Jump to content

Bakker - A Discussion of Rectal Miracles


Francis Buck

Recommended Posts

Brain's don't matter in Earwa, thought occurs in the soul, not the brain. That's why we have substitutions like "Soul's Eye" instead of "Mind's Eye."

So the No God caused still births because babies were no longer being ensouled, thus they had no mind.

The No Birth cut things off at the moment of ensoulment. When the moment of ensoulment is, is not something anyone can agree on here on Earth, so I doubt we know when that happens in Earwa.

I thought that was Bakker given credit to archaic notions about the soul, that he purposefully doesn't use the word 'brain' because Earwans credit the soul, rather than the mind, as the locus of thought. Brains still are the house of function-cognition etc., look at the Dunyain's horrific experiments in Isual.

It's no surprise that Bakker is a mid-list author. The prose can be daunting, the structure of the first book is uninviting and at first difficult to wade through*, there is a strong thread of horror running through the books, the fact that woman are objectively inferior (authorial theme, but still, alienating to a good percentage of the audience that either wants relatable female characters or out-and-out feminist agenda models), the complexity of the world and the occasional deliberate foray into historical text writing to describe political alliances, battle engagements, etc. Bakker is my favorite fantasy author (and I find only the shallowest of relation to the IMO cartoonish Erikson) but compared to what one sees on the latest book shelf at your average B&N it's no surprise at all that in a genre where Sanderson and Canavan and Gail Z. and Brett (etc. etc.) are consistent bestsellers that Bakker is not.

There's also the fact that fantasy has long been a conservative genre and Bakker is not a conservative writer.

*on the note of TDtCB's structural issues, how much more effective as an introduction would it have been to have Cnaiur's whole section / the Battle of Kiyuth to start the novel? Of course, this would have messed with the chronology, but still, I think the book as a whole would be easier to get into for the masses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the fact that woman are objectively inferior (authorial theme, but still, alienating to a good percentage of the audience that either wants relatable female characters or out-and-out feminist agenda models)

I don't know, the metaphysical question doesn't really come up as written into creation until TJE. Felisin is a much more unlikeable character than Esmi.

[in fact I'd say Esmi was my favorite character until WLW where she becomes an instrument for the author's message more than a character.]

no surprise at all that in a genre where Sanderson and Canavan and Gail Z. and Brett (etc. etc.) are consistent bestsellers that Bakker is not.

It does feel like a lot of the good writers are not big sellers, with the exception of a few like GRRM or - and part of me hates to admit it - Rothfuss.

There's also the fact that fantasy has long been a conservative genre and Bakker is not a conservative writer.

Curious if you could expand on this. I wouldn't consider GRRM or Rothfuss conservative writers, though the latter's narrative fits the traditional/reactionary mold with extra Felurian fanservice thrown in for good measure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

man ten years ago the board was moaning about how GRRM couldn't sell as well as the Goodkind's and Jordon's of the world, and no one read him so he couldn't even win a hugo over freaking Rowling. This was usually attributed to the difficulty of the books in comparison to ____. The darkness of the books was often brought up as a huge detriment as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always check any bookstore I go into for Bakker, the only place I've ever found it anything is in my local Barnes and Noble, they continually re-stock TDtCB, but it turns out that's only because one of the managers is a big fan. I've never seen any other books from the series in print, I bought them all on my ereader. I think the marketing is an issue; it seems to me in my biased mind that if you get any one who enjoyed LOTR or ASOIAF to pick up TDtCB, at least half of them will enjoy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The darkness of the books was often brought up as a huge detriment as well.

Needless to say, that line of argument has fallen by the wayside. Both Martin and Abercrombie have sold very well and you can hardly call their writing cheerful.

. . . it seems to me in my biased mind that if you get any one who enjoyed LOTR or ASOIAF to pick up TDtCB, at least half of them will enjoy it.

Yeah, the male half. Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bakker's problem isn't that he isn't good, because parts of him are, but that he has a lot of what I'd call "turn off points". IE: There's a bunch of things in his books that would make people annoyed enough to stop reading (that is if they even started)

Other authors might not have Bakker's good points, but also don't have these "turn off points" which makes them... Smoother?

First of all his prose is, while occasionally stunning, definitely an acquired taste. There are long slogs of "Who the hell wrote this?" repetitive language, etc. Very different from eg. Abercrombie's much more "action-movie" style. (or GRRM for that matter)

Secondly is the high concepts, not everyone likes that kind of stuff.

Thirdly is the misogyny.

Fourthly is the general "ick" factors. People in general seems more comfortable with violence than sex. Bakker has both, not to mention stuff that's just gross (like sranc-eating) I know a lot of people who put down the book just with the child-rape at the start of TDTCB.

Fifth is the metaphysics/philsophy thing. I'm also not sure how much they overlap with each #4, audience-wise.

Sixth is Bakker's internet persona, which is well... Pretty dickish in a know-it-all kind of way. I honestly suspect he'd have been better off staying off the internet. (he's not the only author this applies to, mind)

The thing is, all these negatives are prevalent enough that a lot of people are going to find *something* they mind about Bakker's books enough that they won't recommend it/spread the word. Other authors might run afoul of a couple of these alienating factors, but Bakker combines them all in one neat package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that prologue scene has always fascinated me as a metric of ick, it seems so mild compared to what happens to Bran at the end of his second chapter.

Of all those who had fled to Ishuäl, only Ganrelka’s bastard son and the Bardic Priest survived.

Terrified by the Bard’s strange manner and one white eye, the young boy hid, venturing out only when his hunger became unbearable. The old Bard continually searched for him, singing ancient songs of love and battle, but slurring the words in blasphemous ways. “Why won’t you show yourself, child?” he would cry as he reeled through the galleries. “Let me sing to you. Woo you with secret songs. Let me share the glory of what once was!”

One night the Bard caught the boy. He caressed first his cheek and then his thigh.

“Forgive me,” he muttered over and over, but tears fell only from his blind eye.

“There are no crimes,” he mumbled afterward, “when no one is left alive.”

But the boy lived. Five nights later, he lured the Bardic Priest onto Ishuäl’s towering walls. When the man shambled by in a drunken stupor, he pushed him from the heights. He crouched for a long while at the fall’s edge, staring down through the gloom at the Bard’s broken corpse. It differed from the others, he decided, only in that it was still wet. Was it murder when no one was left alive?

Winter added its cold to the emptiness of Ishuäl. Propped on the battlements, the child would listen to the wolves sing and feud through the dark forests. He would pull his arms from his sleeves and hug his body against the chill, murmuring his dead mother’s songs and savouring the wind’s bite on his cheek. He would fly through the courtyards, answering the wolves with Kûniüric war cries, brandishing weapons that staggered him with their weight. And once in a while, his eyes wide with hope and superstitious dread, he would poke the dead with his father’s sword.

When the snows broke, shouts brought him to Ishuäl’s forward gate. Peering through dark embrasures, he saw a group of cadaverous men and women—refugees of the Apocalypse. Glimpsing his shadow, they cried out for food, shelter, anything, but the boy was too terrified to reply. Hardship had made them look fearsome—feral, like a wolf people.

Bakker, R. Scott (2008-09-02). The Darkness that Comes Before (The Prince of Nothing) (p. 3). Penguin Group. Kindle Edition.

btw, that was a great counterpoint someone had bringing up neuropuncture to refute my claim about thoughts being seated in the brain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Bakker's problem isn't that he isn't good, because parts of him are, but that he has a lot of what I'd call "turn off points". IE: There's a bunch of things in his books that would make people annoyed enough to stop reading (that is if they even started) Other authors might not have Bakker's good points, but also don't have these "turn off points" which makes them... Smoother? First of all his prose is, while occasionally stunning, definitely an acquired taste. There are long slogs of "Who the hell wrote this?" repetitive language, etc. Very different from eg. Abercrombie's much more "action-movie" style. (or GRRM for that matter) Secondly is the high concepts, not everyone likes that kind of stuff. Thirdly is the misogyny. Fourthly is the general "ick" factors. People in general seems more comfortable with violence than sex. Bakker has both, not to mention stuff that's just gross (like sranc-eating) I know a lot of people who put down the book just with the child-rape at the start of TDTCB. Fifth is the metaphysics/philsophy thing. I'm also not sure how much they overlap with each #4, audience-wise. Sixth is Bakker's internet persona, which is well... Pretty dickish in a know-it-all kind of way. I honestly suspect he'd have been better off staying off the internet. (he's not the only author this applies to, mind) The thing is, all these negatives are prevalent enough that a lot of people are going to find *something* they mind about Bakker's books enough that they won't recommend it/spread the word. Other authors might run afoul of a couple of these alienating factors, but Bakker combines them all in one neat package.

Okay, when you put it that way, Bakker's sales seem to be exactly what you'd expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one might reasonably infer child rape from that prologue, but one need not do so--the more express descriptions of sexual violence later militate against the inference. RSB is after all nothing if not unsubtle regarding sexual violence. that ROH dismissed RSB on the basis of this mere uncompelling inference alone constitutes the prima facie case against the reasonableness of that site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What distinguishes Erikson from Bakker, although I think the latter is a much better writer, is that his books have many more female readers in general, and as a percentage of those who read his books (for obvious and inherent reasons).

Having seen the Erikson discussions here and on Malazanempire, I think it is clear that Erikson has also managed to lose a hell of a lot of his female readers over the years. Several major female fans I knew of the series gave up long before its end, and the few online I know who carried on finally gave up at Dust of Dreams because of the systematic rape, humiliation, torture and ultimate destruction of a major female character for no discernible plot reason. The overwhelming majority of the fans of Erikson - at least going by online comparisons - are male. The difference is that they do not appear to be put off right at the start of the series, as Bakker managed to alienate a lot of his female fans within the first trilogy (if not the first two books).

This is a far, far cry from the 50/50 split most other fantasy authors - Tolkien, Jordan, Martin - seem to enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one might reasonably infer child rape from that prologue, but one need not do so--the more express descriptions of sexual violence later militate against the inference. RSB is after all nothing if not unsubtle regarding sexual violence. that ROH dismissed RSB on the basis of this mere uncompelling inference alone constitutes the prima facie case against the reasonableness of that site.

I don't know, I remember being a bit creeped out by that scene when I first read the book. If I'd not bought the hardcover but was reading it at Barnes to get a feel I may have just put it back on the shelf.

I don't see how you don't get molestation from that scene. We can go into "was it rape-rape?" if you really want, but I find such equivocating bizarre.

I've disagreed with RoH on various issues like the whole thing about Russia not being colonialist, but I still find that "Prince of Misogyny" piece hilarious/poignant satire. Plus she did write a lot of good reviews, and she doesn't count Prince of Misogyny as a review at all.

The overwhelming majority of the fans of Erikson - at least going by online comparisons - are male.

Reading the reviews on Amazon a lot of people found the series pretentious, though the gratuity of the rape does get mentioned I get the feeling a lot of male fans got turned off for other reasons. I'm not convinced perceptions of misogyny in the text are going to hurt an epic fantasy author.

Trying to suss out why it's niche..books are a weird mash up of LotR, Dune, Blood Meridian, philosophy texts, the New Testament and a childhood D&D campaign. There are a butt load of long names for characters who barely get any screen time, there's little to no humor, you have a closeted insane barbarian, and the parts with Serwe really are brutal. And I don't think it becomes even slightly clear what the No-God is, or who the Consult are, until TWP?

When you really dig into TDTCB, it isn't hard to see why people who read SFF primarily as entertainment don't want to bother going further. [i'm actually not as certain as this last sentence seems to make me.]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sometimes congratulate myself on knowing and understanding CuS and pitying the rest of the reading world. Idiots.

Yeah, that's why I swing back and forth between "WHY IS THE WORLD NOT READING THIS?!!" and "It's obvious why the world is not reading this."

I'll think of the surface reasons to stop reading the series, but then I think about the scenes with Cnauir and Kellhus traveling together and wonder why you wouldn't want to see what happens.

In a better world I'd say the good swathe of male SFF fans stopped reading because of empathy for Serwe but I'm not that naive.

eta:

hahaha omg it never stops paying off:

They become
invested
, to the point of repeating the same arguments over years. It really is remarkable. They end up sounding like, well, gay conservatives.

HAHA PEOPLE WHO THINK HIS BOOKS ARE MISOGYNISTIC ARE JUST LIKE GAY CONSERVATIVES

What did you have for breakfast on that day, Bakker? Your own piss?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, the metaphysical question doesn't really come up as written into creation until TJE. Felisin is a much more unlikeable character than Esmi.

[in fact I'd say Esmi was my favorite character until WLW where she becomes an instrument for the author's message more than a character.]

Curious if you could expand on this. I wouldn't consider GRRM or Rothfuss conservative writers, though the latter's narrative fits the traditional/reactionary mold with extra Felurian fanservice thrown in for good measure.

On Esme -- I've always found her intro to the series to be quite realistic as to the toil of a prostitute, making her -- for me -- a sympathetic character, though I'd agree that the plot-forcing in WLW diminished her; I understand what Bakker was doing, just found the way he did it a little abrupt and too obvious.

As for the conservative angle, I'm referring to the 'traditional' character journey and general worldbuilding viewpoint many authors have adhered to since Tolkien (and Tolkien himself drew from the archetype pool), and China M. for one attacked in his famous essay. Up until the late 90's, most of the big-selling doorstopper series adhered to the farmboy-secret-king / hero with mysterious origin or "ruling class protagonist" as sologdin calls it on one of his goodreads bookshelves. Certainly there were variations on the theme in many of these books, but it wasn't until GRRM and those that came after that a lot of the traditional storytelling devices were openly/blatantly subverted, with Abercrombie, Bakker, Erikson, Rothfuss et al. pushing the envelope. Now, Bakker operates to these traditional structures to a larger and lesser degree -- Kellhus, for example, emerging from the old line of kings (perhaps?), but he flouts a lot of conventions, too. The Big Badass who is secretly a homosexual (and indeed, informs Cnaiur's arc) -- the whore(s) as specific female POV to the near-utter exclusion of well-bred, agency-possessing women - Akka's unfortunate-if-aborted tryst with an underage camp-follower - the (endless) descriptions of the "good guys" side being just as vicious and less civilized than the southern Muslim-influenced enemy... You don't see any of this in Jordan, Brooks, Eddings, or the other heirs to the blockbuster fantasy epic as it emerged in the late 70's / 80's / 90's. But you still see it a lot in many of the current bestsellers that aren't often mentioned on this board due to their very redundancy.

Fantasy gets a lot of flak, and somewhat rightfully so, as wish-fulfillment. The reader stepping into the shoes of a supposed nobody who actually possesses secret powers / noble blood / destiny to inhabit and/or dominate the ruling class. The hero's journey through dark and strange lands brimming with exotic evil-dominated peoples and monsters of "mixed breeding." The resiliant dominance of Western Europe as a geographical entity of light against the alienating threat of the other. The eventual climax, in which the hero defeats the authoritative dark lord and restores the "natural" order as conceived by the hegemony of the elite. etc. etc. Now consider this, and look at the climax of The Thousandfold Thought, in which the condemnation of mankind through a not-so-muted misanthropic lens is summarized in the conversation between Moenghus and Kellhus, and Kellhus himself, the hero-savant who callously manipulates others to his own ends and is rather explicitly amoral.

This is what I meant by Bakker's subversion of the conservative tradition. All these factors, plus many many more, can be quite alienating to the casual reader wanting to just escape for a few hours, rather than have the world's shit served under his or her nose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having seen the Erikson discussions here and on Malazanempire, I think it is clear that Erikson has also managed to lose a hell of a lot of his female readers over the years. Several major female fans I knew of the series gave up long before its end, and the few online I know who carried on finally gave up at Dust of Dreams because of the systematic rape, humiliation, torture and ultimate destruction of a major female character for no discernible plot reason. The overwhelming majority of the fans of Erikson - at least going by online comparisons - are male. The difference is that they do not appear to be put off right at the start of the series, as Bakker managed to alienate a lot of his female fans within the first trilogy (if not the first two books).

This is a far, far cry from the 50/50 split most other fantasy authors - Tolkien, Jordan, Martin - seem to enjoy.

Perhaps I have a bad perspective on this topic, since the readers who actually suggested Erikson to me happened to be female (although, it must be said, this was when there were only four books in the series). Perhaps it is the case that Erikson lost his female readers as the story went along. Even so, I think even that is preferable to Bakker's approach, which was to start at ground level, dig a hole, and then keep digging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I have a bad perspective on this topic, since the readers who actually suggested Erikson to me happened to be female (although, it must be said, this was when there were only four books in the series). Perhaps it is the case that Erikson lost his female readers as the story went along. That said, I think even that is preferable to Bakker's approach, which was to start at ground level, dig a hole, and then keep digging.

The difference, I think, is that Erikson brutalized the character for mere shock-value / to make the situation more dire, rather than as a advancement of the plot. (I'm assuming this, having not read DoD but having perused Wert's review and the controversy elsewhere, and having read Erikson's first four books and read in them similar instances of this sort of brutality-as-a-short-cut / lazy tactics to influence reader emotion). Bakker, on the other hand, deliberately constructed his world in a manner ill-fitting to females in order to tackle gender inequality issues. The approach could have been mitigated, as it has been written elsewhere, by introducing female characters of more variety and different experience, and I as a fan would have appreciated this frankly, but it was the intent all along: a thematic development that continues throughout the series, towards an end I don't believe has been completely articulated yet (the series isn't done).

This comes to another debate that has percolated in these threads: Bakker delves into the dark and disgusting to shine a light on what was and still is. Serwe and Esme's situations certainly aren't unique; awful treatment of woman occurs all the time, all over the world. The question is, should it be documented? (or, documented without contrast?) Many readers will not want to expose themselves to it, because it's awful and often the way it is portrayed highlights the helplessness on the micro and macro level. With Bakker, I guess you can say Reader beware... it works for some, but isn't the way to sell a lot of books.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take is far different than that of most people. I am not bothered by Bakker on a philosophical level and do not even begrudge him his intentions. I just think Esmenet is a terrible, terrible character, who has only gotten progressively worse with every book that comes along. This is a big problem since she is the only significant female character in the first trilogy, with the possible exception of Serwe, who achieves the notable distinction of somehow outdoing her. Bakker somewhat rectified this problem by adding Mimara to the second trilogy, but by then the damage had already been done. Hopefully next time he will leave ill conceived love triangles as plot drivers to Mexican telenovelas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mimara had a ton of promise as a character in TJE, only for that to be dashed in WLW when she became someone who just gets acted upon again for 99% of the plot. It's one of my biggest disappointments with the series so far. You've got this brave female character who leaves a relatively easy life as the Aspect-Emperor's Queen's daughter (albeit after a very rough childhood), follows her not-father into the wilderness despite said wilderness being infested with Sranc and her not-father being in a group of scalp-hunting psychos, and then saves all their asses in the darkness after she sanctifies a chorae.

. . . And then you get to WLW, where she gets pregnant and does nothing except stay high on Nonman ash while occasionally communicating with a skin-spy who is trailing the group. I can almost imagine Bakker thinking some too-clever-by-half idea that this shows how women are ultimately enslaved by their biology, etc, etc. In any case, it was disappointing.

Personally, I've always liked Esmenet as a character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I meant by Bakker's subversion of the conservative tradition. All these factors, plus many many more, can be quite alienating to the casual reader wanting to just escape for a few hours, rather than have the world's shit served under his or her nose.

Ah, excellent points. I guess the response to those final words between Kellhus and Big Moe depends on how one sees society. I loved TTT and still do think it starts the point where the series reaches for newer, more interesting heights.

But yeah, it definitely isn't Jordan or Eddings level fantasy and it's also not GRRM/Abercrombie. It's sort of a ponderous, heavy dark, akin to Elric but without the emo goth sexiness to blanket over the bleakness. ;-)

This comes to another debate that has percolated in these threads: Bakker delves into the dark and disgusting to shine a light on what was and still is. Serwe and Esme's situations certainly aren't unique; awful treatment of woman occurs all the time, all over the world. The question is, should it be documented? (or, documented without contrast?)

I think it's hard to confront and really deal with these issues within the confines of alternate world medieval fantasy. I mean, Bakker offers little in terms of resilience of need for change, so it leans as unintentionally exploiting realities rather than opening vistas of compassionate understanding.

That said, I did shake my head at people (men and women) who missed the point and wanted Esmi to suffer for "betraying" Akka.

We do get more insight in WLW, finally, into both Esmi and Mimara but it is such a small part of the narrative in which Esmi ends up back in a whorehouse and Mimara strips and forgives her rapist. Part of [me] sees the reasoning the narrative took this turn, part of me feels like some of this narrative transgression comes o[f]f as hipster poverty porn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, excellent points. I guess the response to those final words between Kellhus and Big Moe depends on how one sees society. I loved TTT and still do think it starts the point where the series reaches for newer, more interesting heights.

But yeah, it definitely isn't Jordan or Eddings level fantasy and it's also not GRRM/Abercrombie. It's sort of a ponderous, heavy dark, akin to Elric but without the emo goth sexiness to blanket over the bleakness. ;-)

I think it's hard to confront and really deal with these issues within the confines of alternate world medieval fantasy. I mean, Bakker offers little in terms of resilience of need for change, so it leans as unintentionally exploiting realities rather than opening vistas of compassionate understanding.

Oh yes, the ending of TTT is fantastic, and sort of informs my disappointments with the second trilogy (below).

An excellent contrast is GRRM and Abercrombie. Both counterpoint the bleakness with much-needed humor, an area Bakker does not employ often or generally with success. Abercrombie in particular is interesting. I initially had serious reservations after the first book of The First Law due to the relatively poor writing, which continued into the second book but then began to improve on a rather surprising level. More importantly, Joe reached his peak/nadir of what I tend to call "dime store misanthropy" with Best Served Cold and then, perhaps sensing he'd said what he needed to say on that topic, began to shift away from it in The Heroes and even more in Red Country. This growth as an author and authorial 'message' is quite impressive (some might disagree, and I do consider those 'lesser novels' than TLAoK, but still, growth is growth--BSC became tedious for me due to [what became] predictable character decisions). Bakker, on the other hand, has descended into a cycle of repeating the same misanthropy, to the point that "Ever do Men..." became a parody on these threads not so long ago. This is particularly disappointing in that Bakker is highly intelligent and I sense he could be really pushing the bar in terms of intellectual content, but hasn't (yet) in TAE. The most intriguing parts of the second trilogy have been the oblique tidbits of the underlying structure of the overall conflict and the somewhat-expanded worldbuilding... a few points (the watcher/watched segment, Kellhus's conversation with the Nonmen embassy, the information revealed in the short stories) notwithstanding.

We do get more insight in WLW, finally, into both Esmi and Mimara but it is such a small part of the narrative in which Esmi ends up back in a whorehouse and Mimara strips and forgives her rapist. Part of [me] sees the reasoning the narrative took this turn, part of me feels like some of this narrative transgression comes o[f]f as hipster poverty porn.

Yeah, this is frustrating. I understand why he developed the story the way he did, as both are 'natural' progressions for the character arcs, but again, I guess I expected more experimenting and unexpected events from someone with Bakker's ability -- which sums up my view that TAE is lesser than PoN: the surface predictability of both TJE and TWLW (hopefully TUC will more than resolve this issue). I also think that Esme's arc in particular was simply not developed enough / believable for the rapid descent to reach the emotional impact Bakker intended. She has to act stupidly to get to that point, and relative weakness of the relationship-based cause of that stupidity (lil' Kel), coupled with the hoary sitcom miscommunication cliche, made it more of a "oh, OK" rather than a "oh, SHIT."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...