[TUC Spoilers] Ajokli and the metaphysical whodunit

  • 316 Replies
  • 103703 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

False Man

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 24
    • View Profile
« Reply #90 on: October 08, 2017, 03:24:52 pm »
I'll reiterate for posterity that I don't think Kellhus and Ajokli made any deals.

Then why is Ajokli mad with him after the Resumption?

Quote
“ANASÛRIMBOR!” he roared in no human voice. “HEAR ME, DECEIVER!”

Quote
“I SHALL HAVE MY OWN PORTION! MY OWN PRIZE!”

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5275
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #91 on: October 08, 2017, 03:38:55 pm »
It's interesting that I can't articulate my distinctions (largely because no one aside from profgrape and draft readers have tried teasing the particulars with me).

I do attribute all dialogue by Kellhus in the Golden Room to Ajokli (profgrape and I have tried many times to work out the specifics regarding how/why Ajokli would speak from Kellhus' life experience, etc).

I don't attribute Cnaiur's dialogue to Ajokli. I think the authorial reasoning behind the "shadow of four horns" (badly paraphrasing) is to show that despite the No-God and their "blindness" to it (though Ajokli's agency might differ), the Gods, but specifically Ajokli, can still interact with and wield influence in the world.

EDIT: Likewise to show that that Cnaiur can't see the No-God because he's inhabited by Ajokli, thus the Gods can exercise agency in Earwa while still being unable to perceive the No-God.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2017, 03:40:55 pm by Madness »
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

Khaine

  • *
  • Suthenti
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
« Reply #92 on: October 08, 2017, 03:48:50 pm »

"The living shall not haunt the dead" is a fantastic line. I've often thought on what it means. I always thought it meant that the living' s sense of right and wrong - their notion of damnation - was what held the dammed in place... But then Bakker has shat on the idea of subjective truth leading to objective truth, so I don't see how the living *can* haunt the dead.

It's still a great line.

Thank you for this comment, I wasn't aware of this.

Which destroys my theory.

:)

In that case I entirely agree with you, what does this line mean? It has been repeated too many time, not to mean anything.

Maybe Kellhus was deluded in thinking he could fix the problem of damnation without going down the path of shutting the world. The same way he was deluded in thinking he was a prophet or divine. After all, himself admits he went a bit crazy.

God damn it, no answers, only questions within questions, wrapped in enigmas, bundled up with riddles.

:)
Knowing was the foundation of ignorance. To think that one *knew* was to become utterly blind to the unknown.

R. Scott Baker, The White Luck Warrior, chapter 12.

ἕν οἶδα, ὅτι οὐδέν οἶδα

Khaine

  • *
  • Suthenti
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
« Reply #93 on: October 08, 2017, 03:51:31 pm »
I'll reiterate for posterity that I don't think Kellhus and Ajokli made any deals.

Interesting objection.

So when Kellhus speaks of pacts with the Pit, is that simply Ajokli speaking?

So does this mean that Kellhus was under the impression he had found a way to save the world, but Ajokli takes over and then the salting incident takes place due to Kelmonas and his plan is never put into action.

After all Kellhus himself says that his TTT fails him. I should find the reference, because at the time when I read it, I thought it was important in itself, but I forgot to highlight it in my book.

Knowing was the foundation of ignorance. To think that one *knew* was to become utterly blind to the unknown.

R. Scott Baker, The White Luck Warrior, chapter 12.

ἕν οἶδα, ὅτι οὐδέν οἶδα

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5275
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #94 on: October 08, 2017, 06:51:48 pm »
Interesting objection.

So when Kellhus speaks of pacts with the Pit, is that simply Ajokli speaking?

So does this mean that Kellhus was under the impression he had found a way to save the world, but Ajokli takes over and then the salting incident takes place due to Kelmonas and his plan is never put into action.

These are things I think, yes, and that I'd like to tease implications from.
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #95 on: October 08, 2017, 07:38:49 pm »
Quote from:  Madness
]It's interesting that I can't articulate my distinctions (largely because no one aside from profgrape and draft readers have tried teasing the particulars with me).

I do attribute all dialogue by Kellhus in the Golden Room to Ajokli (profgrape and I have tried many times to work out the specifics regarding how/why Ajokli would speak from Kellhus' life experience, etc).

I don't attribute Cnaiur's dialogue to Ajokli. I think the authorial reasoning behind the "shadow of four horns" (badly paraphrasing) is to show that despite the No-God and their "blindness" to it (though Ajokli's agency might differ), the Gods, but specifically Ajokli, can still interact with and wield influence in the world.

EDIT: Likewise to show that that Cnaiur can't see the No-God because he's inhabited by Ajokli, thus the Gods can exercise agency in Earwa while still being unable to perceive the No-God.

Correct the Gods can still function, because the Outside isn't shut yet....ergo Kellhus isn't done.

Oh, from my reading and the simple fact of the decapitants and that glossary entry and the head in a pole scene from TGO (that clearly was Ajokli), they had some sort of relationship. But, I agree, I don't think Kellhus struck any deals.

And, here's my confusion where you then contribute ALL dialogue in the Golden Room to Ajokli. Kellhus was going in the GR on his own terms. One clue this isn't Ajokli the whole time, is telling Malowebi avert your eyes.... Why would Ajokli care what a mere soul saw in the IF? All dialogue up until the point Kellhus's head bursts into flames, I attribute to Kellhus. I believe that Ajokli is there waiting for the right time and steps in when wants and then the dialogue about making them his slaves and he'll in Earth, blah, blah,  blah.

I don't see how you can think they didn't make a pact and attribute all dialogue to Ajokli. Doesn't make sense to me. I agree, no pact and Ajokli just using Kellhus as a vehicle for treachery. But, I can't attribute the dialogue to Ajokli. Not at all. Anyhow. We're here, let's tease this out...meld or what have you.
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #96 on: October 08, 2017, 07:57:03 pm »
Quote from:  Madness
These are things I think, yes, and that I'd like to tease implications from.

I agree with you wholeheartedly here. But, then how do you, again, attribute all dialogue to Ajokli? I just don't see where your toe positions align, at all. Could you help me out to make it clearer please? I love you!

[EDIT Madness: Fixed quote tag.]
« Last Edit: October 10, 2017, 03:59:32 pm by Madness »
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

SmilerLoki

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 618
    • View Profile
« Reply #97 on: October 08, 2017, 11:48:41 pm »
Kellhus was going in the GR on his own terms.
Then what would those terms be, if he isn't relying on a divine agency to back him up when he is clearly outmatched and knows this?

On a different note, I like how Malowebi calls Ajokli "the Ciphrang-God".

profgrape

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Great Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 401
    • View Profile
« Reply #98 on: October 09, 2017, 12:28:07 am »
Quote from:  Madness
]It's interesting that I can't articulate my distinctions (largely because no one aside from profgrape and draft readers have tried teasing the particulars with me).

I do attribute all dialogue by Kellhus in the Golden Room to Ajokli (profgrape and I have tried many times to work out the specifics regarding how/why Ajokli would speak from Kellhus' life experience, etc).

I don't attribute Cnaiur's dialogue to Ajokli. I think the authorial reasoning behind the "shadow of four horns" (badly paraphrasing) is to show that despite the No-God and their "blindness" to it (though Ajokli's agency might differ), the Gods, but specifically Ajokli, can still interact with and wield influence in the world.

EDIT: Likewise to show that that Cnaiur can't see the No-God because he's inhabited by Ajokli, thus the Gods can exercise agency in Earwa while still being unable to perceive the No-God.

Correct the Gods can still function, because the Outside isn't shut yet....ergo Kellhus isn't done.

Oh, from my reading and the simple fact of the decapitants and that glossary entry and the head in a pole scene from TGO (that clearly was Ajokli), they had some sort of relationship. But, I agree, I don't think Kellhus struck any deals.

And, here's my confusion where you then contribute ALL dialogue in the Golden Room to Ajokli. Kellhus was going in the GR on his own terms. One clue this isn't Ajokli the whole time, is telling Malowebi avert your eyes.... Why would Ajokli care what a mere soul saw in the IF? All dialogue up until the point Kellhus's head bursts into flames, I attribute to Kellhus. I believe that Ajokli is there waiting for the right time and steps in when wants and then the dialogue about making them his slaves and he'll in Earth, blah, blah,  blah.

I don't see how you can think they didn't make a pact and attribute all dialogue to Ajokli. Doesn't make sense to me. I agree, no pact and Ajokli just using Kellhus as a vehicle for treachery. But, I can't attribute the dialogue to Ajokli. Not at all. Anyhow. We're here, let's tease this out...meld or what have you.
One way to think about it: it's Kellhus speaking what he thinks are his thoughts but in truth, the impetus (AKA DTCB) is coming from Ajokli.  When the Ciphrang-God manifests, it's really just to cow the Mutilated into submission.

At this point, I'm more or less convinced that the Great Ordeal was little more than a contrivance to get Ajokli to the GR, the topos of topoi.

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #99 on: October 09, 2017, 01:05:50 am »
Fair enough. Not that I'll agree just yet, but, if that's the case (the ordeal was to get Ajokli to GR) why wouldn't there be a pact between him and Kellhus?
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2298
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #100 on: October 09, 2017, 01:08:16 am »
Why would Ajokli care about Malowebi's soul and him looking into the IF?
“No. I am your end. Before your eyes I will put your seed to the knife. I will quarter your carcass and feed it to the dogs. Your bones I will grind to dust and cast to the winds. I will strike down those who speak your name or the name of your fathers, until ‘Yursalka’ becomes as meaningless as infant babble. I will blot you out, hunt down your every trace! The track of your life has come to me,

JerakoKayne

  • *
  • Suthenti
  • *
  • Posts: 50
    • View Profile
« Reply #101 on: October 09, 2017, 02:13:10 am »
Why would Ajokli care about Malowebi's soul and him looking into the IF?

For that matter, why would Kellhus? We still don't have any idea what shenanigans he was up to replacing Malowebi with his previous decapitant anyway.

Too many of the motivations behind this stuff are too dark.

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2893
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #102 on: October 09, 2017, 11:20:22 am »

"The living shall not haunt the dead" is a fantastic line. I've often thought on what it means. I always thought it meant that the living' s sense of right and wrong - their notion of damnation - was what held the dammed in place... But then Bakker has shat on the idea of subjective truth leading to objective truth, so I don't see how the living *can* haunt the dead.

It's still a great line.

Thank you for this comment, I wasn't aware of this.

Which destroys my theory.

:)

In that case I entirely agree with you, what does this line mean? It has been repeated too many time, not to mean anything.

Maybe Kellhus was deluded in thinking he could fix the problem of damnation without going down the path of shutting the world. The same way he was deluded in thinking he was a prophet or divine. After all, himself admits he went a bit crazy.

God damn it, no answers, only questions within questions, wrapped in enigmas, bundled up with riddles.

:)

I did, I think at some point, speculate that the "living shall not haunt the dead" line specifically refers to Kellhus' use (and perhaps misuse, if you'd like to see it from that persepctive) of the Daimos.  Kellhus manages, via some "hidden" function of the Daimos (the head-on-a-pole-beind-him), to walk into the Pit and to walk back out living.  This is a distinct violation of what probably always has been.  Consider this whole "scene:"

Quote
We pondered you, says the most crocodilian of the Sons.
“But I have never been here.”
You said this very thing, it grates, seizing the line of the horizon, wrapping him like a fly. Legs click like machines of war. Yesss …
And you refuse to succumb to their sucking mouths, ringed with one million pins of silver. You refuse to drip fear like honey—because you have no fear.
Because you fear not damnation.
Because there is a head on a pole behind you.
“And what was your reply?”
The living shall not haunt the dead.

So, Kellhus walks into the Pit.  The Ciphrang tell him that they have studied him.  Kellhus corrects them, saying he has never been there.  The Ciphrang correct him, saying not only has he been there, but they have had this exact conversation before.  In other words, this is another example of this all having already happened.  So, Kellhus asks, what did you reply to me?  And they tell him, quite frankly mind you, "the living shall not haunt the dead," so in other words, he is already dead.  You shall not be a living person skulking around in the Pit.  The reverse is always the case, the Ciphrang haunt the world, not the reverse, and the Ciphrang happily tell Kellhus this will be the case again.
I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor. . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury. -Cet'ingira

profgrape

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Great Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 401
    • View Profile
« Reply #103 on: October 09, 2017, 01:43:27 pm »
Why would Ajokli care about Malowebi's soul and him looking into the IF?
Trying to prevent an asset turning against Kellhus?  I don't think it's so much about Ajokli caring as wanting to ensure there were any hiccups along the way (PS how'd that work out for you, Ajokli?).

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2893
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #104 on: October 09, 2017, 01:54:43 pm »
Why would Ajokli care about Malowebi's soul and him looking into the IF?
Trying to prevent an asset turning against Kellhus?  I don't think it's so much about Ajokli caring as wanting to ensure there were any hiccups along the way (PS how'd that work out for you, Ajokli?).

I just don't think the "all Ajokli" explanation fits any more than the "all Kellhus" explanation.

The key is that both are entangled with each other.  It doesn't seem, to me, to fit the narrative and thematic purpose if it's so cut and dry.
I am a warrior of ages, Anasurimbor. . . ages. I have dipped my nimil in a thousand hearts. I have ridden both against and for the No-God in the great wars that authored this wilderness. I have scaled the ramparts of great Golgotterath, watched the hearts of High Kings break for fury. -Cet'ingira