New R. Scott Bakker interview

[Happy Ent]

Nice, meaty interview. Thanks for posting this! Bakker’s level of self-reflection is almost obscene.

[Dr Spoon]

I've not read his books. Does he write his novels in the same sort of prose as he writes his answers?

[Galactus]

I've not read his books. Does he write his novels in the same sort of prose as he writes his answers?

His prose in the books is much better.

[Renasko]

Agreed. You should at the very least borrow 'The Darkness that Comes Before', his first novel, from the library. It's well worth it, IMO.

As for the interview, I thought it was one of his better ones. The man does love to ramble on about himself, though. :laugh:

[Sci-2]

Thanks Pat!

Yeah, Bakker needs to relax and then some. A little too much self-pity, seeing the number of people trying to publish fantasy novels in the world and he is one of the few to have made it.

That said, I do agree with some of his points - people looking down on fantasy, people thinking he's a misogynist without reason.

A couple points were interesting:

I wallow in this or that perspective for the sake of exploring this or that nuance of character–nuances, which, frankly, strike all but the most careful readers as bald repetition.

I wish he'd give an example of this. There are a lot of statements I think would be served by an example from the texts.

If the literary world were even remotely ‘self-critical,’ then you would think they would be discussing critiques such as these, rather than lace the blinders like the ‘cretinized masses’ they lampoon.

Some of the smartest professors I've ever met are down-to-earth people who enjoy basketball games, Dr. Who, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. I don't think the divide between the masses and academia is always that deep. I think some examples again would fit, I am not even sure what he means about the literary world being self-critical.

The sad fact is that the humanities evolved in near absolute ignorance of the pedagogical and social problems they pretend to address.

??????

The stupendous amount of research doesn’t matter. The automatic, instant assumption is that I must–at some level–consider myself the magical exception. Nothing makes people more defensive than impugning their intelligence.

Actually manner of delivery goes a long way in getting people to connect with what you are saying.

That said, Bakker has thought about this more than others, and the way he articulated his ideas in his first trilogy was pretty incredible. TDTCB is insanely good for that reason, an awesome mind-screw with Cnauir and Kellhus traveling together.

But nothing argues cowardice quite so fiercely as parenthood.

Again, there doesn't seem to be this dichotomy between martyrdom and cowardice that he's presenting. A LOT of people have similar ideas and similar stances with regards to free-will, how we make choices, and so on. They seem to get along just fine in their careers and even reach the masses from time to time.

If you think Literature resides in the shape of the stones (the resemblance of your work to past forms), then it makes no difference if you throw them with your eyes opened or closed. If you think literature resides in the ripples (what you work does to actual readers), then you have to keep your eyes peeled, and prepare to be humbled time and again.

Great stuff!

One of the recurring themes in the series has to do with the contextual vagaries of strength. I have always thought of Esmenet as being extraordinarily strong, given her oppressive circumstances. But her strength is a different strength than that of Mimara, whose strength is entirely different than that of Serwa.

The problem is that so many people think strength consists of agency and nothing more–that strength is simple.

I'm glad he said this - I found little sexism in the first series, and I don't even think he was trying to be sexist in WLW. I think, rather, that his desire to speak on particular topics and ideas regarding sexism resulted in railroading the plot.

[kcf]

nice interview. I'm slowly slogging my way through TWLW now. Mostly I'm enjoying it, but I wish it was as accessible as TJE.

[Relic]

but I wish it was as accessible as TJE.

ive heard that said before and i have no clue what it means. explain please?

[Gaston de Foix]

Hmm, few weeks for the questions I really want, but

Eanna is the Land of the Rising Sun.

Earwa is the Land of the Setting Sun.

Right?

So I have no idea what that comment could mean. But I'm sure there's an answer in there somewhere.

Skafra, what is Eanna? I read it about in the books obviously, but is there an explanation in-text? I thought Earwa was the whole of the world. Is Eanna a different world?

Loved the interview. I'm adding "The Unholy Consult" to my "most eagerly anticipated book"-list. A Dance with Dragons has a brother in Zeum!

[kcf]

ive heard that said before and i have no clue what it means. explain please?

I found the writing style in TJE to be much more accessible (I suppose 'easier to read' could be used, but that feels very incomplete and unfair) than the Prince of Nothing trilogy. I'm about half-way into TWLW and the writing style seems to be much closer to the trilogy than TJE.

[jdiddyesquire]

I wish Pat would have asked why Bakker's publisher hasn't put TJE and TWLW in eBook format.

[Jon AS]

Skafra, what is Eanna? I read it about in the books obviously, but is there an explanation in-text? I thought Earwa was the whole of the world. Is Eanna a different world?

Eärwa is the part of the continent west of the Great Kayarsus, Eänna refers to the lands to the east. It's actually marked on the maps.;)

[Galactus]

What confuses me is that there seems to be a subtle distinction between what is "the humanities" in english and in swedish.

[Gaston de Foix]

sorry double post

[Jon AS]

What confuses me is that there seems to be a subtle distinction between what is "the humanities" in english and in swedish.

Is the Swedish version focused just on sciences (like the German "Geisteswissenschaften"), as opposed to the English one that also includes art?

[Tears of Lys]

No, he spends a lot of time reflecting on the flaws of OTHERS. That's a different matter entirely :P

I'm afraid I can't agree with you. He spends a lot of time reflecting on the flaws of HUMANITY, of which he is a part.

The longest answer was in response to the misogyny he's often accused of, where he goes to some length to defend himself. Understandable, since it's clearly quite upsetting to him. I think a true misogynist wouldn't give a flying fuck.

As for "lightening up," I'm sure the people who know him personally think he's a good Joe, fun at parties, etc. But when you're being interviewed about topics that you feel strongly about, such as his frustration with the dichotomy between commercial success and being true to his vision and the sometimes virulent ways people respond to his writing, I wouldn't expect him to be all sweetness and light. :P

[lokisnow]

In america/canada, the humanities encompass only literature, "creative writing, and art. Philosophy can sometimes be included in 'the humanities', but is often too hard for humanities students at university, so it's usually segregated. History is often also included within the humanities. Art can also be a totally separate field from humanities, typically, art studies would be lumped into the humanities, but something like Ceramics may or may not be. Film studies would be a humanities program. The idea is that it's a degree whose only useful purpose is as a gateway to a more advanced degree that will allow one to teach, or is a degree that is only good as a supplement to an education certificate so one can teach "english" or 'communication arts'.

Typically humanities students never take any math or science courses in university unless their university requires one class of each during a four year term. These are generally classes like 'basic chemistry' or 'college algebra' that can usually be tested out of by many students and are typically covered in a college prep high school education curricula. Most humanities students avoid math and science electives like the plague.

To sum up, there really is no B.S. in humanities, you can pretty much only earn a B.A. ;)

Likewise, science, math programs etc have a similar scorn for all things humanities program, and the one or two humanities classes required for their degree are very basic stuff (usually you read Catcher in the Rye and talk about what a prat HC is) but very much loathed by the students that have to waste their classes on none degree related material. Some engineering programs have so many required courses that they wave many of the humanities requirements, because in an eight semester degree there's no room for more than two or three classes of electives.

[Spring Bass]

Eärwa is the part of the continent west of the Great Kayarsus, Eänna refers to the lands to the east. It's actually marked on the maps.;)

There's a brief reference to the "plains of Eanna" in the books somewhere. Amusingly enough, all of the events chronicled in the Tusk take place in Eanna (it ends with the Four Tribes deciding to invade Earwa), yet we've never heard mention of any of its stories.

I wonder if Bakker will tell us about any of them. Since he has said that he googles his name, I'll just say this: R. Scott Bakker R.Scott Bakker R. Scott Bakker.

[Finn]

In america/canada, the humanities encompass only literature, "creative writing, and art. Philosophy can sometimes be included in 'the humanities', but is often too hard for humanities students at university, so it's usually segregated. History is often also included within the humanities.

Ummm . . . what?

In my experience of North American universities, the Humanities encompass pretty much everything that isn't considered part of the hard sciences or the social sciences (or "business" claptrap, I suppose). So . . . philosophy, history, anthropology, classics, literature, art history, the history of music, religious studies, etc. Philosophy and History are very much part of the humanities. Some institutions include the fine arts (Theater, Dance, Music, Creative Writing, etc) as part of the humanities and some do not.

Philosophy is no more "difficult" in and of itself than any other college major. It all depends on the requirements of the program and the predilections of the student. I've never met anyone at any college who thought that philosophy was too hard for "humanities" students (which makes no sense anyway given that philosophy is one of the core disciplines of the humanities).

The idea is that it's a degree whose only useful purpose is as a gateway to a more advanced degree that will allow one to teach, or is a degree that is only good as a supplement to an education certificate so one can teach "english" or 'communication arts'.

I think the idea is that a university education shouldn't simply be dictated by what is useful. Most university disciplines - including those in the hard and social sciences - don't have the kind of direct utility you seem to be talking about. Things like accounting and engineering do, which is why those things are more or less glorified trade schools (IMHO). :smoking:

Sorry for the thread derail. I thought this needed some clarification.

[kcf]

Things like accounting and engineering do, which is why those things are more or less glorified trade schools (IMHO).

this is one of the most ignorant things I've ever read on this board.

[jdiddyesquire]

I think the idea is that a university education shouldn't simply be dictated by what is useful. Most university disciplines - including those in the hard and social sciences - don't have the kind of direct utility you seem to be talking about. Things like accounting and engineering do, which is why those things are more or less glorified trade schools (IMHO). :smoking:

Sorry for the thread derail. I thought this needed some clarification.

Don't feed the hipsters.