Pineapple Posted January 3, 2012 Share Posted January 3, 2012 What I don’t like about this thread is that in the process of rationalising our preferences, we are bound to disparage either one of two very, very good books.While I agree...there can only be one!(cue lightning) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balefont Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 I usually decide who I enjoy more by asking myself who would be the biggest douchebag to hang out with in real life. I prefer GRRM. Actually Bakker is genuinely cool. And very tall. And sort of dashing. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerraPrime Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Re: FrancisOne thing I like more about Bakker's series is that the world itself feels much more...fantastic, I guess? More exotic? Or imaginative? Earwa seems more like what an ACTUAL completely fantastical Earth would be like. This may just be because it has more of an Eastern influence than most fantasies, I'm not sure.It is true that Bakker broke with the European medieval setting and put his story in the Middle-Eastern setting. That was a breath of fresh air, indeed. I remember when only the first book was out, talking about it with some people about the series and hearing complaints that the names are too awkward and unpronounceable. Well, not to me, or really, to anyone who's known any Thai people. Just goes to show the comfort zone for many (most?) readers. Re: NerdanelI think Bakker's characters are better. This one is hard to put into words, but I think the heart of the matter is that I think Martin's view of human nature is excessively cynical.So you think Martin's work betrays a more cynical view of mankind than Bakker's? That's completely opposite of what I got from the two series. Bakker has actual white in there with the gray and the black.Really? Who are the "white" characters in the first trilogy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Lord of Winterfell Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 To me, the biggest stylistic difference is that Martin writes more dialogue, and Bakker writes more introspection. I vastly prefer the former to the latter, to the point where I gave up on Bakker after 5 books. Another non-setting based difference is that GRRM is much cleaner (and I think realistic) with his characters' motivations. Bakker is closer to writing a mystery as to what is really going on.Imagine Scott Bakker and Glen Cook trying to write something jointly.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 It is true that Bakker broke with the European medieval setting and put his story in the Middle-Eastern setting. That was a breath of fresh air, indeed. I remember when only the first book was out, talking about it with some people about the series and hearing complaints that the names are too awkward and unpronounceable. Well, not to me, or really, to anyone who's known any Thai people. Just goes to show the comfort zone for many (most?) readers.I love the other touches too. The sandals, drinking from bowls, the architecture, all that. There really isn't imo a feeling of bog-standard medieval-but-not-really europe that you get from alot of other stuff.I do think though Martin does a great job of making the overused castles-and-knights pseudo-european setting feel more real and less fairy-tale like and implausible. With the occasional nice touch of the fantastical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdanel Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Re: NerdanelSo you think Martin's work betrays a more cynical view of mankind than Bakker's? That's completely opposite of what I got from the two series.I suppose the heart of the matter is that Martin's world is just grindingly medieval with all the assorted miseries while Bakker's world is capable both of higher peaks and lower lows. If things go wrong Bakker's world may end up a Hell on Earth but if things go right great things are possible. Maybe that makes me a person who sees a glass half full...I think it's similar to how I see Donaldson's Thomas Covenant books as ultimately optimistic even though the books are full of despair and bad things happening to good people.Really? Who are the "white" characters in the first trilogy?Inrau. Achamian. Proyas. Xinemus. I'm not saying they don't have flaws, but I think all of them are always trying to do the right thing.The characters I consider decidedly evil include Kellhus, Cnaiür, Conphas (the mini-Kellhus), and Xerius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Inrau. Achamian. Proyas. Xinemus. I'm not saying they don't have flaws, but I think all of them are always trying to do the right thing.Uh, what? Good intentions are all that is needed to be a good character? I can't believe you would consider Achamian to be white (whatever that means). A man who is strongly implied to be a pedophile? A man who tried to manipulate one of his students into spying for him, even when he knew it would probably result in Inrau's death? And that's just book one. Ned Stark is a flawed man, but he's far more morally defensible than Achamian. It's not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurble Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 There's no strong implication that Achamian is a pedophile, just a few lines where he thinks how Esmenet looks like a young boy along with the Scarlet Spires accusing him of buggering Proyas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pineapple Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 The characters I consider decidedly evil include Kellhus, Cnaiür, Conphas (the mini-Kellhus), and Xerius.I consider Kellhus whiter than white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Bass Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Serwe seemed like a fundamentally good person, albeit emotionally traumatized (think of Sansa, only what happened to Serwe was much worse than what happened to Sansa). Xinemus was a good, loyal friend and companion to both Achamian and Proyas.I'm not sure how you could call Kellhus a "white" character in terms of morality, considering what he's done to get to where he is. "Necessary evil" pretty much defines him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Nerevar Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 There's no strong implication that Achamian is a pedophile, just a few lines where he thinks how Esmenet looks like a young boy along with the Scarlet Spires accusing him of buggering Proyas.There's quite a bit about how he loved Inrau, too. I'm not sure whether its a "strong implication" of pedophilia or just a platonic, teacher-student love, but it's there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 There's no strong implication that Achamian is a pedophile, just a few lines where he thinks how Esmenet looks like a young boy along with the Scarlet Spires accusing him of buggering Proyas.There's a bit more than that. The awkwardness of his relationship with Proyas and the weird power reversal they both seem to be constantly struggling with seems quite overblown just for a normal student-teacher relationship. In addition, there's the line when he is dueling one of the Scarlet Schoolmen that he "tore through his wards like a knife through a cotton shift" (not an exact quote). That strongly implies a rapist to me, and since he doesn't show much sexual violence towards women, there's enough to start connecting the dots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spring Bass Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 I think you're reading too much subtext into that wording. It sounds more like the Three Seas' equivalent of "cutting through X like a knife through butter".There's quite a bit about how he loved Inrau, too. I'm not sure whether its a "strong implication" of pedophilia or just a platonic, teacher-student love, but it's there.It could be a parently type of love. Achamian has no children of his own, and he seems to enjoy teaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurble Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 That strongly implies a rapist to me, and since he doesn't show much sexual violence towards women, there's enough to start connecting the dots.Why would he have to be a rapist? If he's just a pedophile, we meet tons of young boy prostitutes he could purchase. Like, in his first chapter, he pays a young boy prostitute to run messages for him, and he never once indicates any sexual attraction towards him. Moreover, he shudders to think how the boy spends his evenings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pineapple Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Serwe seemed like a fundamentally good person, albeit emotionally traumatized (think of Sansa, only what happened to Serwe was much worse than what happened to Sansa). Xinemus was a good, loyal friend and companion to both Achamian and Proyas.I'm not sure how you could call Kellhus a "white" character in terms of morality, considering what he's done to get to where he is. "Necessary evil" pretty much defines him.Sure, but is he evil if he changes the very essence of morality to his liking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerdanel Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Uh, what? Good intentions are all that is needed to be a good character? I can't believe you would consider Achamian to be white (whatever that means). A man who is strongly implied to be a pedophile? A man who tried to manipulate one of his students into spying for him, even when he knew it would probably result in Inrau's death? And that's just book one.Not huge spoilers but spoilering anyway:Pedophile != inherently evil. You may have noticed a distinct lack of child-raping by Achamian going on. He's too good a person to do that. Instead he goes to grown-up prostitutes like Esmenet with her "boyish thighs" and hurts no one.The case of Inrau was an issue of greater good vs. putting an individual in danger. Achamian was very reluctant to do it but was swayed by his superiors. There is no obvious right answer in that kind of situation.I think the very essence of being a morally good character is trying to do the right thing i.e. putting good intentions to action. Achamian had devoted his entire life for such a purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurble Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Sure, but is he evil if he changes the very essence of morality to his liking?Wait by the standards of Earwa or reality?Because good and evil don't exist in reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pineapple Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 Wait by the standards of Earwa or reality?Because good and evil don't exist in reality.I'm going by Earwan standards, you're right about reality (As far as we can tell, IMO) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurble Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 I'm going by Earwan standards, you're right about reality (As far as we can tell, IMO)They need to toss a sinner and a priest into the LHC and see whether they emit sin-bosons or good-deedtons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sci-2 Posted January 4, 2012 Share Posted January 4, 2012 It could be a parently type of love. Achamian has no children of his own, and he seems to enjoy teaching.I think he even refers to the two students (Proyas and Inaru) as his children. We know he is bisexual, as complex as such designations can get.ETA: But he never seems sexually interested in any child, beyond his "love" of Inaru but this is never, IIRC, put in a sexual context.I think a lot of this also depends on what you are trying to compare. Bakker does a much, much better job (so far) of giving us the stakes and the motivations of the BBEG. Martin gives us better dialogue and range. Bakker gives us better prose in terms of being poetic.And so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.