Maybe Wilshire, but do the Dunyain want them preggers all the time?  That seems contrary to their very clear eugenic intentions. It also raises the question of how many people Ishual could support. Breeding like rabbits seems like something for the worldborn.

It seems likely that they have a ton of children but they ruthlessly cull out not only the defectives but the less good. Somebody has to have their facial muscles twitched into the display of an emotion. Otherwise, how will the little ubermenschen learn to dominate the worldborn? The more kids conceived, the more choices available.

I had the thought that he left knowing that things would fall apart under Esmi, and used that as a lure for his enemies. So Fanayal comes out, the Yatwer cult, the Zeumi plotting, they all sense weakness and converge, allowing Kellhus to just make a quick trip back home after transforming Proyas into the leader the Ordeal needs by disillusioning him and sticking it in his butt, not to mention mostly saving the Ordeal from a nuke. He's got his enemies right where he wants them, without having to work so hard or wait around in Momemn.

At just the cost of Maithanet and Thelliopa, both of whom are a-list competent henchpersons. But hey, maybe now Esmi will think he does love her after all.

I didn't see this intro forum, and like a savage I just started right in posting and measuring tongues or whatever it is we're doing around here.

I did mention in another thread that I got here by way of the podcast, which I found by way of the Facebook page, which I found by way of the Grimdark FB page, which I found by way of the Grimdark Magazine... Which I found because I heard about Scott's "The Knife of Many Hands" story. So I guess it all comes back around.

I recall where but not when I discovered TDTCB: it was a Border's bookstore outside Pittsburgh. I and some of my fellow teacher friends had gotten away from kids and campus to spend a quiet afternoon. I happened to pick up TDTCB and after sitting there reading the prologue, I was totally hooked. Had to buy it and read it. It had to be sometime between 2004-2006, I guess.

Awesome journey here !

Yeah... the Three-Seas forum languished there, in the in-between, for a number of years because there were no active mods/admins.

Yeah, anarchy's nice in theory, but at the end of the day, someone's got to be the Aspect-Emperor if you want anything to get done.

Quote from: Parsh on August 07, 2016, 06:11:17 pm

...

Great post, Parsh.

Welcome to the Second Apocalypse .

Thanks and thanks. I made my way here by way of the podcast, by way of the Facebook group, by way of the Grimdark Facebook group.

Once, long ago, I tried to register on the Three Seas forum, but I never got approved and wandered away, disconsolate.

Interesting idea, but I don't think I agree. Why would only damned souls be in that pool? That would mean that its a shrinking pool, that, eventually, everyone is saved who chooses in subsequent lifetimes to seek redemption.

It's kind of the same problem some people have had with the idea of reincarnation in our own world: since our population is getting larger and larger, where do the new souls come from? Then again--and here's a pleasant image--maybe the Ciphrang are ripping souls apart, so everybody who's born just gets a piece of a damned soul. I'm not sure if that makes one's theological situation better or worse....

I'm doubtful of the scenario, but stranger things have happened in Earwa.

What's most interesting to me is to look beyond the surface similarities to think about what Bakker has done differently with these elements.

For instance, there are obvious similarities between Nonmen and elves (come before humans, teach some of them who are thus raised above the others, immortal, their civilization waning as humanity waxes, twisted by the Big Evil into orcs/sranc, etc), but the differences are what fascinate me. In Tolkien, the elves, with their immortality, are kind of the wiser, more patient "big brothers" of humanity. While the Nonmen do teach humanity, they also inflict a terrible slavery on them, whether the pits we see in Cil-Aujus or the Emwamma. The thing that struck me first and hardest, though, was the effect of immortality: Nonmen aren't "wise" so much as alien to us; and, of course, they end up being driven insane because of the way that memory degrades over the course of a lifetime. Even their propensity toward betrayal, especially when we're talking about the Erratics: it's like their long lives make the lives of others inconsequential, just a tool to be used to spark their memories.

Or how about Achamian vs. Gandalf? I like the analogy drawn between him in The Aspect Emperor and Gandalf in the Hobbit, but of course it's the differences that are striking. Gandalf is genuinely interested in the success of the quest, while it's a tool for Achamian. In fact, Gandalf genuinely cares about the members of the party, especially including Bilbo, who is basically sent along for his own personal growth. There's a benevolence there with Gandalf, who additionally is kind of "above the fray" and also a bit of deus ex machina with the ways he leaves and returns. Akka, by contrast, has to be saved more often than he saves the party, despite the fact that he does indeed have incredible power at his command. And although it pricks his conscience, at the end of the day he's using them as an ends to achieve a means.

(Thorin Oakenshield and Lord Kosoter, though: pretty much the same.)

Staying with Akka, take him back to the first trilogy. There's a certain similarity between him and LotR Gandalf as well. They're both out to save the world, with deeper knowledge than any of the human characters have, they're both, to some extent, doubted by the powerful, and obviously both wizards. But Gandalf is this sort of wise, knowing guide and mentor who's not QUITE always right, but he's certainly always GOOD, he's always motivated by a higher purpose (he's sent by the Valar to help men and elves, and he remains true to that mission). Compare that to Akka: yes, he's basically a good guy, but he's full of uncertainty, full of mixed motives and just generally a lot more HUMAN than Gandalf ever seems to be. He screws up his personal relationships, he screws up his world-saving duty... we have to be reminded every so often that he IS actually a total badass, because he doesn't show it all that often. Anyway, all of that plays into the differences in the kind of story Bakker is telling. Clear good and evil vs. a very muddy morality. Authority figures who can be trusted to there being very few real authority figures, and each of them having an agenda.

Anyway, just some off-the-cuff thoughts.