TDTCB, Ch. 2

  • 23 Replies
  • 12771 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« on: April 19, 2013, 10:33:01 am »
Quote from: Madness
Good day. I thought I'd make this now, just in case I don't get around to posting. But I'll try not to make it two days.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2013, 10:33:28 am »
Quote from: sologdin
i'm a bad summarizer, so merely a few items of interest:

a ) the anonymous mandate scholar who gives us the epigraph does not appear to share DA’s collapsing of the recent and the ancient, as the scholar has reported on his “recent audience” (I.2 at 55).  the scholar opines that the mandate knows of the consult only in the “secrets” of third parties.  we should make a note, cf. prologue re: “no one, not even the no-god, could besiege a secret”, here.  the scholar concludes with a nansur aphorism regarding a hunter who extinguishes the hunt by virtue of hunting (id.), and we should add next to that cf. DA re: “when a man chases a hare, he finds a hare.  but when many men chase a hare, they find a dragon..

impressions regarding the epigraph: 

1 ) DA is different insofar as his education has collapsed certain binary concepts, whereas this scholar still relies on them. 

2 ) when a man chases a hare, he finds a hare and extinguishes all hope of running it down.  when many men chase a hare, they find a dragon, and extinguish all hope of running it down.


b ) DA responds “surely you jest” (I.2 at 57) in response to

Quote
There is to be Holy War. [emphasis original]
he is responding this way because of the structure that has collapsed, holy/unholy, as noted in chapter 1?  it makes little sense to assume that he can’t believe such things are possible--it is rather an insult to the conceptual apparatus of his superior, whom he informs later:  “before you were too harsh, but now you are simply too stupid” (I.2 at 64).

and yet: 

Quote
Nautzera strode from the shadows, pausing only when he stood close enough to tower over him.  Achamian resisted the urge to step back.  The ancient sorcerer had always possessed a disconcerting presence.
(I.2 at 57).  perhaps the binary is not very well collapsed, after all.  Or:  ancient is given several significances?  i assume that RSB is not poorly drafting this--that the collapsing of binaries was not forgotten by the author merely one chapter later:  therefore either the character is wrong or the word does not mean what we think it means.

c )
Quote
”Cut from them their tongues,” the holy words said, “for their blasphemy is an abomination like no other.”
(I.2. at 58).

Quote
”What better way to secure his power than by inciting hatred against those condemned by the Tusk?
(I.2 at 59).

I’m surly enough to disagree with the characters who actually live under this system.  on the showing made (“an abomination”), this does not appear to be a “condemnation.”  compare the most famous “abomination” that we know:

Quote
Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
there’s a nice theological debate out there whether this is a criminal prohibition or a rule of ritual purity.  certainly lev 18:22 carries no criminal prohibition (but lev 20:13 does--though deuteronomy does not.  i personally don’t read lev 18:22 to be a criminal prohibition, and the language of lev 20:13 reads unclearly--this leads me down the ritual impurity path.

it is the same for the quoted Tusk passage.  “cut out their tongues” is, first of all, not a death sentence or a condemnation to hell.  “abomination” places us out of crime and into impurity.  it’s an important theological distinction, and those who seek to sweep up “abomination” into “sin” (i.e., crime) might be a bit hasty.

the entire “damnation” bit in the story has always bothered me, and it will become a very stupid story overall if all that crap ends up being true. 

d )
Quote
Simas had been his teacher, the one to bury the innocence of a Nroni fisherman’s son in the mad revelations of the Mandate.
(I.2 at 59).

the ideology of innocence.  noted here, for analysis, incidentally, if it may arise again.  we have glimmers of it in the prologue, with the high king’s bastard, without specific invocation.  we see it again, regarding mr. inrau (I.2 at 68).

e ) we see that nautzera collapses the rational/irrational binary on behalf of the thousand temples (I.2 at 61).  this collapse is presented by that character as a bad thing.  we shall see.

f )
Quote
We are alienated in advance.
(I.2 at 63).

or, sorcerers are always already estranged.  merely noted for now.

g ) “we pursue ghosts” (id.).  the figure of the ghost arises in chapter I.  there do not appear to be any literal ghosts yet.

h ) “rolling the dice of apocalypse” (id.).  gaming metaphor. 
(click to show/hide)
we shall see.

i ) “he could distinguish his age from the one he dreamt night after night.  He could see the difference.” (I.2 at 64).  and yet the recent, as we have been told already, is merely a repetition of the ancient.  something bizarre here.

j ) “He’d never seen Simas like this” (I.2 at 65) and “the man’s eyes had yet to fail” (I.2 at 71) - noted for now.

k ) “His? But that was just it: these memories weren’t his!” (I.2 at 65).  it’s the nietzsche epigraph.

l ) “Only the Mandate remembers” and “the Mandate could never forget” (I.2 at 67).  as discussed regarding the prologue--memory as keystone.

likely plenty of other items that I’ve missed--but that’s what stands out for me this time around.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2013, 10:33:42 am »
Quote from: Tony P
Here's my summary. Less quotes, because is more a "set-up" chapter.

Chapter II: The Sorceror (Atyersus)

Chapter heading:
I write to inform you that during my most recent audience, the Nansur Emperor, quite without provocation, publicly addressed me as “fool”. You are, no doubt, unmoved by this. It has become a common occurrence. The Consult eludes us now more than ever. We hear them only in the secrets of others. We glimpse them only through the eyes of those who deny their very existence. Why should we not be called fools? The deeper the Consults secretes itself among the Great Factions, the madder our rantings sound to their ears. We are, the damned Nansur would say, “a hunter in the thicket”-one who, by the very act of hunting, extinguishes all hope of running down its prey.
ANONYMOUS MANDATE SCHOOLMAN, LETTER TO ATYERSUS


Akka returns, summoned back home, and he notes few places are more heartless than Atyersus. The only ones he can think of are Golgotterath, certainly, and the Scarlet Spires, maybe.
Akka is called before the Quorum, and is immediately annoyed by their scrutiny. The Quorum informs him that the Thousand Temples have a new leader, who has shaken up things:

Quote
“The Thuosand Temples is no longer to be ignored, Achamian, at least since this Maithanet has seized the Seat and declared himself Shriah.” Inevitably it had been Nautzera who’d broached the silence. The last man Achamian wanted to hear speak was always the first.

“[Maithanet] survives,” Nautzera said. “Flourishes, in fact. All the Cults have come to him in Sumna. All have kissed his knee. And with none of the political manoeuvring olbligatory to such transitions of power. No petty boycotts. Not even a single abstention.” He paused to allow Achamian time to appreciate the significance of this. “He has stirred something”-the grand old sorcerer pursed his lips, as though leashing his next word like a dangerous dog-“something novel … And not merely within the Thousand Temples.”

“None has moved this fast, or with such cunning. Maithanet is no mere enthusiast. Within the first three weeks of his tenure two plots to poison him were uncovered-and here’s the thing-by Maithanet himself. No fewer than seven of the emperor’s agents were exposed and executed in Sumna. This man is more than simply shrewd. Much more.”

The clinching bombshell is that there is to be a Holy War, but the Mandate does not know it’s target. Maithanet has yet to declare. Previous Holy Wars had sorcerers as their targets, but the Fanim of Kian, heathens, are also a possible target. Except, the Fanim are extremely powerful, and they have the Cishaurim as their allies. They do not stand apart, as do the Schools amongst the Inrithi. Without sorcerers, there would be no defense against the Cishaurim. Simas, Achamian’s old teacher, speaks up, and says that a Holy War against the Fanim could not succeed, therefore the target has to be the Schools.

Akka is sent to Sumna to find out what the target of the Holy War is to be. He argues that he has no assets there (even though he is reminded of Esmenet, a whore who he used to visit in Sumna). It turns out Simas has told Nautzera that Akka does have an asset in Sumna: Inrau, a young priest. Inrau was once Akka’s student, but he had defected from the Mandate. Akka says to the Quorum that “Inrau was born with the sensitivities of the Few, and the sensibilities of  a priest. Our ways would have killed him.” Nautzera is not amused, and reminds Akka that Inrau should be eliminated for compromising the Gnosis. It turns out Akka helped Inrau escape, and Simas knew about it and informed Nautzera. So Achamian is blackmailed into using Inrau as an agent in Sumna. Standing on the parapets of Atyersus, the evening before his departure, he reflects:

Quote
Filled by a wan loneliness, Achamian looked beyond the straits in the direction of far-away Sumna. He yearned to once again see these two people, one whom he’d loved only to lose to the Thousand Temples, the other whom he thought he might love…
Were he a man, and not a sorcerer and a spy.

As an aside, we get to see a meeting between Nautzera and Simas. Achamian thinks of Nautzera as menacing and ruthless, but it appears Nautzera has followed Simas’  lead. Nautzera wants to tell Akka that all of their assets are being eliminated, but Simas tells him it would only ensure that Akka would refuse to seek Inrau out. Nautzera argues that they owe Achamian more than that, but Simas is relentless. They conclude that, since their spies are taken out so effortlessly, there must be a traitor amongst the Mandate.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #3 on: April 19, 2013, 10:33:52 am »
Quote from: lockesnow
haven't yet re-read the chapter, but I'd like to remind everyone reading this chapter of the massive revelation of Chapter 13 of TTT, which is the next time there is a POV on Atyersus.  It should effect our point of view of DA, of what he thinks of these two men, Nautzera and Simas and perhaps indicates that the Consult had an interest in DA's career--in particular--long before his career became so impactful.

spoilers TTT
(click to show/hide)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2013, 10:34:02 am »
Quote from: Happy Ent
Secret Simas:
(click to show/hide)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2013, 10:34:11 am »
Quote from: Twooars
Simas
(click to show/hide)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2013, 10:34:22 am »
Quote from: sologdin
re: simas--

(click to show/hide)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2013, 10:34:31 am »
Quote from: generic
The last words of the chapter are: "a Mandate Schoolman had turned traitor". That should settle the question of timing, no?

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2013, 10:34:42 am »
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: generic
The last words of the chapter are: "a Mandate Schoolman had turned traitor". That should settle the question of timing, no?

I agree. This seems to suggest that there is already a traitor among them, and its hard to believe that there was ... someone else ... that was a traitor around that time. Considering their spys had been going missing for some time, all over the world, it would be safe to assume that its not a general field spy that was the traitor. It would need to be someone down in Atyersus that had knowledge of where the spies where. If its not, well if its not who we know it is, then that would mean there would have been more than one person, lurking around Atyersus, leaking information about their spies that the Mandate was unable to detect.

It has to be someone high up with intimate knowledge of many spies locations, assuming every cabin boy isn't told the whereabouts of their spys.

So yes there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the spy in the Mandate at this time is the same as the one we are told about later. Unless you believe the Mandate simply turn on each other on a whim. 1 traitor is an exception, 2 means there are and have been much more, and that seems silly knowing about Seswatha's dreams and all that.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2013, 10:34:50 am »
Quote from: lockesnow
(click to show/hide)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #10 on: April 19, 2013, 10:36:14 am »
Quote from: lockesnow
This is making me crazy, thinking so much.  What if the very first epigraph, 'we define the soul as that which precedes everything,' is metaphysically very wrong, and wrong foots us all because thinking of the soul in this way is the way we are intrinsically biased to think about metaphysical issues.

Because by positioning the soul in this manner one is fetishizing it as an object, in a sense, one is anthropomorphizing it.  You are taking something elusive and intangible and solidifying it via metaphor into something determined and graspable.  You are inherently changing the thing (or not even seeing the thing) because the method and lens by which you observe it makes it impossible for you to get the right answer.  This human perspective on the soul is essentially, incredibly wrong because it is viewed through a human eye, interpreted by a human mind.  And human minds have innummerable vulnerabilities to these sort of 'story' esque mechanisms, thinking of a soul as an object short circuits rationality with the seduction of a 'common sense' right-ness. 

What if it's not the soul that precedes everything--what if the object did not come first--what if forgiveness precedes everything?

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #11 on: April 19, 2013, 10:36:30 am »
Quote from: Madness
Quality discussion here. Once again, sologdin is kicking speculative ass. Can't wait till I'm done traveling around and can get some kind of routine going for this.

Atyersus

I write to inform you that during my most recent audience, the Nansur Emperor, quite without provocation, publicly addressed me as “fool.” You are, no doubt, unmoved by this. It has become a common occurrence. The Consult eludes us now more than ever. We hear them only in the secrets of others. We glimpse them only through the eyes of those who deny their very existence. Why should we not be called fools? The deeper the Consult secretes itself among the Great Factions, the madder our rantings sound to their ears. We are, as the damned Nansur would say, “a hunter in the thicket” – one who, by the very act of hunting, extinguishes all hope of running down his prey.

- ANONYMOUS MANDATE SCHOOLMAN, LETTER TO ATYERSUS

This letter has always struck me as very pessimistic. Perhaps because of the time I'm spending reflecting on different chapters I'm perceiving things differently.

The AMS seems to be suggesting that the more they are ridiculed by the Three Seas politi, the more evidence that the Consult still wages its silent war.

§2.1 The Mandate Quorum & the Shriah of the Thousand Temples

The chapter begins with Achamian's debriefing before the Quorum, "the ruling council of the School of Mandate" (p62), at Atyersus, "the citadel of the School of the Mandate" (p62). Bakker takes some time to ponder Atyersus' architecture, associating its construction with some fluid and unreliable.

Nautzera, a member of the Quorum introduces the reader to Maithanet, Shriah of the Thousand Temples, and the deviousness of his rise to power - "Within the first three weeks of his tenure two plots to poison him were uncovered ... by Maithanet himself" (p63). Then he tells Achamian that "there is to be a Holy War" (p63).

Achamian reflects on some historical factuals, the "Scholastic Wars" (p64), Holy Wars declared by the Inrithi Thousand Temples against the Schools of the Three Seas, in the latter of which "Atyersus itself had been besieged for seven years" (p64).

This makes me wonder if the Cishaurim were attacked during the Scholastic Wars at all.

Achamian and Nautzera spend some time speculating about the possibility of a Scholastic War over a war against the heathen Fanim.

It strikes me that there had never been a Holy War against the Fanim before this point.

(click to show/hide)

Nautzera raises some concern that all the Cults have declared their support to Maithanet as Shriah and that “'once again the Cultic Priests openly denounce us, refer to us as Unclean' ... The Chronicle of the Tusk, held by the Thousand Temples to be the very word of God, had named them thus – those Few with the learning and the innate ability to work sorcery. “Cut from them their tongues,” the holy words said, “for their blasphemy is an abomination like no other…” (p64)

Then a seemingly sober voice speaks up, Simas, who has raised so many retrospective eyebrows.

“There’s no way that a Holy War against the Fanim could succeed” (p65).

"We estimate that the Thousand Temples itself has four to five thousand Chorae, which means it could field as least as many men immune to whatever sorceries we could muster. Add to that all of the Inrithi lords who bear Trinkets, and Maithanet could field an army of perhaps ten thousand men who would be immuned to us in every war" (p66).

It's interesting to note the possible hereditary nature of Chore, Trinkets being a mark of class. There's a good deal of ink spilled reflecting on the Chorae: “In the Three Seas, Chorae were a crucial variable in the algebra of war. In so many ways the Few were like Gods compared with the masses. Only the Chorae prevented the School from utterly dominating the Three Seas.” (p66)

I think it's probably beneficial to catalog the Dreams, which I only thought about this reading. I don't think that any of us pointed out that Achamian actually reflects on the Celmomas Dream as "Death and Prophecy of Anasurimbor Celmomas" (p55) - probably we because we assumed but it explicitly titles it this in Ch. 1. The Dreams (p66) – Fords of Tywanrae, Burning of the Library of Sauglish, Death and Prophecy of Anasurimbor Celmomas (p55).

Simas, again, councils the futility of a Holy War against the Fanim - marking him for a Holy War against the Schools.

“The Cishaurim are not a School … They don’t stand apart, as we do, from the faith and people of their nation. While the Holy War struggled to overcome the heathen Grandees of Kian, the Cishaurim would rain ruin upon them.” (p60)

The two members of the Quorum inform that Achamian is being sent to Sumna and that he is to make an informant of an old student, Inrau. “Simas has informed us of that student of yours who … defected” (p68).

Nautzera admonishes Achamian on any skepticism and demands that Achamian turn Inrau to their cause: "What we share is incomprehensible to other men. As one we cry out in our sleep" (p69).

They argue for a time and Simas interjects “ask yourself, Achamian,” he said finally, “if our adversary, the Consult, were to seize power in the Three Seas, what vehicle would be more effective than the Thousand Temples ... what better way to destroy the Mandate, the last memory of the Apocalypse, than by declaring a Holy War against the Few?” (p71).

The passage ends with Achamian cursing that he must sacrifice Inrau for the possibility of the Consult's existence.

§2.2 Inrau & the Second Apocalypse

The second paragraph of §2.2 spends words highlighting Achamian being well traveled, though always searching for the “Absence” (p73) of the Consult.

Mostly §2.2 dumps info about the Old Wars and Achamian's relationship to Inrau and "the first student he'd loved, Nersei Proyas" (p75). Achamian reflects on his shaken character, the nature of teaching and makes an interesting comparison between Innocence and Goodness (p75).

An interesting quote, directly paraphrasing Seswatha's Dreams of the Death and Prophecy of Anasurimbor Celmomas, “The sun! … Can’t you see? Can’t you see the sun?” (p76)

“The Dreams. What had happened could not happen again. This world must not die. A thousand innocents – a thousand thousand! – were not worth the possibility of a Second Apocalypse” (p77).

Reference to a girl in Sumna, "the holiest of cities for the Inrithi, home of the Thousand Temples and the Tusk. Only Shimeh, the birthplace of the Latter Prophet, was as holy" (p77).

2.3 Nautzera & Simas

The chapter ends with a perspective from Nautzera reflecting on Simas, who I would just note had the most to say about the agency of the Mandate and Achamian - what they directives should be.

He finds Simas in the scriptorium, reading some ancient manuscripts. They talk about keeping Achamian in ignorance and we have some indication of possible shifty nature: “Simas, in the end, was a predictable man. Or was that also part of the sham, like the faint air of doddering gentility he used to disarm his students?” (p79)

“If there’s one lesson we’ve learned from the Consult, old friend, it’s that ignorance is a potent tool" (p79).

They talk about all the Mandate informants going missing, which as the reader, we've seen firsthand when the thing kills Geshrunni. Added to this the Mandate itself seems to have been infiltrated at Atyesus.

Some more character comment on Simas: “But if the years had taught Nautzera one thing about Polchias Simas, it was that the man was as shrewd as he was devoid of sentiment.” (p81)

Of course, the end of the passage, which has been noted.

“If he knew that Atyersus itself had been infiltrated … whoever hunted their informants did so with galling ease, and that could mean only one thing: despite reliving Seswatha’s anguish night after night, a Mandate Schoolman had turned traitor.” (p81)

I would just like to note that a quick motif emerging surrounding Achamian, which seems to define him: Ignorance.

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #12 on: April 19, 2013, 10:36:42 am »
Quote from: Church
I returned from holiday a couple of days ago and saw that this had started, so I just wanted to say to whoever came up with the idea of a group reread that this is an awesome idea! It's good to be able to reread it at a slower pace - I always find that I race through fantasy books too quickly and never pick up on the smaller details so this is a good corrective.

Looking at the chapter, one of the things that I started thinking about was the implication of the dreams of the Apocalypse replacing mandate scholar's normal dreams. We normally think of dreams as the ultimate fantasy, either representing our hidden desires or broader cultural currents (think Jung for this second view of what a dream is). With the mandate the status of dreams is pretty much reversed, in that they're actually more real than the waking lives of those dreaming:

Quote
For Nautzera, there was no present, only the clamour of a harrowing past and the threat of a corresponding future. For Nautzera, the present had receded to a point, had become the precarious fulcrum whereby history leveraged destiny. A mere formality.

So real everyday experience in this structure is treated as a fantasy, equivalent to the fantasy that dreams are normally considered to be. What I'm wondering is what this means in the book - is it Bakker putting on his sceptical hat and effectively speaking out of the text, asking the reader whether they really consider the everyday world they live in to be knowable and not fantastical (ie. not created at their own whim as dreams normally are)? Or:

(click to show/hide)

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #13 on: April 19, 2013, 10:36:50 am »
Quote from: Wilshire
For them, the dreams are reality. Who are you to tell them any different. (more or less thats from inceptions =P )

What Came Before

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Emwama
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
    • First Second Apocalypse
« Reply #14 on: April 19, 2013, 10:36:59 am »
Quote from: Tony P
Quote from: Madness
This makes me wonder if the Cishaurim were attacked during the Scholastic Wars at all.

I don't think so. That would involve a Holy War, or a bizarre plot in which the Kianene stand aside while the Three Seas ravage the Cishaurim, who do not stand apart.

Quote from: Madness
Achamian and Nautzera spend some time speculating about the possibility of a Scholastic War over a war against the heathen Fanim.

It strikes me that there had never been a Holy War against the Fanim before this point.

(click to show/hide)

Quote from: Madness
(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)