Judging Eye IX (spoilers)

[Happy Ent]

I’ve not been able to add to the (interesting) speculation upthread, but let me add two things:

1) Ad Kellhus’s postulated inability to see Mek’s Mark:

Here’s Kellhus when he looks at Skeös:

Kellhus blinked, and his senses leapt back into their proper proportion. How was this possible? Sorcery? If so, it possessed nothing of the strange torsion he’d experienced with the Nonman he’d battled so long ago. Sorcery, Kellhus had realized, was inexplicably grotesque—like the scribblings of a child across a work of art—though he did not know why. All he knew was that he could distinguish sorcery from the world and sorcerers from common men. This was among the many mysteries that had motivated his study of Drusas Achamian.

The “strange torsion” is of course the Mark. So, Kellhus did perceive it when he first saw it, and Bakker does indeed tell us (however implicitly) that Kellhus is of the Few in Darkness already. As to why this detail is not mentioned during the scene itself? I don’t know. I’m tempted to chalk it up to Bakker’s evolving understanding of the nature of sorcery when he wrote the book. On the other hand, it would have been very easy for him to go back to the relevant paragraph in the same manuscript and add a half-sentence about a “strange torsion”.

2) Ad postulated sudden appearance of Outside agencies in Eye

I remain puzzled about the perceived agency of “Yatwer” in Eye. I can see no difference between how gods are described and act in the books. It’s not as if Yatwer appeared in physical form, like Ulmo, and shoot fireballs or clean the dishes real fast. All we see is that some followers of Yatwer can Do Stuff. Why is that so much of a big deal? This is what we should expect from the religious and metaphysical frameworks that have been laid out before. The agency that is Yatwer (which, for most intents and purposes, is indistinguishable from the collection of souls that believe in her) is now threatened (by the slave reforms of the New Empire), so she reacts. You can identify (a) the collective Yatwerian movement, (B) Nanny, or © a gestalt agency in the Outside with the subject of this action, but in my understanding of Bakkerworld these things are largely the same. Eye in no way convinces me that there is an Outside agency that has opinions or powers that are independent from its followers.

But, yes: The Gods exist. The God exists. Demons exist. The Outside exists. We knew this already.

Some agencies from the Outside interfere with the world. Onkis did with Inrau. The God did with Kellhus several times (resurrection, pulling out of hearts, revelation, incredible coincidences (*), talking to Kellhus in direct speech). You can add the No-God’s contact with Kellhus if you want, though I’m not sure what He means.

(*) Kellhus meets Mek. Kellhus is found by Leweth at the point of death. Kellhus just happens to be ambushed by Sranc and almost killed on the grave of the man that his father killed.

[Happy Ent]

(moved to Judging Eye X)

[lokisnow]

Is Kellhus the beggar who blows up the Herder’s Gate, dressed as a beggar? Otherwise other schoolmen must have learned to teleport, of which we have no other indication. (Also, Kellhus’s original spell in Thought is too difficult for a world-born sorcerer to pull off, requiring two inutterals.)

world-born male sorcerers can't think of two things at once. There are now female sorcerers trained with the gnosis and possibly trained to Kellhus designed curricula. We can't rule out that female sorcerers can think of two things at once.

but it's probably just a kamikaze bomber rather than Kell.

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

The debunking of my theory about the Third Sight being the Judging Eye also confirms my other theory about all the Cishaurim being able to detect skin-spies with ease. I remember suggesting that they could perhaps see souls...

While I agree that the idea of the Third Sight seeing souls seems to support this claim, for it to be true we have to make the supposition that the Consult only put skin-spies in Kian 10-15 years prior to the events of TDTCB, because the Cishaurim only attacked the Spires ten years prior, and the Consult is unhappy about their spies going dark at around that same time.

A thought: perhaps the Cishaurim could tell that the skin-spies were different but didn't understand that they were a threat (perhaps thinking them damned people or people whose souls were just very very dim) until Moe came along and figured it out.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

Aurang uses analogies/anagogic against Inrau, Lights like a thousand hooks. The weight of an ocean crushed him with an embalming fist.

Not sure if "light's like a thousand hooks" would neccesarily imply Anagogic sorcery. It could just be his interpretation of a fractal pattern. I recall that Mek's use of the Agonies on Seswatha involved some sort of fractal light. Maybe Nonmen/Inchoroi are capable of more advanced math than humans?

[lokisnow]

um, it uses "like" that's a pretty clear simile. The ocean bit is a clear metaphor. Gnostic sorcery comes with descriptions of calculus. Inrau would know the difference.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

The human brain interprets phenomon as analogies. That doesn't mean the phenomenon were actually analogies. and all descriptions of Gnostic sorcery involve descriptions of parabolas and lines, hardly calculus.

[Happy Ent]

Here’s Mek’s encounter with Kell.

A furious incandescence. Like a petal blown from a palm, Kellhus was thrown backward. He rolled through the snow and, stunned, struggled to his feet. He watched numbly as the Nonman was drawn upright as though by a wire.

Two uses of “like”. But Mek is a !man sorcerer, so he wields something like the Gnosis, instead of the anagogic spells Blown Petal and Pinocchio’s Hidden Strings.

[unJon]

HE, "blown like a petal" is describing Kel getting tossed in the air, not the sight of the Spell itself.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

I think it was the scene when Cleric talks shit to the statue of Cujara Cinmoi.

[lokisnow]

why is Happy Ent using !man?

I read the Tad Williams Otherland series, so I pronoune that in my head as *mouth makes clicking sound*-Man when I see it. :-p

or I guess it could me Man-factorial.

[unJon]

It's a standard way to say "not equals" !=

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

This reminds of a theory I had about the difference between Quyan and Gnostic Sorcery. Basically the Nonmen have more advanced math. So while the human sorcerers use intersecting lines and parabolas for their spells, Nonmen Ishroi will more likely use something like Schrodinger's Collapsible Wave Form or Partial Differential Equation of Doom.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

Are you suggesting that Quyans are like MIT grads and anagogic sorcery comes from ITT Tech?

:lol: I think I'd characterize the anagogic sorcerers as sociology majors and psukari as creative writing or art.

[Brennan]

First off I would like to say hello to everyone in this thread. I have lurked around these parts for a long time and have finally decided to make my first post. You guys discussions are not really new people friendly, but man they are very informative to follow. So here it goes...

@Triskele Nimeric was the final king of Aörsi and was is ruler during the first Apocalyse. I'm currently doing a reread of the TTT Glossary and ran across that bit of info. Funny enough, my reason for said reread is to better follow the discussions in this thread.

[Curethan]

Welcome Brennan,

and thx for the reread summation HE.

Fair assumption, Bakker usually describes anagogic spells via the analogies that form them. Being blown by wind could also describe an quya abstraction but sounds crap in narrative.

[Madness]

I thought I'd pop in and post something, scramble to continue with the discussion.

So in no specific order:

I had an interesting idea when rereading these last posts about the Third Sight and the Judging Eye. I think, Nerdanel, that we might have been victim of profiling and deceiving logic concerning our debate so far.

Rhamadanth provided some insightful quotes from Bakker's old Q&A and I remembered Achamian's musing in TJE that the Judging Eye was the name given Mimira's ability, I believe, from old Mandate theses.

So, perhaps, everything here remains simple, in a biased and diverse historical philosophy kind of way. The Psukhe, and the Cishaurim, are so incompletely understood by all the character perspectives we're privy to in the PON. Maybe something as commonplace to the Cishaurim as the Third Sight might only be known to the Mandate as the Judging Eye - the different in naming conventions even highlights that fact that the Mandate are secular and the Cishaurim are not. This quote is enlightening framed by this argument:

TTT, p.345 (Mind you this is the larger version)

"Seokti and the others respect you," Kellhus continued. "Indeed, as Mallahet you have a reputation that reaches across Kian and beyond. And you shine in the Third Sight. But secretly, they all think you cursed by the Solitary God. Why else would the Water elude you?"

Now I always read this as Moenghus' ownership of an ability. In light of Rhamadanth's Bakker quotations, I'm inclined to read it as Moenghus' status when viewed through a certain perspective, or lens. If everything follows along, due to the nature of the Psukhe metaphysics, Moenghus is unable to see souls but he, Kellhus, and the Dunyain shine with God's proportions, Skin-Spies, despite having no souls, look the equivalent to the Judging Eye as some level of damnation, and the Cishaurim have the Judging Eye, in Kian the Third Sight.

I'm nearly convinced. Raises some real interesting questions though. Lol, Nerdanel may not be so crazy as we thought?

Thanks to Ent for joining in with two awesome posts. I just wanted to comment on this:

The God did with Kellhus several times (resurrection, pulling out of hearts, revelation, incredible coincidences (*), talking to Kellhus in direct speech). You can add the No-God’s contact with Kellhus if you want, though I’m not sure what He means.

I'm not, personally, quite as convinced of Bakker's weaving of the Gods into the initial trilogy. I mean, I truly think it's the mark of a great author to tell a tale that, upon it's conclusion, we can go right back to the beginning and see the objectivity of that conclusion written into all the nooks and crannies of a story.

However, accepting that Gods exist, for this comment, are we actually to believe that Kellhus is an avatar of a God or the God? That something as obscene to "objective" morality as Dunyain psychologies might be favored by Entities of that Morality?

For the record, as I wrote, Ent, I really think the idea of Gods not expressly partaking or even existing was important. It was a novel thing for a Fantasy author to do and it sold the story of everyone's self-doubt and metaphysical insecurities because nothing, in our World or Earwa's, is as certain as we'd all like to believe in and of our lives.

I, also, thought Curethan's comment about Onkis' Tree and the Copper Tree of Siol were interesting, if not outright revealing. We know from Bakker's comments that Nonmen refer to Human Gods and Demons as Agencies. What could it mean if the Nonmen of Siol were Onkis' Earwan champions?

Finally, Cleric's identity. I really don't think we need to have heard of him before, despite Pat's comments. I mean what do we really know about all the Nonmen we're rooting for already? Pretty much nothing. I'm sure no matter what Bakker will convince us of Cleric's place within Earwan history and this tale.

Welcome, Ser Brennan. What Triskele said: join in and get lost with us Bakker nerds.

Just thought I'd add for Triskele's latest post:

Assuming that Cleric is a name that we've been given somewhere other than Incariol why is he calling himself that? Could an erratic have forgotten their very name?

There's an Incariol thread on Three Seas and I'm sure here but Bakker's linguistics are pretty sound. We can probably figure out the name's meaning, if anyone is interested. It might be a name Cleric has taken. Something to do with fighting for the Consult?

[Curethan]

Oh hey, I found the identity of cleric on the old 3 sea's site. Should I tell?

[Kalbear]

Yes, Curethan, you should tell - or at least link.

So if you do think that it's Nin, can you make your case as to why? What I posted a bit upthread is that I remember that being the most common vote, but I don't really recall how we came to this conclusion.

Many quotes from Cleric, but the biggest one was the whole conversation with the undead king - the 'damnation; no, I have never forgotten' and his anger and bitterness towards the other Nonmen when talking about them. Why would a nonman hate them so much? Why despise his brothers so?

[Madness]

I'm surprised by Bakker on this one, Curethan, especially considering Cleric's identity being a reveal in WLW. That's ridiculous. Not overly upset, just wondering how much else he out and out revealed back in the day.

Cleric's Identity: Click link and spoiler at your own peril.

Cleric is . . . Nin'Ciljiras, last surviving Nonman king. I wonder if he is, perhaps, related to Nin'janjin. The naming convention suggests so.

Apparenty, according to Mith - I think he is referring to a conversation between Aurang and a Skin-Spy in TWP - he's even been mentioned in the series before.