[H]

Ok, so post TGO, what are people's feelings on Kellhus.  Is he the savior of the world or it's literal end?

[MSJ]

Ok, so post TGO, what are people's feelings on Kellhus.  Is he the savior of the world or it's literal end?

The savior, yet he is the literal end of the Gods. Remember, whatever comes about of the GO is holy!

[themerchant]

Well he isn't saving anyone from damnation atm, but he might eventually.

I'd be hiding somewhere hoping he would fix it before i died. So whatever that makes him.

[JRControl]

Ok, so post TGO, what are people's feelings on Kellhus.  Is he the savior of the world or it's literal end?

The savior, yet he is the literal end of the Gods. Remember, whatever comes about of the GO is holy!

Holy according to who or what?

[MSJ]

Ok, so post TGO, what are people's feelings on Kellhus.  Is he the savior of the world or it's literal end?

The savior, yet he is the literal end of the Gods. Remember, whatever comes about of the GO is holy!

Holy according to who or what?

Throughout TAE there are multiple references that certain people, places and such become HOLY. Such as the herdsman of the GO and certain places. I will find quotes later for you.

[MSJ]

Here is one such example, there are others. But, if something later becomes holy, we have to assume that whatever comes about from the GO - civilization goes on and the GO was holy.

Vast herds of sheep and cattle, bred solely to accompany the march, were also beaten across the horizon, so many that some Men of the Ordeal began calling themselves ka Koumiroi, or the Herdsmen—a name that would later become holy.

[Hirtius/Pansa]

There are a few narrative ticks like that in TAE, they are enumerated somewhere on the forums.

After Sibawul is flogged for insubordination, the text says that "his was the name that would be heaped in shame in the scripture to follow", or  something to that effect.

It happens three times again in TGO.  Some narration is preceded by "According to the legends..." and again "According to the chroniclers..." when describing some action that the Ordeal is taking.  In the map description at the end, it describes the Apophagia as a moniker given by contemporary historians, or something to that effect.

If Middle-Earth is disenchanted to becoming boring normal Earth, I have long suspected that the same thematic through-line is at play in TSA.  The third series will be 1000 years+ in the future after all the action of these two trilogies. With metaphysically intentional Earwa disenchanted to becoming boring normal Earth-like.  If fantasy fiction is scripture, as Bakker has often said, then the events in these 7 books will be regarded as the Old/New Testament of the times in the third series.

I honestly don't think we'll actually see much of the war of the titular "Second Apocalypse" on page, we'll only learn incidental details after the fact 1000 years later.

[JRControl]

Here is one such example, there are others. But, if something later becomes holy, we have to assume that whatever comes about from the GO - civilization goes on and the GO was holy.

Vast herds of sheep and cattle, bred solely to accompany the march, were also beaten across the horizon, so many that some Men of the Ordeal began calling themselves ka Koumiroi, or the Herdsmen—a name that would later become holy.

Yeah, holy in histories. According to Men. Holy to them. The holy gold standard is Mimara. Without her, everything is suspect. What men feel is holy is not necessarily so. After all, a good chunk of the Tusk is basically Inchie propaganda.

[MSJ]

Here is one such example, there are others. But, if something later becomes holy, we have to assume that whatever comes about from the GO - civilization goes on and the GO was holy.

Vast herds of sheep and cattle, bred solely to accompany the march, were also beaten across the horizon, so many that some Men of the Ordeal began calling themselves ka Koumiroi, or the Herdsmen—a name that would later become holy.

Yeah, holy in histories. According to Men. Holy to them. The holy gold standard is Mimara. Without her, everything is suspect. What men feel is holy is not necessarily so. After all, a good chunk of the Tusk is basically Inchie propaganda.

Well what I took from it, is that what Kellhus/GO are doing now will rewrite the scriptures. My quote is not from the Tusk, it's from whatever is holy in the future, after the GO. HP has some quotes that reflect what I was trying to convey also. Sure, I'd say there is a GREAT chance that Mimara is holy in those same scriptures, or even who they will be about.

[JRControl]

I think it's a crapshoot. So much history is buried under layers of lies agreed upon and God knows who will actually pen them down. The idea of Noble Lies comes to mind. People need to believe in something, even if it's not necessarily the truth as seen by an objective universe.

[MSJ]

I think it's a crapshoot. So much history is buried under layers of lies agreed upon and God knows who will actually pen them down. The idea of Noble Lies comes to mind. People need to believe in something, even if it's not necessarily the truth as seen by an objective universe.

True, I agree with that. Viramsata basically. Yet, someone will think whatever comes about of the GO, to be Holy. So, inevitably whatever comes about will benefit mankind, ensure their survival. Heh, and nothing can be worse than the afterlife awaiting them now.

[mrganondorf]

There are a few narrative ticks like that in TAE, they are enumerated somewhere on the forums.

After Sibawul is flogged for insubordination, the text says that "his was the name that would be heaped in shame in the scripture to follow", or  something to that effect.

It happens three times again in TGO.  Some narration is preceded by "According to the legends..." and again "According to the chroniclers..." when describing some action that the Ordeal is taking.  In the map description at the end, it describes the Apophagia as a moniker given by contemporary historians, or something to that effect.

If Middle-Earth is disenchanted to becoming boring normal Earth, I have long suspected that the same thematic through-line is at play in TSA.  The third series will be 1000 years+ in the future after all the action of these two trilogies. With metaphysically intentional Earwa disenchanted to becoming boring normal Earth-like.  If fantasy fiction is scripture, as Bakker has often said, then the events in these 7 books will be regarded as the Old/New Testament of the times in the third series.

I honestly don't think we'll actually see much of the war of the titular "Second Apocalypse" on page, we'll only learn incidental details after the fact 1000 years later.

I bet Kellhus is the potential savior in the sense that he aims to be the No-God, shut the world from the God's harvest; disenchant Earwa in the sense of shutting it from heaven (hell).  Bakker laid those foreshadowing moments so far back there--Cnaiur sees Kellhus as "The Whirlwind" and now we find that Kellhus is dreaming that the No-God has his own face and all the stuff he tells Proyas about no salvation.  First two series titles refer to Kellhus and the third is supposed to be a spoiler--The Prince of Nothing, The Aspect-Emperor, The No-God.  Last books are DIY, no heron spear attempts to shut down Kellhus.  Crab-Kid walks the sky as the perfect Cishaurim in a tragic end of Earwa and/or subjectivity shutdown.

[Dont Skald Me Bro]

I just finished reading the ARC version of this thread and I've read this one earlier in the week. People debating whether Kellhus is a savior or not, the extent of his humanity/emotions and listing examples from the books got me to thinking about Akka crashing Kellhus's coronation at the end of the first trilogy. I guess I always thought (when I did think deeply at all about it) that Kellhus let Akka leave and live because of some kind of human connection/fondness for him, probably due to wishful thinking and my own natural inclination to want it to be that way. Does anyone else think that could have been a factor, or did Kellhus see his usefulness as a future tool far outweighing any threat he posed and was in total rational power strategist mode, with no emotion playing a part?

[Somnambulist]

I just finished reading the ARC version of this thread and I've read this one earlier in the week. People debating whether Kellhus is a savior or not, the extent of his humanity/emotions and listing examples from the books got me to thinking about Akka crashing Kellhus's coronation at the end of the first trilogy. I guess I always thought (when I did think deeply at all about it) that Kellhus let Akka leave and live because of some kind of human connection/fondness for him, probably due to wishful thinking and my own natural inclination to want it to be that way. Does anyone else think that could have been a factor, or did Kellhus see his usefulness as a future tool far outweighing any threat he posed and was in total rational power strategist mode, with no emotion playing a part?

I don't know specifically why, but Kellhus definitely has a use for Akka.  It struck me when reading TJE that Vem-Mithriti was titled the Vizier-in-Proxy.  Before Akka stuck up his middle finger at Kel, his role was to have been Vizier to the Aspect-Emperor.  Now, as you say, if Kellhus had no use for him, why not just kill him and appoint a new Vizier?  Why, after twenty years, is there a 'Vizier-in-Proxy' position being held open?  I can only assume Kel expects Akka to come back, as he 'foretold,' and kneel - maybe to be re-indoctrinated as Vizier.  Again, though, not sure why Akka specifically.  Maybe Kel 'unlocked' Seswatha in Akka when he hypnotized him to get the Gnosis.  I don't know, but Kel doesn't really need a Vizier.  He's already more powerful and knows more than Akka by this point.  I have no real answer, but I dodged your question pretty well, I think. 

IMO, I don't really think Kel has any emotional attachment to Akka.  Like, at all.  He was, and still is, a tool for Kel.  Unless Kel suddenly acquires real empathy, I just don't see why he would 'care' for Akka.

[Madness]

I just finished reading the ARC version of this thread and I've read this one earlier in the week. People debating whether Kellhus is a savior or not, the extent of his humanity/emotions and listing examples from the books got me to thinking about Akka crashing Kellhus's coronation at the end of the first trilogy. I guess I always thought (when I did think deeply at all about it) that Kellhus let Akka leave and live because of some kind of human connection/fondness for him, probably due to wishful thinking and my own natural inclination to want it to be that way. Does anyone else think that could have been a factor, or did Kellhus see his usefulness as a future tool far outweighing any threat he posed and was in total rational power strategist mode, with no emotion playing a part?

While I like something of Somnambulist's conjecture above, it might be as simple as, at the time, Kellhus couldn't risk stopping or otherwise refuting Achamian in his crowning moment, lest he risk Achamian disenchanting those assembled.