Bakker XIV: Star Trek into Darkness that Comes Before

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

I have a crackpot theory.

We all know what happens to Maithanet. But the description of him in his final passage is strange:

The broad-shouldered man who knelt in prayer before them, she had known less than half her life - if indeed she had known him at all. She knew him only enough to know he never prayed. Not truly.

Anasurimbor Maithanet, the Holy Shriah of the Thousand Temples. He turned the instant she came to a pause below, held her in his monolithic regard. He was dressed in full ceremonial splendor, with elaborate vestments hooding his shoulders, draping down in two long, gold-tassled tongues. He had allowed his beard to grow, so that the plaits fanned across his ritual chest plate. They seemed to have stained the white felt of his vestments where they touched, as if he had used a cheaper dye than normal to conceal the blonde that was his true color. His hair gleamed with oils, making him seem of apiece with the idols framing him.

Throughout the series, Bakker continually emphasizes Maithanet's habit of dressing plainly. In fact, as far as I can tell in all five books there are only two occasions where his attire is not plain (or at least plain by Shrial standards) - during the crowning of AK as Aspect-Emperor, and here. His beard is longer than Esmi remembers, though it's been only a few weeks since she's seen him. Finally, his beard dye is cheap and not well-concealed, utterly unlike the Maithanet we've seen elsewhere.

I think her calling out his facsimile of prayer could be a cue to the reader that this isn't Maithanet. The obvious arguments against are that he acts just as you'd expect, more or less, and his voice is described the same way. But Esmi has been severely out of it the whole time, hasn't eaten or drank anything for hours. She senses the wrongness but not well enough to connect that this man with different features isn't the Shriah.

I'll also say it doesn't make much difference to the plot. Esmi demands and receives the submission of the Shrial Knights and attaints Maithanet, so even were he alive he'd have some troubles. The significance would be twofold - a loyal(ish) Dunyain on the loose in Momemn and the fact that the WLW can be wrong.

[Arthmail]

This would no doubt be a great time to have searchable ebook - I think that may be the consensus the Almanac has reached, Trisk, but you must realize Arthmail and yourself distinguish a divided spectrum.

Clearly, Arthmail seems to have taken the narrative as asserting that "everything" falls under the domain of Kellhus' personal knowledge and forethought. I personally don't think the story leans that way - the White-Luck Warrior, the Gods (Yatwer, specifically), the World/Fate conspiring (there is the Greek denotation of Anagke giving rise to the Gods).

I know we've encountered pretty distinct line in these threads before concerning the contrivances of Kellhus' character. However, I have to wonder - as I think you are, Trisk - that though Kellhus' dominated the worldborn, possibly on his own as Dunyain without the aforementioned possible influences, he may have encountered these greater forces of Earwa (Nonmen, Consult, Gods, White-Luck, Fate) and is struggling...

EDIT: Btw, what a fantastic sig, Trisk.

He may be struggling, but some people struggle to take a good shit. Khellus's propensity for setting events in motion, which i clearly think happened with the Skin Eaters and Mimara, is just beyond the borders of...credibility? Interest - in that his near perfection is too much, and i have felt that since hardened soldiers started weeping at his feet during the first cycle of books. Again, he is pushing his agenda though the apparently awe inspiring ability to see impossible outcomes through some sort of pseudo-logic bullshit. Khellus of course knows that Akka has been having different dreams, and that merely be sending Mimara it will drive the old Wizard off into the wilds to seek the meaning of Khellus.

I like the books, but they jumped the tracks when Cnaiur disappeared. I think instead of going so grandiose and so large Bakker could have done so much more with a tighter story centered around what was essentially one of the most unique characters in fantasy. Instead he retreads familiar ground with endless piles of men getting crushed and beaten.

As a side note: i know of no author that seeks to degrade not only his characters, but everything in his world, more than Bakker. Every descriptive term, every moment, is a teachable moment in the perversity of men and the filthiness of the world. Bakker, in my opinion, has a fucked up world view. I know there is the debate of fiction and belief as it pertains to the author, but i think that in the sheer amount of negative descriptive terms used you can get a good idea of Bakker's true train of thought.

Anyways.

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

Having read Neuropath, I agree with your last point 100%.

[Happy Ent]

As a side note: i know of no author that seeks to degrade not only his characters, but everything in his world, more than Bakker.

Cormac McCarthy. He’s Bakker without the hope, the sensawunda, and the fist-pumping coolness. I’m sure I can think of others.

Kafka. Heinrich Mann.

[Sci-2]

Having read Neuropath, I agree with your last point 100%.

I thought we were pretending Neuropath was written by a ghost writer strung out on crank.

Regarding Kellhus's ability to predict the future, I think it's important to recognize the possibility that he doesn't know if Akka and Mimara will survive. What he might be doing is testing the possibility that Mimara is protected by Fate.

Note the Synthese in WLW talking about protecting false and true prophecies. Seems like the Consult is trying to do the same.

[Madness]

Lol - the endlessly quotable HE.

Neuropath is Bakker's through and through, dammit, Sci.

Honestly, I can empathize with Arthmail but I don't share the criticisms. I mean, Bakker is likely going to take my hope for humanity's survival in Earwa and shove it down my throat but I can bullet-point potshots in my head and seemingly counter those previously mentioned instances of Kellhusian/Authorial fiat.

All I can do is repeat:

- The Hunoreal Skin Eaters seem about Nil'giccas first - Achamian is a tertiary aspect of Kosoter's Zaudunyani mission.

- Kelmomas and Esmenet seem explicitly responsible for Mimara ending up with Achamian - despite our readerly assumptions about Kellhus' implicit involvement. I mean, the natural inversion of the first trilogy would be that Kellhus is responsible for absolutely none of the events in TAE.

- Fate, especially, and the agency of the Gods seems inseparable from the natural course of events as they happen.

We all know what happens to Maithanet.

You might be picking up on some authorial cues there, Wrath. I can't support another body-swapping Nerdanel (a la Moenghus the Elder) but I'm completely unnerved by the idea that Maithanet sits there in the probability trance (his praying, unless the Moenghus, Kellhus and Maithanet have uncovered some way to move the Gods with the prayers of the ensoulled) and the White-Luck Warrior is simply waiting, measures away from the Shriah as he waits for Esmenet...

[Kalbear]

- Kelmomas and Esmenet seem explicitly responsible for Mimara ending up with Achamian - despite our readerly assumptions about Kellhus' implicit involvement. I mean, the natural inversion of the first trilogy would be that Kellhus is responsible for absolutely none of the events in TAE.

Whyever would you think that this story would be the inversion of the first? In the classic trilogy this would be the arc where the heroes suffer some kind of setback and we get some big reveals about what is really going on before hitting the full climax of the last arc; there need not be an inversion. And so far there's nothing indicating that, either. Akka clearly realizes he's been manipulated all along. He realizes Mimara was as well. We know through authorial fiat that the skin eaters were there for Akka. We know that the timing of Mimara showing up coincided perfectly with the Great Ordeal; without that there was no possibility of Akka going anywhere. e

So far the series has at its core a person who can use their knowledge of the human animal combined with their knowledge of fundamental philosophy and logic to determine what is most likely to come up next and how to manipulate it to suit their ends. One explanation of all of the above is that it was just odd luck this all happened; another is that Kellhus really did plan it. Which of the two seems more likely? Given how intentional the world of Earwa is, where everything is happening now and nothing can be changed because it has already happened, what do you think is more likely? Do you think luck plays into it?

Or could you perhaps take the character's misogynistic words to heart and declare that luck is a whore?

[Madness]

Whyever would you think that this story would be the inversion of the first?

Because it seems many readers, like Arthmail above, sincerely believe that Kellhus is responsible for everything, based on his manipulations in the first trilogy. Bakker likes to toy with readerly assumptions; for instance, the Holy War is likely a war by the Damned for their Damnation, even though that's not the way the first trilogy reads.

Akka clearly realizes he's been manipulated all along. He realizes Mimara was as well. We know through authorial fiat that the skin eaters were there for Akka. We know that the timing of Mimara showing up coincided perfectly with the Great Ordeal; without that there was no possibility of Akka going anywhere.

Achamian might be wrong. He doesn't know about Kelmomas. We assume that the Traveler is from the Ministrate.

So far the series has at its core a person who can use their knowledge of the human animal combined with their knowledge of fundamental philosophy and logic to determine what is most likely to come up next and how to manipulate it to suit their ends. One explanation of all of the above is that it was just odd luck this all happened; another is that Kellhus really did plan it. Which of the two seems more likely? Given how intentional the world of Earwa is, where everything is happening now and nothing can be changed because it has already happened, what do you think is more likely? Do you think luck plays into it?

I don't think I used the word luck. Nor do I think such a thing exists in Earwa. If not Kellhus/Dunyain, then the Gods. If not the Gods, then Fate. Not necessarily in that order. I think there are plenty of "intentional" agencies to "blame" the twests on.

Or could you perhaps take the character's misogynistic words to heart and declare that luck is a whore?

I'm almost entirely convinced that with Anagke - despite the direct Greek denotation - Bakker is mostly riffing off of Machiavelli's Fortune. I'm not sure what you are after with this last question...

[Kalbear]

Bakker likes to toy with readerly assumptions; for instance, the Holy War is likely a war by the Damned for their Damnation, even though that's not the way the first trilogy reads.

I'll challenge this, actually. Bakker's text is very direct and open. Bakker himself has said multiple times how it seemed 'obvious' what he was doing and his fear was that he was being too obvious. We as readers learn early on that the holy war's cause is not at all what the Empire thinks it is. This isn't a tweaking of the reader's assumption; it's tweaking the general theme of fantasy books, but as readers we are always in on the joke.

At the end of the first trilogy we get the long explanation of how everything happened and what some of the motivations were - but at no time does Kellhus think that things haven't been manipulated for him to get to this point. How many times does 'I walk on conditioned ground' show up? I don't think Bakker ever thought that we would think that the Holy war was for being saved in the first trilogy, at least not past the first Cnaiur-Kellhus chapters.

And while the crusade aspect is a large deviation from history - as is the Jesus character who is a sociopath - the story is one that's largely been told elsewhere. Many have remarked on the parallelism of Dune (including Bakker). The second trilogy is actually quite similar in feel to that as well; you have Kellhus' children going crazy and screwing things up while the prophet goes off and leads a war to pacify the whole world. Paul in Dune still knows everything (though as it turns out he realizes that he isn't making decisions so much as doing precisely what has already been seen), and he still acts with that information. To outside eyes it looks like he sees the future and plans for it; only he knows it's all been preordained. How is that particularly different from what we've seen in the series so far? If you wanted to have an inversion of this you'd have Kellhus doing all of this not against the Consult but against something else and have the Great Ordeal be completely irrelevant. But I doubt very seriously that he'll do that because, frankly, it'd be a shitty decision with a bad payoff.

I think ultimately that it doesn't matter if Arthmail is wrong about Kellhus calling all the shots and it's the Gods that are doing it or if the universe is preordained and Kellhus simply has a better notion of exactly how things must line up in it; it's unsatisfying to have a character that is that omniscient. From a narrative perspective it bothers me that one must have everything planned and tweaked just so for things to line up in just the right way. At the end of the day that still leads to the explanation 'everything happened that way because it must happen that way because X dictated so' and that's not as interesting, to me at least.

[Sci-2]

From a narrative perspective it bothers me that one must have everything planned and tweaked just so for things to line up in just the right way. At the end of the day that still leads to the explanation 'everything happened that way because it must happen that way because X dictated so' and that's not as interesting, to me at least.

Yeah, saying "the world conspires" is acceptable if there is a cool payoff to that idea. But I'm worried it'll just be an excuse to handle the Deus Ex Machina stuff Arthmail is complaining about.

Making everything preordained removes any desire to read - or at least buy - the books.

[Madness]

I'll challenge this, actually. Bakker's text is very direct and open. Bakker himself has said multiple times how it seemed 'obvious' what he was doing and his fear was that he was being too obvious. We as readers learn early on that the holy war's cause is not at all what the Empire thinks it is. This isn't a tweaking of the reader's assumption; it's tweaking the general theme of fantasy books, but as readers we are always in on the joke.

Firstly - you don't find it ironic that you think you've figured things out because you think Bakker's text is obvious because you think what you've assumed about the narrative is obvious and Bakker's said what he's trying to do is obvious to him, therefore what's obvious to you and what's obvious to Bakker is... what? Obviously the same?

I find that oblivious.

But more to the point, perhaps, I should have offered exposition: I was talking about the distinctions between the Fanim and the Inrithi and I'm not certain how Kellhus' or Cnaiur's perspectives show, which, if either, of them actually practice faith correctly in Earwa.

it's unsatisfying to have a character that is that omniscient. From a narrative perspective it bothers me that one must have everything planned and tweaked just so for things to line up in just the right way. At the end of the day that still leads to the explanation 'everything happened that way because it must happen that way because X dictated so' and that's not as interesting, to me at least.

Making everything preordained removes any desire to read - or at least buy - the books.

Lol...

I don't share your opinions.

[Kalbear]

Firstly - you don't find it ironic that you think you've figured things out because you think Bakker's text is obvious because you think what you've assumed about the narrative is obvious and Bakker's said what he's trying to do is obvious to him, therefore what's obvious to you and what's obvious to Bakker is... what? Obviously the same?

I find that oblivious.

I didn't say that it was the same. Didn't even imply it. I said that Bakker is a direct and open writer. He does not appear to be about inversions. He has stated that he is concerned that he is if anything too direct. Given that directness it is an unreasonable assumption that he will change course in a narrative way simply to give readers something they are not expecting.

Bakker does surprise - but he does so mostly by withholding information, not by having shocking reveals. Now, you could be right - that despite the 8 novels he's written where he hasn't done this, the evidence of his interviews, the background and influences of the world itself he's going to pull out a huge shocker and reveal that Kellhus had been a total pawn.

I just don't find that likely.

As to fanimry or inrithism, he's stated outright that we aren't going to get into depth on that at all one way or another. That being said, I don't see that as all that surprising or an inversion ever; as readers privy to Kellhus and his thoughts we knew both of these were just means to manipulate and not true anyway. If anything it's a bit more interesting to note that Kellhus finds out that he's wrong and that the gods are real.

Though this is only interesting because of information withholding; from the second series it's pretty clear that the gods have absolutely directly interceded before and their power is manifested somewhat regularly. The question of whether or not god is real is kind of silly. It's like asking whether or not airplanes can work and moments later having a jet fly overhead.

[Sci-2]

Lol...

I don't share your opinions.

Well, barring a huge twist in TUC, I suspect that if everything is explicitly noted as having been preordained more people will drop the series than jump on.

Of course it likely won't be measurable given the fact that after TUC we may not get another Earwa book until 2018, and the distance will account for much of the drop in readership.

[Arthmail]

Because it seems many readers, like Arthmail above, sincerely believe that Kellhus is responsible for everything, based on his manipulations in the first trilogy. Bakker likes to toy with readerly assumptions; for instance, the Holy War is likely a war by the Damned for their Damnation, even though that's not the way the first trilogy reads.

Achamian might be wrong. He doesn't know about Kelmomas. We assume that the Traveler is from the Ministrate.

I don't think I used the word luck. Nor do I think such a thing exists in Earwa. If not Kellhus/Dunyain, then the Gods. If not the Gods, then Fate. Not necessarily in that order. I think there are plenty of "intentional" agencies to "blame" the twests on.

I'm almost entirely convinced that with Anagke - despite the direct Greek denotation - Bakker is mostly riffing off of Machiavelli's Fortune. I'm not sure what you are after with this last question...

You seem quick to jump to conclusions about what people are saying, but you are missing what they mean. I'm sure Bakker could babble on about this. I did not imply that Khellhus is responsible for everything. Simply that he works events around him to such a ridiculous degree that the idea of what he is doing is in any way shape or form based on logic or probability, rather than simple prescience such as Paul Atriedes had (which would make it more believable, to be honest) become preposterous. Khellus, somehow, knows what Akka is dreaming and puts events in place to ensure that Akka moves forward. Khellus might not influence all events, but what he is able to influence stretches the realm of credibility so fucking much that he may as well influence everything. This is an easy assumption to jump into, considering the bullshit of the first three books, with Khellus spouting some nonsense and hardened warriors falling to their knees and weeping like children. It was easily the least convincing messianic rise that could have been done. I'm not saying i could do better. But i never bought into the seeing into men's hearts thing. If you look at a guy like Mohammad, his rise was a little more...understandable. But he wasn't reading people's faces like a book.

You are also greatly mistaken in assuming that Bakker is toying with people's perceptions of the holy war. He all but spells out that despite what Khellus says or believes everyone is still damned. Bakker is anything but subtle.

I agree with Sci, the notion of everything being pre-ordained does remove a great deal of desire to move forward. But i can handle it. I felt that the Dune books did a nice, if flawed, approach to the notion of events being set as they are and the idea of prescience. And i do enjoy the series. My problem is simple and I have mentioned it before:

Bakker looks to degrade everything in his books. A forest cannot be described without talking about the stink and rot of it. There is the constant reference to the reek of piss, the smell of people. Every person's face is hiding machinations so dark that all of the humans may as well be rape demons. There is not a single redeeming person in the world, not even Akka, who i have come to like. Bakker is always forcing conflict and ill will between characters as a way of filling page space. Mimara will ask a question, and instead of Akka simply answering it, he responds like an asshole and brings up her early life as a rape slave. This ties in with what Kalbear was saying about the books not having any surprises, only slow revelations. Bakker could have Akka answer the fucking question so that we could get a better grasp on the world he is building, but Bakkers first impulse is to have the characters get mad at each other and then have Akka pout for a few pages about how impetuous Mimara is. Instead of telling us what the fuck is going on he falls into more hand wringing, whining bullshit.

People don't talk, they jerk and clench their teeth or squint or leer or sneer. Everything is made base, lessened, dragged through filth and muck until there is not a spot in the entire books where you get a moment to go, hey, this place might have some beauty here. People don't laugh, they bray cruelly. They are a stomping, spitting, snorting, leering and sneering group of whores, rapists and murders that should probably be fucking shot to a man. These books are darker than Warhammer 40k universe. I truly believe that talking with Bakker in person would be an exercise in self-restraint, because he has such a dim view of people that I would likely just want to punch his face off.

I'll stick with the books to the end, maybe, but my interest is growing less and less.

[Rhom]

I truly believe that talking with Bakker in person would be an exercise in self-restraint, because he has such a dim view of people that I would likely just want to punch his face off.

Which ironically, would fit right in line with his apparent belief that you are a degenerate at the most base level of your soul. :lol:

[Arthmail]

Well, some prophecies are self fulfilling!

But honestly, not everyone is a piece of shit all of the time. There are some redeeming qualities out there. But we certainly would not know that reading Bakker.

[WrathOfTinyKittens]

I don't think everything is pre-ordained, nor do I think Kellhus necessarily controls everything on a micro level.

For example, the timing of Mimara's arrival at Akka's tower. Yes, this was the push that sent him to the Skin-Eaters. But as someone mentioned in a previous page, if not Mimara then Kellhus likely had other ways. He certainly could have created an environment where Mimara is likely to leave, but it needn't have been her specifically.

Another wrinkle - assuming Kellhus is responsible for Akka's trip, he was very nearly undone by events beyond his control, eg Cil-Aujas. Kellhus can't control the late snowing of the pass, and Akka would certainly had died despite the Skin-eaters if Mimara hadn't pulled a miracle out of her ass (a miracle which even Akkwatha had never seen, so it's unlikely that Kellhus could have known about it, much less counted upon it). So right there you have the fallibility of a plan that may have been laid by Kellhus.

Go even further. Even if Kellhus had planned for all of that, Akka still would have failed were it not for Cleric deciding (apparently for the first time) to share his Qirri. What if Cleric had died? What if Cleric's pouch had been cut away by a Sranc, or if Cleric had simply never decided to share?

I think Kellhus is like a preternaturally skilled bowman, and Akka is the arrow. Kellhus can make that impossible shot - or at least condition the path to give it the best chance of success - but he can't control whether a gust of wind or a flailing arm or whatever knocks the arrow off the path he laid.

Frankly I think that the Hundred are directly aiding Akka. Kellhus may well be using this fact (since we know he is perfectly aware of the Hundred warring against him), but he hasn't decided everything that occurred.

[Castel]

You seem quick to jump to conclusions about what people are saying, but you are missing what they mean. I'm sure Bakker could babble on about this. I did not imply that Khellhus is responsible for everything. Simply that he works events around him to such a ridiculous degree that the idea of what he is doing is in any way shape or form based on logic or probability, rather than simple prescience such as Paul Atriedes had (which would make it more believable, to be honest) become preposterous. Khellus, somehow, knows what Akka is dreaming and puts events in place to ensure that Akka moves forward.

Wait, we know this? I thought that this was a bit of fan speculation?

But honestly, not everyone is a piece of shit all of the time. There are some redeeming qualities out there. But we certainly would not know that reading Bakker.

Well, there was Xin going back for Akka. And...uh, give me a second...just a little while..Cnaiur warning Proyas? Akka helping his apprentice whathisface escape? Trying to teach Proyas to think? Hm...Having "redeeming qualities" doesn't seem to work out for people does it xD?

[Darzin]

Yeah Kellhus' near omnipotence bugs me at times but I like the rest of the series enough to keep reading. I wish Bakker had made Kellhus little less powerful as someone mentioned up thread one doesn't need to read faces to rise as a religious leader, especially when faced with religious fanatics such as in the holy war, we have such people rise all the time without Dunyain powers. Also if Kellhus' whole plan hinges on Akka surviving his trip then I will be annoyed as that surpasses Kellhus' current powers, unless he has truly become a prophet.

[Arthmail]

I don't understand why Kellhus bothers people so much. I mean, sure, one has to suspend one's disbelief to some extent, but this is high fantasy. Why would we insist on verisimilitude? And if you're going to have a nigh omnipotent character, some combination of Dunyain conditioning, an incomperable intelligence finally being given access to a superior magic system, prophet status being granted in a very faith-based world, etc...seems like a pretty good way to develop it within the confines of said high fantasy.

I think it is about the way it was done. Some people, at least myself, simply don't buy it.