Why Kelmomas?

  • 42 Replies
  • 7375 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

NronFisher

  • *
  • Emwama
  • Posts: 13
    • View Profile
« on: September 09, 2017, 06:17:13 am »
Hey everyone, just finished the book (I know I know, late to the party). Loved it, but among my many questions I have to ask: why Kelmomas? I don't want to believe it was just his bloodline that allowed him to be the No-God, but his emptiness. It is implied throughout the series the Kel is an amoral creature, with little or no concept of good. In fact, whereas all other characters consider what is right or wrong, or what leads to damnation or salvation, Kelmomas proceeds from an animal desire for what he wants (his mother) and what he fears (his father). Could this be what allows him to be sacrificed for the birth of the No-God? That he is a soulless soul, without any consideration for right or wrong? That by giving dominion of the world to an amoral force that blots out the vision of the Gods due to their existence being intertwined with morality?

Just a thought. Also, whether or not this is true, I have read some people say Kelmomas IS the new No-God. I personally don't want to believe it. I don't want to believe that the No-God is Kelmomas, because I would hate for the all-consuming whirlwind to be about to kill our heroes when suddenly it sees Esmenet and decides it wants a cuddle or some stupid shit. I want to think that the consciousness we call 'Kelmomas' was completely subsumed by the Sarchophagus, which contains ultimate power, but needed a template for rational thought.

TL DR; the No-God being a giant Jaeger in need of a pilot ala Pacific Rim would make me mad as fuck

TLEILAXU

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Exalt-Smiter of Theories
  • Posts: 731
    • View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 09, 2017, 06:35:44 am »
I think the part about Kel always being the No-God maybe refers more to the pre-determined causal flow that leads him to become the insertant for the carapace rather than him actually shouting MUMMEEEE with the voices of a million sranc (courtesy of somebody else on this forum).

solipsisticurge

  • *
  • Momurai
  • **
  • Posts: 79
  • There is a head on a pole behind him.
    • View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2017, 07:13:37 pm »
His neurological framework, as per Bakker in a Q&A.

What specifically about his brain structure, or why it seems to run strongly with the Anasurimbor, is not yet explained.

Dead twins also seem to be a recurrent factor where the No-God is concerned (Nau-Cayuti's father), though whether it is a causal relationship (or what that would mean for Mimara and Akka's child) also remains undefined at present.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Kings never lie. They demand the world be mistaken.

Cynical Cat

  • *
  • Kijneta
  • ***
  • Posts: 221
    • View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 11, 2017, 12:30:16 am »
I imagine its a combination of heredity and mental plasticity.  The Anasurimbor line reputedly includes Nonmen blood so the "code" of both of Earwa's native soul possessing humanoids can be found and read in their bodies.  The second, as has been mentioned, is Kel's mental plasticity that allows him to closely match the mind of the original.

profgrape

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Great Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
« Reply #4 on: September 11, 2017, 04:41:42 pm »
I thought it was because he's an ensouled being without any identity, a sort of non-entity.  Reminds me of how Bakker described the NG as "a perfectly unconscious God". 

That being said, I've no idea whatsoever why Nau-Cayuti was a suitable Subject.   

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2660
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #5 on: September 12, 2017, 11:02:13 am »
That being said, I've no idea whatsoever why Nau-Cayuti was a suitable Subject.

Yeah, I still think there is something about their (Nau and Kel) souls that mark them as somehow similar to the kind of souls that would have powered the Sarcophagus (i.e. the No-God) on other worlds.  Either they were souls of Progenitors themselves (i.e. suffiently close to the Absolute) or they were souls purposely bred for the task, in which case, I am not sure what the ideal there is. What quality would make an idea circuit?  Perhaps that is the lesson of little Kel?  A lack of identity?
“I am a warrior of ages, Anasūrimbor . . . 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

MSJ

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Yatwer's Baby Daddy
  • Posts: 2288
  • "You killed the wolf"
    • View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 12, 2017, 11:06:02 am »
Well looking back on Akka's dreams, Nayu is infatuated with Lėva in the same manner that Kel is with Esme. I mean, in the bowels of the Ark, and Nayu only has getting his wife back on his mind. I think those hints are there for a reason.
“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,

profgrape

  • *
  • The Afflicted Few
  • Great Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 12, 2017, 03:34:13 pm »
Well looking back on Akka's dreams, Nayu is infatuated with Lėva in the same manner that Kel is with Esme. I mean, in the bowels of the Ark, and Nayu only has getting his wife back on his mind. I think those hints are there for a reason.
I had a similar thought, MSJ, about whether there was a parallel between NC:Aulisi and Kel:Esme.  The bit I had trouble reconciling was that the object of NC's obsession, Aulisi, is long-dead by the time he becomes the Subject.  The last thing he does before getting captured, after all, is enthusiastically shag his wife. 

Madness

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Conversational Batman
  • Posts: 5224
  • Strength on the Journey - Journey Well
    • View Profile
    • The Second Apocalypse
« Reply #8 on: September 13, 2017, 12:43:01 am »
Just a thought. Also, whether or not this is true, I have read some people say Kelmomas IS the new No-God. I personally don't want to believe it. I don't want to believe that the No-God is Kelmomas, because I would hate for the all-consuming whirlwind to be about to kill our heroes when suddenly it sees Esmenet and decides it wants a cuddle or some stupid shit. I want to think that the consciousness we call 'Kelmomas' was completely subsumed by the Sarchophagus, which contains ultimate power, but needed a template for rational thought.

I've likewise dismissed the Kelmomas IS the No-God speculation. I don't think the No-God attributes change depending on which neurology completes the circuit.
The Existential Scream
Weaponizing the Warrior Pose - Declare War Inwardly
carnificibus: multus sanguis fluit
Die Better
The Theory-Killer

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2660
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #9 on: September 13, 2017, 11:33:40 am »
Just a thought. Also, whether or not this is true, I have read some people say Kelmomas IS the new No-God. I personally don't want to believe it. I don't want to believe that the No-God is Kelmomas, because I would hate for the all-consuming whirlwind to be about to kill our heroes when suddenly it sees Esmenet and decides it wants a cuddle or some stupid shit. I want to think that the consciousness we call 'Kelmomas' was completely subsumed by the Sarchophagus, which contains ultimate power, but needed a template for rational thought.

I've likewise dismissed the Kelmomas IS the No-God speculation. I don't think the No-God attributes change depending on which neurology completes the circuit.

Plausible.  However, he is "in there" somewhere?  I guess we can ask, as NG 1.0, who is asking "WHAT DO YOU SEE?"  Is it the apparatus itself?  I think probably would be Nau-Cayuti.

Just as circuitry in, say, a car has no idea what it is doing, I doubt if the soul that completes the Sarcophagus' function is aware of what it is doing.  Obviously, electrical circuits are always unaware, but a soul, shorn of the body and so of it's identity and perceptual capacity, ends up in nearly the same place.  The difference, of course, as the NG 1.0 demonstrates, is that the insertant retains (or gains, depending on how you want to approach it) the awareness of being unaware.  Not only that, but seemingly also retains the feeling, or perhaps knowledge, that something isn't quite right about this state.

So, I don't think the No-God 2.0 will have the external character of Kel, in the same way that I don't think the No-God 1.0 had the character of Nau.  However, somewhere in there, physically or metaphysically, their souls are (were) present.  I don't know if this means the No-God could be metaphysically undone, but I guess it is possible (i.e. Mimara answering it's question).
“I am a warrior of ages, Anasūrimbor . . . 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

SmilerLoki

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 13, 2017, 12:23:00 pm »
Plausible.  However, he is "in there" somewhere?  I guess we can ask, as NG 1.0, who is asking "WHAT DO YOU SEE?"  Is it the apparatus itself?  I think probably would be Nau-Cayuti.
Since the No-God itself has tremendous metaphysical significance, compounded by it's mantra being completely identical both times, it seems much less likely that an Insertant has any kind of agency in the System. Or else we shouldn't discuss the No-God, but Kelmomas and Nau-Cayuti, in however maimed states.

Any kind of agency on the part of an Insertant is a potential flaw (that might very well have huge narrative consequences), but as an intentional component of the System it would tremendously weaken the concept of the No-God. Instead of a philosophical principle brought to life it would just become, basically, a piloted mecha.

In other words, I agree with Madness in dismissing the speculation that an Insertant in any way describes the No-God itself.

TLEILAXU

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Exalt-Smiter of Theories
  • Posts: 731
    • View Profile
« Reply #11 on: September 13, 2017, 01:03:53 pm »
Plausible.  However, he is "in there" somewhere?  I guess we can ask, as NG 1.0, who is asking "WHAT DO YOU SEE?"  Is it the apparatus itself?  I think probably would be Nau-Cayuti.
Since the No-God itself has tremendous metaphysical significance, compounded by it's mantra being completely identical both times, it seems much less likely that an Insertant has any kind of agency in the System. Or else we shouldn't discuss the No-God, but Kelmomas and Nau-Cayuti, in however maimed states.

Any kind of agency on the part of an Insertant is a potential flaw (that might very well have huge narrative consequences), but as an intentional component of the System it would tremendously weaken the concept of the No-God. Instead of a philosophical principle brought to life it would just become, basically, a piloted mecha.

In other words, I agree with Madness in dismissing the speculation that an Insertant in any way describes the No-God itself.
But it does in the sense that the Gods are blind to the actions of the Insertant.

SmilerLoki

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
« Reply #12 on: September 13, 2017, 01:13:28 pm »
But it does in the sense that the Gods are blind to the actions of the Insertant.
It's quite the other way around, the way I see it. The Gods are blind to the No-God, and an Insertant is a part of it. What comes after determines what comes before.

H

  • *
  • The Zero-Mod
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • The Honourable H
  • Posts: 2660
  • The Original No-God Apologist
    • View Profile
    • The Original No-God Apologist
« Reply #13 on: September 13, 2017, 02:14:51 pm »
Plausible.  However, he is "in there" somewhere?  I guess we can ask, as NG 1.0, who is asking "WHAT DO YOU SEE?"  Is it the apparatus itself?  I think probably would be Nau-Cayuti.
Since the No-God itself has tremendous metaphysical significance, compounded by it's mantra being completely identical both times, it seems much less likely that an Insertant has any kind of agency in the System. Or else we shouldn't discuss the No-God, but Kelmomas and Nau-Cayuti, in however maimed states.

Any kind of agency on the part of an Insertant is a potential flaw (that might very well have huge narrative consequences), but as an intentional component of the System it would tremendously weaken the concept of the No-God. Instead of a philosophical principle brought to life it would just become, basically, a piloted mecha.

In other words, I agree with Madness in dismissing the speculation that an Insertant in any way describes the No-God itself.

I don't think we are actually disagreeing though.

My point is that the No-God's behavior, or functionality, is not dependent on the identity or personality of the insertent.  In the same way that a computer doesn't care what completes the circuits that allow it to function, only that it functions.  The No-God, as I speculated years and years ago, is just a piece of technology, no different than the Heron Spear, it has no personality, regardless of who is in the Sarcophagus.

My point though was that I don't think Kel has ceased to exist and that might be significant.
“I am a warrior of ages, Anasūrimbor . . . 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

SmilerLoki

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Posts: 553
    • View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 13, 2017, 02:39:44 pm »
The No-God, as I speculated years and years ago, is just a piece of technology, no different than the Heron Spear, it has no personality, regardless of who is in the Sarcophagus.
This is what I'm disagreeing with. It's not just a piece of technology, it somehow influences the metaphysics of Earwa, actually remaking the world in a way that's described in philosophical, and not mechanical, terms. So, a case can be made, the No-God transcends its purely technological origin.

Is this point significant to you, or were you only talking about the No-God's machinery (the Sarcophagus) and booting sequence? If its the latter, please disregard everything written above, we are in agreement, I also view those things by themselves as just technology. The difference for me starts only when the System is operating. It seems to me that it creates some sort of new entity or principle, something more than the sum of its parts.

My point though was that I don't think Kel has ceased to exist and that might be significant.
Here I can only agree, this is very much possible.