The Second Apocalypse

Earwa => General Earwa => Topic started by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:50:56 pm

Title: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:50:56 pm
Quote from: Madness
In the past week, Willem has become something of a spokesperson for the lurkers/less immersed/new readers who are intimidated, threatened, overwhelmed, or confused by the amount of content here at Second Apocalypse. Since I have only two immediate goals for the forum and both depend on leveraging the social fulcrums of a cultivated noosphere and it's interaction within and without of itself, I thought I'd sound the community.

What are the Frequently Asked Questions of the Prince of Nothing and the Aspect-Emperor - The Second Apocalypse, thus far?

I honestly don't know. Willem commented on the Old Names here being blinded by their immersion into this content - if that's true, I'm living somewhere in Bakker's colon. I read very little fiction anymore - though every once and awhile a gem comes along - and it should be evident that I'm contented in parsing the minutia of Bakker's works.

All voices are equal at the Second Apocalypse... this is one place where you'll be grilled on your heuristics and biases first, argument second. And thankfully, the former is generally omitted and as a result, as you can see, much of the bullshit of other forums is absent from this place as well.

Any new voice might add completely novel speculation... even a cursory glance of the threads in Unholy Consult or Misc. Chatter should suggest that even five books in, we're still debating many of the same things. There are very few consensuses among the ambiguity. Again, Bakker says the depth is there and I'm willing to take him at his word, especially as people have successfully written academic papers on his works. Three Pounds is not enough to crack the riddle of the Second Apocalypse. And I want to solve it ;).

So again, in the interest of generating interest... What goes in a TSA FAQ?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:03 pm
Quote from: lockesnow
maybe this belongs in the collected sayings thread, but no one ever actually mentions there that Bakker's online handle is Cû'jara Cinmoi, or the significance of that name.  That knowledge is just assumed. So I think one FAQ should be:

Who is Cû'jara Cinmoi? 

Cû'jara Cinmoi was R Scott Bakker's original online handle when he participated in forum discussions about his work.  So the Collected Sayings of Cû'jara Cinmoi encompasses what the author has said about his books and world as well as other quotations and aphorisms he has made.  He used this handle before it was revealed at the ends of The Warrior Prophet (and in The Thousandfold Thought glossary) how significant Cû'jara Cinmoi was in the history of Earwa.  Cû'jara Cinmoi was a cunoroi (nonman) king, the preeminent king, when the Inchoroi first came to Earwa.  His machinations against and with the Inchoroi led to the immortality of the cunoroi race and the extinction of the cunoroi females.  His wars wiped out all but a handful of the inchoroi before he was slain by a former cunoroi adversary whom he had conquered before the inchoroi threat united the cunoroi.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:08 pm
Quote from: Madness
Cheers, lockesnow.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:13 pm
Quote from: WillemB
Quote from: Madness
In the past week, Willem has become something of a spokesperson for the lurkers/less immersed/new readers who are intimidated, threatened, overwhelmed, or confused by the amount of content here at Second Apocalypse.

LOL - wow, if ever there was a group for which I didn't want to be unofficial spokesperson... I hope I don't seem intimidated, threatened, or confused by the content.  Definitely overwhelmed by the sheer volume of posts, and wanting to participate.  Filled with a love for this amazing series; haunted by RSB's visceral depictions of human folly.   I've read and reread all five books, cringing like I'm about to be slapped. 

Quote from: Madness
Willem commented on the Old Names here being blinded by their immersion into this content - if that's true, I'm living somewhere in Bakker's colon.

Hehe.  How's the wireless access in there?  I offered the word "impenetrable" in reference to the breadth and depth of speculation.  As I said elsewhere and with respect, you guys go deep.  Colon deep?   :shock:  Adds new meaning to "crack-ing the riddle."

Back on track - perhaps the FAQ would be a good place for a sort of speculative "greatest hits"? 

Top shelf characters could be picked from the roster at the end of the books, and links could provided, bullet point style, referencing and cross-referencing the relevant threads.  This would serve two purposes: it would provide a point of access for new forum members to find their way into the speculation, and it would give Old Names someplace to send the new members.   ;)
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:19 pm
Quote from: Madness
Quote from: WillemB
Definitely overwhelmed by the sheer volume of posts, and wanting to participate. Filled with a love for this amazing series; haunted by RSB's visceral depictions of human folly. I've read and reread all five books, cringing like I'm about to be slapped.

+1. No, Willem, you did not seem those other things. But you've offered the best alternative perspective - you know, I'm in trouble when I don't even realize that there are alternatives. I adopted a shotgun approach in guessing people's states...

Wireless is spotty. Just like my campus wireless.

Quote from: WillemB
Back on track - perhaps the FAQ would be a good place for a sort of speculative "greatest hits"?

Top shelf characters could be picked from the roster at the end of the books, and links could provided, bullet point style, referencing and cross-referencing the relevant threads. This would serve two purposes: it would provide a point of access for new forum members to find their way into the speculation, and it would give Old Names someplace to send the new members.

The PreFAQ is there for anyone - I find it interesting that we're having to guess at an FAQ... Where are the frequently asked questions, anyways?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:24 pm
Quote from: Wilshire
So, uh, asked a friend of mine who just finished PON if he could give me some insight to his FAQ's.... he's been busy :P. Too bad this didn't come up when I was coaching him and another through the books. Could have really shared some stuff. Alas.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:29 pm
Quote from: Madness
I asked a friend too. But honestly, she didn't ask simple questions...

What's Esmenet's deal? Why's Achamian even trying? Where are the other Dunyain? What's Kellhus endgame?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:34 pm
Quote from: jogrady
Ive seen a lot of sorcery questions lately. I created an detailed chart describing and connecting the branches, sub-branches, and advanced theories of Sorcery. I was logged out before I could post it. I really don't want to do it again, and I am sure someone could do a better job. It would be a good reference for new readers and helpful to those trying to work out whats next in the world of Singing. I can do it but be warned it will take some time, Im very busy.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:39 pm
Quote from: Madness
Thanks for thoughts, jogrady, and I'm sorry that the ethernet ate your post - I think many of us know firsthand how frustrating that feels.

Hmm... for the life of me I can't think of a big list.

Quyan Gnosis - Gnosis
Quyan Daimos, Gnostic Daimos, Anagogic Daimos
Anagogis
Mbimayun Totemic?
Folkloric?
Witchcraft - Anagogis?
Psukhe
Aporos

Anything else? I will gladly make some kind of chart with speculations/descriptions...
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:45 pm
Quote from: lockesnow
how about:

What do all those goofy symbols above the letters mean?  Are they traditional guides to pronunciation, or just used because they look cool/other?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:50 pm
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: Madness
Thanks for thoughts, jogrady, and I'm sorry that the ethernet ate your post - I think many of us know firsthand how frustrating that feels.

Hmm... for the life of me I can't think of a big list.

Quyan Gnosis - Gnosis
Quyan Daimos, Gnostic Daimos, Anagogic Daimos
Anagogis
Mbimayun Totemic?
Folkloric?
Witchcraft - Anagogis?
Psukhe
Aporos

Anything else? I will gladly make some kind of chart with speculations/descriptions...

internet is too slow where I am at currently but it might be useful to make a mindmap, take a screenshot, and upload the pic.

mind42.com
Username: TSAforum
Password: TSAforum
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:51:57 pm
Quote from: Madness
Quality idea, Wilshire. I made a map of what's in the quote. I'm still wondering what I'm missing...
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:02 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Madness
I'm still wondering what I'm missing...
You're missing Shamanism.

EDIT: I've tried using that mindmapping site to represent the evolutionary/developmental relationships of human sorcery (as a map called 'Shamanism'), but it doesn't seem to be possible to show the (independently developed) Nonmen sorcery on the same map, nor to properly show the convergent evolution of the Daimos.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:07 pm
Quote from: Curethan
Possibly adding to Shamanic; Cultic thaumaturgy like Psatma does (and Porsporian).
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:13 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Curethan
Possibly adding to Shamanic; Cultic thaumaturgy like Psatma does (and Porsporian).
Which neatly brings us back to the ancient conflict between the Few and the Prophets that RSB mentioned on Zombie Three Seas as being the ultimate origin of the Anagogis (and the end of the Shamans).

What may have happened is this:

  • Originally, among the Men of Eanna, magic was the monopoly of the Shamans. They were of the Few, their souls recalling the God of Gods in near-perfect proportion, and were also considered holy, with a direct line to the will of the divine. They were Prophets and Sorcerers in one (to the point that this distinction was meaningless then).
  • At some point (still in Eanna, long before the Tusk), individuals arose who claimed to represent the Gods as Prophets, but who were not of the Few, and whose souls did not have any special recollection of the God of Gods. This perhaps gave the Gods a means of bypassing the God of Gods' influence and interfering in the World themselves, each with their own individual agenda.
  • Probably the Gods gave their Prophets 'magical' powers (miracles/thaumaturgy), but these remained under the control/will of the Gods, not of the Prophets themselves.
  • There was eventually a conflict (initially political/philosohical, but eventually violent) between the Shamans and the Prophets. The Prophets won and outlawed/condemned Sorcery.
  • The Prophets monopolised the claim of representing the divine. This was the beginning of recognisable Kiunnat beliefs, with the Gods and their laws as pre-eminent and the God of Gods as an impotent 'placeholder' to represent the Gods as a collective.
  • The Few were driven into the shadows, near-universally believed damned as witches and forced to pass on their knowledge of Sorcery in secret, disguised as herbalism or harmless folk magic. Knowledge of magical healing was entirely lost.
  • The condemnation of Sorcery was thus already widely accepted in Eanna when the Inchoroi compiled the beliefs of the Five Tribes into the Tusk. Likewise, Shamans (Sorcerer-Prophets) were a distant memory, already a myth to most. They got a brief mention in the Tusk but nothing more. The same with healing magic.
  • During or after the Breaking of the Gates, the Men of the Four Tribes began to realise that they needed Sorcery. A few miracles handed out to Prophets by the Gods just didn't cut it against Quya mages. Sorcerers began to assemble into Schools and formalise their oral traditions into the Anagogis.
  • Under the Nonmen Tutelage, the Nonmen demonstrate to Norsirai Sorcerers the conceptual leaps necessary to adapt the Anagogis into the Gnosis. The God's thoughts can be represented more accurately as Gnostic theorems than as mere analogies. It is akin to representing fundamental particles as mathematical formulae rather than as tiny billiard balls bouncing around in space.
  • Inri Sejenus and Fane each tried to bring back the idea of the God of Gods as pre-eminent. Fane also combined the roles of Prophet and Sorcerer. Were one or both of these individuals true Shamans?
EDIT: Umm... the bullet formatting doesn't appear to work.
EDIT2: Never mind. I was doing it wrong. :oops:
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:23 pm
Quote from: Madness
Strange edit...

- I would just do bullet form myself?
- I didn't realize that these forum's had that level of formatting available ;)?

Quote from: Duskweaver
The condemnation of Sorcery was thus already widely accepted in Eanna when the Inchoroi compiled the beliefs of the Five Tribes into the Tusk. Likewise, Shamans (Sorcerer-Prophets) were a distant memory, already a myth to most. They got a brief mention in the Tusk but nothing more. The same with healing magic.

You paint a coherent picture excepting this quote: I'm convinced that the Inchoroi were probably simultaneously interacting with the Eanni as Gods from the Fall, as they interacted with the Nonmen of Earwa. It would suggest to me that the Inchoroi influence is pervasive for a long time before inscribing the Tusk.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:28 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Madness
- I would just do bullet form myself?
- I didn't realize that these forum's had that level of formatting available ;)?
The button is there in the 'Post a Reply' page, but all it does is add a
  • to the text. The forum software isn't converting it into an actual bulleted list like it should.


EDIT: Never mind. I just screwed it up. Turns out you need to include the list command as well to make the bullets work.

Quote
I'm convinced that the Inchoroi were probably simultaneously interacting with the Eanni as Gods from the Fall, as they interacted with the Nonmen of Earwa. It would suggest to me that the Inchoroi influence is pervasive for a long time before inscribing the Tusk.
Well, that's a perfectly fine alternative view. Personally, I think giving Men the Tusk with its "one devious addition" is enough. I dislike the idea of Inchoroi influence over Men being pervasive. Why can't we humans just fuck things up on our own? :P

If the Inchoroi were already basically controlling the Five Tribes by masquerading as the Gods, why bother compiling their 'native' beliefs into the Tusk in the first place? If the 'Gods' are Inchoroi, why not just keep sending Prophets?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:34 pm
Quote from: Madness
Influence and interaction are two different species, friend.

I'd agree with what Wilshire and I had going, the idea that at least one of the Gods from that age is Inchoroi. Which means, we reflect on Inchoroi whenever we reflect on one or some of the Gods.

While I do think that the Inchoroi kept the Xiuhianni back and dominated them completely as a failsafe (hazarding that there remains a culture pervasively worshiping statues of Inchoroi in Eanna) , I don't think they had pervasive influence over the Tribes-of-the-Tusk. Just that they could be any of the Gods in our experience of the present day myth - reflected from the fiction, of course.

EDIT: What couldn't you do with the Shamanism map? Looks good. I understand the convergence issue. Also, are you only seeking to express human sorcery?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:39 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Madness
the idea that at least one of the Gods from that age is Inchoroi.
We don't have any evidence that mortals can become Gods after death, though, do we? If one Inchoroi did manage to figure out how to do that, then would that not be a better method of avoiding damnation than the whole "shutting the World off from the Outside" thing? Eternity as a God sounds much better than mere oblivion. If one or more Inchoroi are living it up in the Outside as Gods, then surely they would oppose such a closing off of the World? In which case, any influence they exerted over the World would be contrary to the aims of the living Inchoroi and the Consult.

Quote
EDIT: What couldn't you do with the Shamanism map? Looks good. I understand the convergence issue. Also, are you only seeking to express human sorcery?
I wanted to show Nonman sorcery on the same map, with the Gnosis as the product of the interaction between Men and Nonmen. But it doesn't appear to be possible to draw a map with multiple 'origin' nodes.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:44 pm
Quote from: Madness
Indeed... Origin nodes and convergence routes. I've always wanted to be part of planning and designing mind-mapping software.

I think something was lost in communicative translation there, Duskweaver.

From the perspective of the Tribes, any Inchoroi interacting with them can only be interpreted as of the Gods. Its the Ancient Aliens/Sufficiently Technological Magic hypotheses pushed to their extremes. This is encapsulated perfectly in the "Tears of God" cultural myth - incidental to how it might actually reflect the metaphysics of Earwa a la Mimara or Aporos perspectives.

I don't believe that the Inchoroi are all of the Kiunnat Gods. I believe that one of them is. So far my money is on Husyelt but that's just a stab in the dark mostly - though, I have more evidence than for that than for it being Ajokli.

Though +1 for uncertainty of mortal ascension - as much as I think that's where the series is going.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:49 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
I admit I like the idea of the 'Burnt Prophet' bowing his face into the Inverse Fire at the behest of an Inchoroi and becoming a tool of the Consult.

But... every time (that we've been privvy to) any human who is not of the Consult encounters an Inchoroi, their first reaction is not "this must be a God/Angel!", but "this is an obscene abomination!". If the Inchies resembled beautiful angelic beings, I could easily buy them masquerading as agents of the Divine... but they emphatically don't.

I really want to buy the argument that one or more of the Hundred are either ascended Inchoroi or are based on folk memories of encounters with Inchoroi. But I see more monkey wrenches than actual machinery there at present...

I'm in the same situation as I am with your Anissi-as-Moe's-daughter theory. I'd love it to be true, but the actual evidence all seems to be against rather than for.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:52:54 pm
Quote from: Madness
Quote from: Duskweaver
But... every time (that we've been privvy to) any human who is not of the Consult encounters an Inchoroi, their first reaction is not "this must be a God/Angel!", but "this is an obscene abomination!". If the Inchies resembled beautiful angelic beings, I could easily buy them masquerading as agents of the Divine... but they emphatically don't.

If I recall correctly, Shaeonanra reflects on them as Flesh Angels in the False Sun - edit: It's among the notes of that story. While their aspects may be incomprehensible, I'd hazard that their actions and reputations define these perspectives far more, neh? Perception may as well be indistinguishable from interpretation.

Quote from: Duskweaver
I really want to buy the argument that one or more of the Hundred are either ascended Inchoroi or are based on folk memories of encounters with Inchoroi.

...

I'm in the same situation as I am with your Anissi-as-Moe's-daughter theory. I'd love it to be true, but the actual evidence all seems to be against rather than for.

Let there be no ambiguity, I support only the middle assertion in any seriousness, that "one or more of the Hundred ... are based on folk memories of encounters with Inchoroi."

I don't support Inchoroi ascension at all as I feel that would put them at serious odds with what seem their guiding principles. I also only advanced Anissi-as-Moe's-daughter in jest - I think we sufficiently squashed it in our first engagements :).
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:00 pm
Quote from: bbaztek
Quote from: Madness
Quote from: Duskweaver
But... every time (that we've been privvy to) any human who is not of the Consult encounters an Inchoroi, their first reaction is not "this must be a God/Angel!", but "this is an obscene abomination!". If the Inchies resembled beautiful angelic beings, I could easily buy them masquerading as agents of the Divine... but they emphatically don't.

If I recall correctly, Shaeonanra reflects on them as Flesh Angels in the False Sun - edit: It's among the notes of that story. While their aspects may be incomprehensible, I'd hazard that their actions and reputations define these perspectives far more, neh? Perception may as well be indistinguishable from interpretation.

i dunno madness if some big dick fish angel thing turned water to wine i still wouldn't write earwa's bible on it
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:05 pm
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: bbaztek
i dunno madness if some big dick fish angel thing turned water to wine i still wouldn't write earwa's bible on it

Depends on the size of the dick. If its so big that you just feel inadequate, probably not. But if its pretty big, but just big enough that you feel like its something you could aspire to achieve, then maybe.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:10 pm
Quote from: bbaztek
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: bbaztek
i dunno madness if some big dick fish angel thing turned water to wine i still wouldn't write earwa's bible on it

Depends on the size of the dick. If its so big that you just feel inadequate, probably not. But if its pretty big, but just big enough that you feel like its something you could aspire to achieve, then maybe.

brb writing a huge post on the prince of nothing series as seen through the lens of freudian psychosexual development
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:17 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Madness
If I recall correctly, Shaeonanra reflects on them as Flesh Angels in the False Sun - edit: It's among the notes of that story.
That term is also used in The Four Revelations. It's probably a Cunuroi designation (they named Aurang 'Angel of Deceit' and the No-God 'Angel of Endless Hunger' - 'Angel' itself seems to be originally a Cunuroi concept).

Anyway, I would expect the Inchoroi to have conditioned Men (intentionally or otherwise) to identify the Inchoroi's physical appearance with the holy if they had indeed been manipulating Men as you suggest. The Burnt Prophet incident could be an exception, since (AFAIK) there were no other witnesses, so if Angeshrael claimed the being he encountered was Husyelt, it wouldn't matter what the supposed deity actually looked like.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:21 pm
Quote from: Curethan
Glamours, bro.  Inchies can look like glowing holy dudes if they want.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:26 pm
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Curethan
Glamours, bro.  Inchies can look like glowing holy dudes if they want.
1) Is there any evidence this is even possible?
2) Assuming it's possible, why do we never see the Inchoroi actually do this?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:30 pm
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: Duskweaver
Quote from: Curethan
Glamours, bro.  Inchies can look like glowing holy dudes if they want.
1) Is there any evidence this is even possible?
2) Assuming it's possible, why do we never see the Inchoroi actually do this?

Much speculation has floated around about this. Esmi's intero-rape session in TDTCB is one that has been debated. I don't know how much hard evidence there is on it though. Mostly speculation, go figure. :P
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:36 pm
Quote from: Madness
+1 on Esmi's rape being a Glamour and the second time when Aurang visits her again before her Compulsion.

Thanks, Curethan.

Duskweaver, Glamours, for me, are the most difficult sorcery to understand. I can dig Cants (Offensive), Wards (Defensive). I can get sorcerous artifacts, glyphs (sorcerous script rendering objects sorcerous), and circles.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:43 pm
Quote from: bbaztek
Curethan has a point, but I'm left wondering why Aurax didn't just appear as a holy being to Werigda and co. in the Warrior-Prophet epilogue. Would have done a better job of coaxing an answer out of them than, well you know
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:48 pm
Quote from: Madness
D00d o.O?

It's the Consult... That was probably friday night for them :shock: .
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:53:56 pm
Quote from: Meyna
Quote from: Madness
+1 on Esmi's rape being a Glamour and the second time when Aurang visits her again before her Compulsion.

Thanks, Curethan.

Duskweaver, Glamours, for me, are the most difficult sorcery to understand. I can dig Cants (Offensive), Wards (Defensive). I can get sorcerous artifacts, glyphs (sorcerous script rendering objects sorcerous), and circles.

As I see it, glamors would fall under a category of magic that is referred to as "Illusion" magic. It's magic that manipulates the mind of the user's target, which can include the self. Rather than be overtly offensive or defensive, illusion magic can be either, depending on the effects of the manipulation. Looking physically different from the target's perspective is one way to do it, but I can imagine illusion spells that directly instill a sense of charm / fear / anger / whatever in the target.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:04 pm
Quote from: Wilshire
Quote from: Meyna
Quote from: Madness
+1 on Esmi's rape being a Glamour and the second time when Aurang visits her again before her Compulsion.

Thanks, Curethan.

Duskweaver, Glamours, for me, are the most difficult sorcery to understand. I can dig Cants (Offensive), Wards (Defensive). I can get sorcerous artifacts, glyphs (sorcerous script rendering objects sorcerous), and circles.

As I see it, glamors would fall under a category of magic that is referred to as "Illusion" magic. It's magic that manipulates the mind of the user's target, which can include the self. Rather than be overtly offensive or defensive, illusion magic can be either, depending on the effects of the manipulation. Looking physically different from the target's perspective is one way to do it, but I can imagine illusion spells that directly instill a sense of charm / fear / anger / whatever in the target.

Genjutsu :P one of these days someone will appreciate my references. For now I'll just entertain myself I guess  :geek:


But yeah, pretty much your standard Illusion magic.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:10 pm
Quote from: Curethan
Oh, I get it Wilshire.  I read a certain manga.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:15 pm
Quote from: Madness
Reading up on that, Wilshire: "Genjutsu can also be used to manipulate others, similar to brainwashing by feeding the victim illusive suggestions" (Narutopedia). This seems to be a more apt description for aspects of the Whelming, in my opinion - though, I understand that Genjutsu seems to encompass both Glamours and Whelming at this point of my analogy. Just drawing on descriptions for fodder.
 
+1 Meyna. I have to wonder then if Esmenet's pleasure is a result of the augmentation of Aurang's true form or of the Glamour he casts? I'd hazard this causes the most ambiguity in that scene and defining Glamours generally.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:20 pm
Quote from: Meyna
Quote from: Madness
+1 Meyna. I have to wonder then if Esmenet's pleasure is a result of the augmentation of Aurang's true form or of the Glamour he casts? I'd hazard this causes the most ambiguity in that scene and defining Glamours generally.

It's a valid question: is the magic only changing how the target's mind views Aurang, or is Aurang changing himself in the physical world so that every perspective apprehends him differently? Do both forms of magic exist in Earwa? The latter would fall under Alteration magic, rather than Illusionmagic, if we want to use terms from, for instance, the Elder Scrolls.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:25 pm
Quote from: Madness
For clarity, we do know that both types I mentioned exist.

In the one instance, Aurang's physical form has been repeatedly Grafted by the Tekne so that it (along with the other Inchoroi who survived such past Grafts) now release augmented pheromones and other biological mechanisms to make their prey compliant.

In the other, we have the fine explanations of Glamours in this thread. This is why I ask, Meyna, as it seems to have changed your thoughts on Glamours being illusory, specifically.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:31 pm
Quote from: Meyna
Ah, of course. I sometimes fail to think of the Tekne when considering the metaphysics of Earwan magic.

+1 for lifting the illusions!
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:36 pm
Quote from: Wilshire
Maybe we should put this on the inital post of a real PreFAQ page if it ever exists:
"Answers are like opium: the more you imbibe, the more you need. Which is why the sober man finds solace in mystery."
Ikurei Conphas, Page 190 (USA Paperback edition)


How's about: Whats with the topos/topi/mengedda plains/Cil' Aujas?




Hell leaks into the world right? Hell = outside (more or less). So it really is just where the objective/subjective reality rules are bent, reality is more further influenced by desire (or mostly from what we have seen influenced by fear).

And since answers always lead to questions(see above):



Is the anarcane ground basically a topos that people arn't scared shitless by? Or is it more like a anti-topos, where human influence does not change but rather the gods can more fully manipulate their desires... or something...

If a bunch of people, in a topos, all thought really really hard about something, would it come true? Could they force an entirely new reality, at least within the confines of that topos? Could Kellhus effectively make his own "outside" exist within the boundaries of, say, the mengedda plains, by getting a shit ton of people to desire/think/want the same thing (Everyone thinking/believing Kellhus is a god/the god and thus Kell actually ascending to a position of absolute power within the sphere of the world)

How big is a topos? Can they only be created through suffereing and anguish. Can a topos be created by intense joy of millions, i.e a heavenly topos instead of the hellish topos we have already seen.


This all fits into the PreFAQ right? Normal questions everyday readers would be thinking of... right? RIGHT?! i'm normal *heavy breathing*
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: What Came Before on May 14, 2013, 11:54:42 pm
Quote from: Madness
+1 on Quote, Wilshire.

Don't worry... I'm anticipating - eventually, I'll work out a nicely condensed and coherent FAQ from our communal brainstorming (I'm also referencing the quickly answered Author Q&A threads on Zombie Three Seas).

It's all gravy.

EDIT: Callan sent me a PM and I'd like to highlight a thought - perhaps, I should even post an Announcements thread.

To lurkers/new members/less immersed readers:

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO RESURRECT OLD THREADS!

That is all.

EDIT: Wilshire, I meant to post this earlier in response to your Topoi thoughts:

Quote from: Cu'jara Cinmoi, 2006
One of the ideas behind anarcane ground simply follows the notion that the boundaries between the World and the Outside are variable. Some, taking the distinction between wakefulness and dreams as their analogy, believe anarcane ground to be Holy ground - places where the God has, for whatever reason, focussed his attention - dreams lucidly - thus rendering the co-option of his Song by sorcery difficult if not impossible.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on June 20, 2013, 02:36:46 pm
Decided to bump this thread with a question that might not be 100% pertinent but oh well.

For some reason, it donned on me that the whole of Golgotterath is surely a topos. A really big and terrible one. If Mengedda went topoi after the NG died, I'm sure the whole area around the ship was similarly transformed when the NG exploded into existence. I am imagining that the coming of NG was not like Tony Stark screwing in the final bolt that finished his iron man suit, but more like a huge explosion (think atomic bomb) after a choir of aporetic schoolman finish their song.

Maybe simply having the majority of the human population standing in big topos worrying about the NG resurrecting... will itself be the cause of that resurrection. If a single man could grow an Eye in his own heart, a whole nation bent to the same thought could certainly cause it to happen. Yes?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on June 23, 2013, 02:15:53 pm
Decided to bump this thread with a question that might not be 100% pertinent but oh well.

For some reason, it donned on me that the whole of Golgotterath is surely a topos. A really big and terrible one.

+1 on the bump. A friend and I discussed about it a few times in the past weeks and it is really difficult to frame a TSA FAQ. Too many questions remain relevant throughout the series.

Golgotterath seems like it would be the worst topoi?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on June 23, 2013, 03:36:47 pm
Assuming of course that there are different levels of topoi... Maybe it goes out like distance rather than magnatude. By that I mean, once something has achieved 'topoi' it is some kind of bridge to the outside. The bridge can get bigger, but a bridge doesn't become more-bridge-like. So maybe the depth of atrocity just makes the area larger. So because of all the suffereing, most or all of Agongorea is Golgotterath's topoi.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on June 25, 2013, 02:02:33 pm
You and I, among others, tried to hash out Topoi in The Ground, the Void and the Outside. (http://second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=801.0), if thou is remembering?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on June 25, 2013, 09:43:12 pm
Ah that was the thread. Knew it was somewhere.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Baztek on June 26, 2013, 05:15:03 am
As I see it, the big questions in the series are: Kellhus/Moenghus/The Dunyain, the Consult and associated shenanigans, and the metaphysics of Earwa (with plenty of subtopics like sorcery and topoi). I don't think the problem with an official FAQ is the length and breadth of these topics, but the lack of definitive answers. I propose that the "answers" just be the interpretations of different members. So like, if the question is, what is Damnation, I'd say that to me it is a law of the universe as objective and arbitrary as that of gravity. Then you can put Wilshire's interpretations, Callan's, etc. etc. I think it would be interesting that way because you'd get wildly varying interpretations and, frankly, that's what I think makes these books so fascinating. It would tell new members that we don't have it all figured out, and they get an idea of how deep these topics go to encourage further discussion.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on June 26, 2013, 12:26:18 pm
I don't think the problem with an official FAQ is the length and breadth of these topics, but the lack of definitive answers. I propose that the "answers" just be the interpretations of different members.

+1.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on June 26, 2013, 04:20:16 pm
Ha. Thats an entertaining idea. We could make a post that had some of the big questions that are commonly asked but seldom have an answer, and then have any who are strongly opinionated and willing to dig up reasons for their madness write up a paragraph or a page on their view of the answer.

I think you hit the heart of the issue. The problem is that most questions that anyone would like to have answered are more complex than they know, and few agree on any theory as a whole.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Baztek on June 26, 2013, 05:04:27 pm
Certainly true, but as long as there's a, for the lack of a better term, commonality in all of our interpretations I don't think it would be very intimidating at all. If we got 10 wildly varying explanations for what the Damnation machine is, then it's just gonna leave new members feeling like they're being asked to study Ulysses with us. But if our interpretations are all within certain bounds, then everyone knows the only thing missing are some key details.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on June 26, 2013, 05:21:56 pm
Would would be lucky to get to 10 :P, but I am tempted to say the more the merrier. For any given question there would probably be only a couple of "answers", and at least some support should be offered.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on July 02, 2013, 03:26:16 pm
Again, I don't think the issue is so much generating answers... it's the questions which allude us and drive us mad! They remind me... they remind me of the answers! But what are the questions?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Borque on December 04, 2013, 11:49:49 am
Ah, so this is the dreaded Pre-FAQ. Finally, we meet.

I'm thinking we should have a part of the FAQ dedicated to new/potential readers who aren't familiar with the books.

I have started a couple of suggestions for questions and answers below, feel free to give your opinions, suggest stuff to add or remove, and improve my writing as needed.

Who is this Bakker guy anyway?
R. Scott Bakker ("RSB") is a Canadian author, yada yada, copy/paste from Wikipedia or link there?
He is best known for his fantasy series called The Second Apocalypse.

What is The Second Apocalypse?
The Second Apocalypse is a series encompassing at least two trilogies, Prince of Nothing and Aspect-Emperor, and one possible duology or trilogy of which nothing yet is known. The two first trilogies can be read independently, but it is generally considered to be best to start with the first trilogy, Prince of Nothing.

Will I like The Second Apocalypse?
Possibly, but not certainly. Many readers consider these books too dark, pompous, or difficult, while many others love them as complex, ambiguous, poetic and challenging. Generally speaking, if you liked Lord of the Rings, George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire,  and/or Frank Herbert's Dune books you stand a good chance of appreciating The Second Apocalypse and should try it out. You need to have a high tolerance for internal ruminations of characters, occasional philosophy, a few outright disgusting scenes involving sex and/or violence, and characters being solidly grey.

It helps if you have read at least a couple of other epic fantasy series, as Bakker works a lot with subverting well known tropes of the genre.


It's almost Christmas. Will my kids love The Second Apocalypse?
No. No, they won't. You definitely don't want to give these books to your kids without having read them yourself first. These books are firmly adult, and as such they are probably not appreciated by kids under 18 or more likely 25 (... though I'm not sure about this one - that's my opinion anyway...).

How should I go about reading The Second Apocalypse?
They should definitely be read in the order they were published, as later books contain spoilers for earlier ones. This means starting out with the Prince of Nothing books, and reading them in the following order:
When starting with The Darkness That Comes Before, do not give up until you have read at least around 200 pages, preferably the entire book. Names will be troubling for some at first, since many of them are very unfamiliar, but ignore this - the important ones will stick eventually. Be aware of that almost everyone, even die-hard fans of the books, found the beginning to be tough going. If you found all of the first 200 pages to be completely unreadable garbage, you probably won't like the rest either, and you can start looking for something else to read. If you found something that piqued your interest, regardless of it being the political machinations, some of the characters, the magic system(s) or something else, keep on reading until you've finished the book. Then make the decision if you want to read on, keeping in mind that the next two books, The Warrior Prophet and The Thousandfold Thought, are generally considered better than the first one.

Then continue with the Aspect-Emperor trilogy, in order:
On RSBs web site there are two short stories, The Four Revelations of Cinial'jin and The False Sun. They were released after The White Luck Warrior, and are probably best read after that book. However, be aware of that The False Sun contains a spoiler for The Unholy Consult.

This Kellhus guy seems to act very weirdly for being the hero, right?

Yes. This is intentional. Beware of considering him a hero, quite possibly he is the main villain. As of writing this FAQ, five books into the six book series, his status as a hero and/or villain is still very much undetermined and subject for some great discussions on this forum.

What are all these strangë chäractërs? They make mÿ head hûrt.
(...)

Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 04, 2013, 01:04:49 pm
Great beginnings, yes!

Nice, Borque.

I hope this inspires people. A couple more, polish this up a little for realsies and I'll update my Links to Fan Resources to FAQ & Fan Resources.

It's easiest if we get a nice bulk base and then keep updating it (if and when this thread receives any participation ;)).

Thank you, Borque.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: locke on December 04, 2013, 07:06:57 pm
Dramatis Personæ:

Kellhus - the hero or the villain, a martial arts monk

Achamian - a sorcerer

Cnaiur - a barbarian

Esmenet - a prostitute

Serwe - a waif

Conphas - heir to the emperor

Those six characters are the primary viewpoint characters of the first three novels, 90% of the story is told from their perspectives.

Dramatis Personæ:

Sorweel - a prince

Mimara - a princess

Kelmomas - an heir to the emperor

these three characters are new to the second series and are also primary viewpoint characters.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: locke on December 04, 2013, 07:28:30 pm
It's really hard to read The Darkness that Comes Before, is their an alternate reading order?

Not officially, but the structure of the books changes after the first book to a more common interleaving style where chapter to chapter alternates the various story threads, this makes the sequels much easier to read. 

The Darkness that Comes Before is written in the more archaic style of long chunks, divided into sections or books, where only one story thread is told at a time.  The best example of this style is the Lord of the Rings which will consist of 300 unbroken pages following Frodo, only to switch halfway through to follow Aragorn et al for 300 pages. 

The Darkness that comes before is structured as follows: Kellhus for 30 pages, Achamian Esmenet for 100 pages, Conphas and Cnaiur for 130 pages, Achamian and Esmenet for 85 pages, Cnaiur, Serwe, and Kellhus for 100 pages and then interleaves all the characters for the final 140 pages.  This makes it very awkward for new readers, because there's a 300+ page gap between the first character you meet and encountering him again. 

There is no official way to read the book differently, but if you find yourself struggling with reading the book as currently arranged, here is an alternate structure that interleaves the book's chapters in a more modern and dynamic fashion that is in keeping with the structural style used in the rest of the series.

Prologue
Chapter One

Chapter Five

Chapter Two

Chapter Six
Chapter Seven

Chapter Three

Chapter Eight

Chapter Four

Chapter Twelve

Chapter Nine

Chapter Thirteen

Chapter Ten

Chapter Fourteen

Chapter Eleven

Chapter Fifteen
Chapter Sixteen
Chapter Seventeen
Chapter Eighteen
Chapter Nineteen
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on December 04, 2013, 11:18:46 pm
Borque that was a good post. I have a few things to add:

18 - 25 seems like a decent range, but I started when I was 16, and am not yet 25. Don't know if a age should be put in there, but its a fair point to say to a parent that they should consider reading it before they gift it. The books are certainly Adult Fiction.

btw Good advice with the 200 pages thing. It wasn't until the end that I really fell in love with the book, and I'm honestly not sure why I went that far. But yeah, if there is absolutely nothing of interest after the first 1/3 of the book, you might be better off just moving on.

Locke, interesting idea with the reading order, I like it.
One thing to add to your response to that question:
It's really hard to read The Darkness that Comes Before, is their an alternate reading order?

I don't think I would have finished TDTCB if I didn't have the TTT glossary  sitting next to me. I'd honestly recommend it to everyone starting out. The ability to look up some of the weird words gave me a fighting chance. Unfortunately that makes it a 2book purchase to start out, which may be too much to ask.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: locke on December 05, 2013, 03:50:54 am
next time I reread TDTCB I'm going to try that order, thematically it should result in many different really nice commonalities across threads such as Serwe's travels corresponding to Esmenets.  It will also provide a smoother narrative flow to Cnaiur, Esmenet and Achamian's stories.  Nothing to be done about the lack of Kellhus in Atraithau.  It'd be great to have that chapter just after chapter two in the above order, maybe someday we'll get an author's special edition.  If RSB ever got a TV series, they should totally reissue a revised and expanded version of TDTCB that would have the pacing more closely track the structure of the remaining volumes of the series. (and naturally the TV series would also use an interleaving structure).
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 05, 2013, 11:13:59 am
The dramatis personae, obviously.

I'm not sure an FAQ is the place for an alternate reading order as much I'm going to try it myself.

Aside, how is it that people are so inconvenienced by (a reading experience) TDTCB? I don't really understand. It remains consistently top three, whenever I rate the series, no matter what my mood.

btw Good advice with the 200 pages thing. It wasn't until the end that I really fell in love with the book, and I'm honestly not sure why I went that far. But yeah, if there is absolutely nothing of interest after the first 1/3 of the book, you might be better off just moving on.

I thought all the characters felt pretty refreshing when compared to the depthless caricatures I was reading in fiction at that point. I especially liked Cnaiur and Conphas as they offered the relative window on more traditional fare. And the whole book is worth Skeaos' face breaking open before Achamian - I knew then it was going to be an awesome ride.

I don't think I would have finished TDTCB if I didn't have the TTT glossary  sitting next to me. I'd honestly recommend it to everyone starting out. The ability to look up some of the weird words gave me a fighting chance. Unfortunately that makes it a 2book purchase to start out, which may be too much to ask.

Interesting.

Ultimately, I don't understand why it is necessary to convince moreso than inform? I've purchased many books that I later regretted and have taken a chance on far less than Bakker and what TSA ended up turning into. Fuck people's indignant hurt in this context.

I have nothing to apologize for for being a fan. Neither does anyone else. Nor should our recommendations constantly be disclaimers about difficulty and graphic gratuity. I refuse to use the FAQ as propaganda that makes a case for reading the books rather than being a helpful guide.

It's like the difference between the FAQ being personified as Saruman or Gandalf to me...

However, obviously, I'll consider myself overruled by the lot of you and include anything FAQ-wise that the community concedes is necessary.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Somnambulist on December 05, 2013, 03:23:04 pm
Hear, hear!  Much agreement.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: locke on December 05, 2013, 07:54:05 pm
Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing.  Then the second Achamian chapter and I thought, WTF, shouldn't this be a Kellhus chapter or a new character.  Then the third achamian chapter and halfway through I began flipping through the book looking for the name kellhus.  I was shocked that 300 + pages later was the first reappearance of that amazing prolouge character.  I skipped those 300 pages and read through the Kellhus/Cnaiur/Serwe section until I saw the name Achamian again.  Then I went back to Chapter 3 to start reading the boring bits.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on December 05, 2013, 09:40:08 pm
Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing. 
Actually now that you say that, I experienced much the same. I went back and read the prologue several times to keep me motivated through the end.

Aside, how is it that people are so inconvenienced by (a reading experience) TDTCB? I don't really understand. It remains consistently top three, whenever I rate the series, no matter what my mood.
...
I have nothing to apologize for for being a fan. Neither does anyone else. Nor should our recommendations constantly be disclaimers about difficulty and graphic gratuity. I refuse to use the FAQ as propaganda that makes a case for reading the books rather than being a helpful guide.

We must just not be as smart and literary inclined as you. Unfortunately, the general concurrences is that its a difficult start. From personal experience and from 2nd hand accounts, I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone that honestly didn't have any troubles or qualms from the start.

If you're honestly interested in disseminating the work, you might want to not take such comments quite so personally.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Triskele on December 06, 2013, 12:21:58 am
Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing.  Then the second Achamian chapter and I thought, WTF, shouldn't this be a Kellhus chapter or a new character.  Then the third achamian chapter and halfway through I began flipping through the book looking for the name kellhus.  I was shocked that 300 + pages later was the first reappearance of that amazing prolouge character.  I skipped those 300 pages and read through the Kellhus/Cnaiur/Serwe section until I saw the name Achamian again.  Then I went back to Chapter 3 to start reading the boring bits.

This was very similar to my experience.  I was amazed at the prologue from the beginning and still think it's an amazing bit of writing. 

But Achamian's and Esmenet's early chapters are challenging.  They might suffer a tad simply for being what comes early in a difficult series (i.e., the reader is still doing a bit of "WTF?" to the names and history and general strangeness).  The story really picks up w/ Cnaiur and the re-introduction of Kellhus.

That being said, the difficult first part of the book does improve upon a reread when the reader is more familiar with the names, the world, and the complex plot that is already starting to move in Achamian's early chapters even if it wasn't so clear upon the first reading.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Francis Buck on December 06, 2013, 12:52:17 am
Personally? 

When I first read it, I thought the prologue was fucking amazing.  The first Achamian chapter was amazing.  Then the second Achamian chapter and I thought, WTF, shouldn't this be a Kellhus chapter or a new character.  Then the third achamian chapter and halfway through I began flipping through the book looking for the name kellhus.  I was shocked that 300 + pages later was the first reappearance of that amazing prolouge character.  I skipped those 300 pages and read through the Kellhus/Cnaiur/Serwe section until I saw the name Achamian again.  Then I went back to Chapter 3 to start reading the boring bits.

Yup, pretty much the exact same thing here, except I only read a little bit of the later Kellhus parts before saying fuck it and going back to go straight through. It definitely required some effort though. I didn't really start liking Achamian chapters in general until TAE to be honest, and even then he's not my favorite. I still miss having a POV like Cnaiur, Conphas, or Kellhus in TAE, all three of which were by far the most interesting, probably because they were the most abnormal.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 06, 2013, 12:43:40 pm
Apparently, I don't read books like everyone else here.

Quelle surprise.

We must just not be as smart and literary inclined as you.

This just isn't so and it does us both a disservice, I think.

Unfortunately, the general concurrences is that its a difficult start. From personal experience and from 2nd hand accounts, I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone that honestly didn't have any troubles or qualms from the start.

If you're honestly interested in disseminating the work, you might want to not take such comments quite so personally.

My rants are fueled by an abiding distaste for this prevalent attitude found in Bakker fans, especially as expressed on Westeros (which still likely gets more posts and proportionately more views than this entire forum does).

If it's perceived that I'm doing damage to the cause, let me know please (unless this is my warning, Wilshire :) ). I'll work to limit/sharpen my position so that it doesn't come off so... however it does.

I'm still honestly surprised by the difference in reading habits, though.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on December 06, 2013, 09:18:25 pm

This just isn't so and it does us both a disservice, I think.

I think the only disservice is to you. Give yourself some credit. Aren't you in grad school?  ;)
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Borque on December 07, 2013, 01:05:07 pm
Westeros (which still likely gets more posts and proportionately more views than this entire forum does).
Not necessarily true, I think. Bakker activity there is in one thread. Here, it's spread out and nicely spread out over all the topics. There is a lot more repetition of themes and questions there.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 07, 2013, 01:44:09 pm
Westeros (which still likely gets more posts and proportionately more views than this entire forum does).
Not necessarily true, I think. Bakker activity there is in one thread. Here, it's spread out and nicely spread out over all the topics. There is a lot more repetition of themes and questions there.

Agreed, I'm being dramatic. I did write proportionately ;). Half the posters there are the regulars here, anyways.

It really is disappointing, though, that (getting on a year and a half later) for many, many internet users that thread is still the only "Bakker forum" going.


This just isn't so and it does us both a disservice, I think.

I think the only disservice is to you. Give yourself some credit. Aren't you in grad school?  ;)

Lol - probably getting on there, I still have some hurdles to go. I've been living quite a life.

This is the point though. You can't just go forming mystics about people, which imply intellectual divisions like this where there are none ;). Especially, as we basically started reading PON at the same age (if separated by a few years).

My head is going to explode for killing the mystery but a little more disclosure for the sake of the thread:

I started reading PON at 17. I've grown with these books more than most (obviously, as I'm still basically growing up) and it took me a long fucking time before I actually started to understand even so much as all the words at that age (thankfully I'd developed a habit of reading with dictionaries).

Hell, when I think back on how much my life has changed since WLW even, it actually boggles me.

So while our experiences necessitate changing our readings and developing ongoing comprehension, I find it hard to believe that someone in their mid-teens (and by extension, anyone) approaching this series, on their own, or worse by our recommendations, need the disclaimers to be convinced...

What happened to curiosity or self-exploration?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Borque on December 08, 2013, 10:08:49 pm
I have reflected on your comments. I think the suggested age span should be removed.

I still think that som kind of parental guidance is a good idea, though.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on December 09, 2013, 12:09:15 am
What questions is the PreFAQ supposed to answer? By which, I mean who is it catering towards? People have haven't started, people who just started, people who are finished with the series and are seeking answers, etc.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 09, 2013, 02:56:30 pm
Lol - the PreFAQ is supposed to determine what type of questions the FAQ consists of. The FAQ is supposed to answer...

People have haven't started, people who just started, people who are finished with the series and are seeking answers, etc.

All of the above, if possible (remember, this cursory investigation has only manifested twice, first with Willem and now with Borque).

I have reflected on your comments. I think the suggested age span should be removed.

I still think that som kind of parental guidance is a good idea, though.

Borque, my commentary was in response to Wilshire calling me too smart for the lot of you - it just isn't true and so I replied to showcase that when I started this series I had probably a lot less intelligence or maturity than others did (and, certainly, than I do now).

I dislike when people underestimate themselves.

However, you raise an interesting distinction - I don't think we should actually make an age suggestion at all. What would be the point? We're not going to stop anyone from reading the series, if they so choose to do so, regardless of age, maturity, or our assessment of what is "appropriate" for who.

I assume (perhaps, erroneously) that those who find this place are, at least, acquainted with an adult worldview.

It's like video games (for which age restrictions are a joke). Call of Duty has ratings of Teen (13 and up) or Mature (17 and up) yet my older sister has doesn't even give a thought to letting my seven year old nephew play whatever he wants.

It's absolutely more difficult with books because of the personal and subjective reading experience. At least with video games, my parents could see what I was playing growing up and had the option to pull the plug on me. What kind of oversight is possible with books? What purpose would it serve to rate and enforce reading experiences in this fashion?

There's actually a Westeros thread on this buried in Gen. Chat or Literature. I may find it and link it as I'm interested in the opinions of others.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on December 09, 2013, 07:45:43 pm
I don't think any specific mention of age would be prudent, but mentioning that its adult scifi/fantasy rather than "teen paranormal romance" (which is a genre now i guess) might be a nice heads up lol.

We could look to the posts with the most responses to get an idea of what a "FAQ" should contain.
Also, maybe it should be layered revelations

Frequently Asked question #one:
Answer (up though TTT)
(click to show/hide)
Answer (up through TUC)
(click to show/hide)

Though that would be difficult for someone who's read all the things already.
Which, if I remember correctly, was a point of contention earlier (or at least in the Almanac discussion). It would be difficult to parse when/where the darkness was light up :P.
Also, though less difficult, it would be important to say if its hard textual "truth", or general community assessment/conclusion, and/or dissenting opinions.


Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 10, 2013, 01:13:02 pm
I don't think any specific mention of age would be prudent, but mentioning that its adult scifi/fantasy rather than "teen paranormal romance" (which is a genre now i guess) might be a nice heads up lol.

Lol.

We could look to the posts with the most responses to get an idea of what a "FAQ" should contain.
Also, maybe it should be layered revelations

Frequently Asked question #one:
Answer (up though TTT)
(click to show/hide)
Answer (up through TUC)
(click to show/hide)

Though that would be difficult for someone who's read all the things already.
Which, if I remember correctly, was a point of contention earlier (or at least in the Almanac discussion). It would be difficult to parse when/where the darkness was light up :P.
Also, though less difficult, it would be important to say if its hard textual "truth", or general community assessment/conclusion, and/or dissenting opinions.

All truth but I think we could spoiler revelations within one FAQ thread... how hard it is really to click on a spoiler tag?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on December 10, 2013, 03:56:58 pm
Easy to spoiler tag hard facts, harder to tag revelations based on community conclusion rent from years of pouring over the text. Conclusions that may or may not be able to be discerned without the full knowledge of all the books.

But yes, reasonable tags of spoilers seems, well, reasonable.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 11, 2013, 02:18:09 pm
Easy to spoiler tag hard facts, harder to tag revelations based on community conclusion rent from years of pouring over the text. Conclusions that may or may not be able to be discerned without the full knowledge of all the books.

But yes, reasonable tags of spoilers seems, well, reasonable.

Lol +1 for reasonable. Otherwise, at least you keep my feet on the ground when my ideals start me floating ::).
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Royce on December 12, 2013, 11:57:37 am
Quote
I have nothing to apologize for for being a fan. Neither does anyone else. Nor should our recommendations constantly be disclaimers about difficulty and graphic gratuity. I refuse to use the FAQ as propaganda that makes a case for reading the books rather than being a helpful guide

Well said. I am so grateful that I knew nothing of this series, the author, other books he has written etc, when I started reading it. Heck, I had barely read any fantasy at all.

I am grateful to Bakker because PON reminded me how rewarding books can be if they do not underestimate the reader. Bakker turned me into a
hardcore reader again(was 31 when I read PON) Read much in my early twenties but lost interest, and my fokus was elsewhere. That he made me pick up on my reading again, is something I am eternally grateful for.

Personally I do not like to know much about the books I read, the element of surprise is in my case essential.
Anyways, teens today grow up with double anal penetration for breakfast, so I would not worry to much about the shock factor in these books.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on December 12, 2013, 12:59:02 pm
Lol - and you fit in the DVDA. Gall, Royce ;).

When I was younger I used to have a standard mix of authors, a constantly growing collection, whose books I would check out regularly in books stores and libraries. As far as my brain is concerned I'm a cyborg as internet activity has been a part of me since I was 11 and somehow I never thought to use it to search out book communities, read up on authors, etc, until I found Bakker (and read the PON as a whole after all the books had been released and realized that there was the Three-Seas forum ;)). But realistically, I was tapering on my fiction reading at that point... I still look but it takes something nearing Bakker's conscientiousness to really grab me now.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: mrganondorf on April 25, 2014, 03:43:23 pm
Don't know if this thread is still ongoing--maybe a note about abbreviations for new people?  TTT, TWP, the IF, etc.  Maybe a definition of nerdaneling?  Or maybe not, is finding out like a token in-grouping?  Also, if someone (I don't) had the details on the ROH affair that might be good to put in there.  I bet some folks come here on the fence about Bakker and something that sounded sober and not too Bakker-fanatic motivated could be nice.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on April 25, 2014, 04:26:51 pm
ROH?

A list of commonly used definitions and phrases might be a good idea.

Where would we put this topic if it ever came to be? News/Announcements? That board is all stickies anyway
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: mrganondorf on April 25, 2014, 08:27:22 pm
ROH?

A list of commonly used definitions and phrases might be a good idea.

Where would we put this topic if it ever came to be? News/Announcements? That board is all stickies anyway

The Requires Only Hate affair!  I have no idea if it should get a write up, I was only vaguely aware of it, but it seemed like a big deal to some folks.  I assumed the abbreviations list would just be another Q/A in an FAQ?
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on April 26, 2014, 12:07:57 am
I'm still completely in the dark. Oh well :P
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: mrganondorf on April 26, 2014, 02:23:01 pm
It was the person who accused Bakker of sexism and Bakker seemed to go into overdrive to respond.  I think.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on April 26, 2014, 03:28:19 pm
Oh that was probably about when I gave up on TPB. Couldn't stand the idiocy.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on April 27, 2014, 01:53:54 pm
I'm not sure it is an issue so much as people make it an issue. People always seem to somehow paint Bakker a certain way during the Vox Day/ROH skirmishes yet they garner so much negative criticism on their own.

To be honest, including that in an FAQ sounds redundant to me. Don't think about a white elephant.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Cüréthañ on April 29, 2014, 01:30:24 am
A quick overview of the ROH (requires only hate) 'debate'.

A blogger (Cracked Moon) picks up on a popular thread topic regarding Bakker and Women, turns it into a review/article. (see Bakker and Women on Westeros for more).

CM's underlying argument is that Bakker's fictional representation of women and a patriarchal social structure reflects misogynist views by the author and that his work is written in such a way as to appeal primarily to people who agree with such views and attitudes.

CM doesn't read TSA (can't get past the molestation and murder in prologue) so just picks quotes that illustrate her point.

Bakker is silly enough to get involved.
Trolls and lols intensify.

Personally, I disagree with moral criticism of art.  Nabakov, Hemmingway and Dostoevski wrote some fucked up shit too - doesn't mean you shouldn't read it.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Royce on April 29, 2014, 09:04:12 am
Quote
Personally, I disagree with moral criticism of art.  Nabakov, Hemmingway and Dostoevski wrote some fucked up shit too - doesn't mean you shouldn't read it

+1. Great art pushes the limit of morals to the point where people get disgusted, and maybe some will reflect more deeply on why they are disgusted, and then find flaws in their own moral reasoning. That is a good thing.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on May 02, 2014, 01:55:15 am
Thanks for the clarity Curethan. That is exactly when I stopped reading TPB comments. Like I said, idiocy all around.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Wilshire on June 17, 2014, 03:07:45 pm
Going to revive this once again, in case our Disseminating Bakker actually works.

I'd like to link a spoiler-free FAQ into our "Who are the Dunyain" board so as to direct people who are more or less completely ignorant of the series to a place that might answers questions without spoiling the book.

Baring further input, I'll go ahead and construct it myself based on the feedback received so far in this topic.

Answers will be topical, geared towards answering basic question about the series as a whole  rather than addressing specific questions about plot points, and  designed to convince people to read TDTCB.
Title: Re: The PreFAQ
Post by: Madness on June 18, 2014, 12:45:19 pm
I can't wait to see your attempt. Such a task has boggled me.