans here, rather than trying to reduce the validity of what he wrote in this section.

Edit: I see Helian has just posted the exact same thing.

[Shryke]

I agree, but that's the problem with stating outright "Kellhus is mad". This is certainly *not* something the reader would know - or even believe, as the heated discussion on this board shows.

It is something the reader would know though. Or, at least, it's a theory the reader could believe. The rehash section only confirms that this is what the reader is assumed to believe. Which isn't far off the mark considering he's having delusions of seeing halos around his own hands.

The problem is you are all making the assumption that it's a statement of what is rather then what the reader is supposed to believe.

Just like the reader is supposed to believe Gandalf died in Moria. Now some people, after only reading Fellowship, might easily assume Gandalf survived the fall in Moria. Shit, he's a wizard, why not? But the interpretation anyone writing/publishing the book will make is that the reader thinks he's dead.

The only real slip here is that it shows how the author assumes we will interpret the scenes at the end of TTT.

So already in this summary section, Bakker is stating things that the reader who has finished the first trilogy absolutely does not know, invalidating your point that it is just a summary of what we already know.

'

No, he is not. The assumption that Kellhus is crazy is stated flat out in the book and frankly, is quite believable. Whether you believe it or not, it is most certainly an interpretation that is very clear in the book.