I seem to remember that Kellhus failed to get viable children with some concubines as well. It seems slightly improbable that Aurang had messed with all of them too.They could be mutually exclusive. Just so happens that the only woman Kellhus could breed with has been raped by his enemy. World conspires?
They could be mutually exclusive. Just so happens that the only woman Kellhus could breed with has been raped by his enemy. World conspires?That darned conspiring World, yes. Could be. But it seems a little too... what's the adjectivisation, now again... Nerdany? Nerdanish? Nerdanesque?
That darned conspiring World, yes. Could be. But it seems a little too... what's the adjectivisation, now again... Nerdany? Nerdanish? Nerdanesque?lol. You can go with 'insane', or 'horrifically unlikely'.
I always took Kellhus' reproductive problems to be a successful long term strike at him by the Consult. Remember when Esmenet did it in the allyway at Momemn with that nameless blonde guy? Well, IIRC his semen is black like that of Aurang in his first encounter with Esmenet. That didn't make sense to me unless intercouse with the synthese had tainted Esmenet in some way and thereby damaged her fertility, which would then effect every subsequent coupling. This might mean that the defectiveness of Kellhus' children is not the product of his seed being "too heavy" for mortal women to bear but not heavy enough to overcome the Inchoroi pollution in every instance of conception.From the chapter fifteen thread of the re-read project:
And, of course, it is another nod to Dune, specifically the(click to show/hide)
Also of interest is the Esmenet section because of the Black Seed.
Does anyone know if Esmenet ever thinks about fucking Sarcellus or otherwise whoring herself to him? In otherwords, does she have any black seed encounters with Sarcellus, or is this encounter with this John her first sexual encounter after the interrorape by the inchoroi/synthese? If this is her first fuck after the inchoroi then the black seed may have been lingering unexpelled inside her.
It's possible that the black seed means something else, perhaps this John was a skin spy? But if the skin spy has black seed, then why doesn't Esmenet ever note black seed from Sarcellus and identify him as Consult?
Indeed, black seed from a skin spy might seem to defeat their purpose as it would be a good way to identify them--and would cause them to be identified often since they seem to have a less than stellar control over their sexual impulses. So if the John is not a skin spy, then why did he have black seed?
If he was a synthese, that might explain it, or perhaps if he were possessed by the inchoroi that might explain it, but neither of those really explain his autonomy. And neither a synthese nor a possessed person would express regret at the end of the encounter. And if he were under the control of the inchoroi, what have they to gain by this public fucking? It's a pointless play.
In all this entire scene makes no sense in the context of a reread, it's easy to overlook a first time through, but amidst the knowledge bestowed by future books this one scene stands out as an especially incomprehensible anomaly.
Though perhaps the best explanation is that the black seed and the "what have I done" are disconnected units of experience. they are not on a continuum.
That is to say, perhaps Esmenet sees Black Seed because this was particularly transgressive behavior, so her mind punishes her with guilt and imagery it finds most offensive, something in proportion to her transgression and the black seed is merely an illusion of her consciousness, it's not actually there, she just thinks it is because the trauma memories help her punish herself for her desire. Her perspective is not broken by the man's discontinuous 'what have I done' she just thinks its in response to the black seed. But he didn't see any black seed, he just now came to his senses and realized he just fucked like a wild animal and broke a vow or moral belief that he had previously not transgressed. His 'what have I done' was a normal guilt reflex, and his fleeing was related to his own internal narrative, and not the black seed, he never even saw the black seed.
for some reason that 'simplest' explanation seemed really difficult and complex to explain. :-p it seems I had an illusion of simplicity when I thought it up.
Yatwerian denial, with the still births, or unable to resist giving, rebukes in regards to the children that did survive (including if any were subsquently killed by Kellhus that we don't know about)
I always took Kellhus' reproductive problems to be a successful long term strike at him by the Consult. Remember when Esmenet did it in the allyway at Momemn with that nameless blonde guy? Well, IIRC his semen is black like that of Aurang in his first encounter with Esmenet. That didn't make sense to me unless intercouse with the synthese had tainted Esmenet in some way and thereby damaged her fertility, which would then effect every subsequent coupling. This might mean that the defectiveness of Kellhus' children is not the product of his seed being "too heavy" for mortal women to bear but not heavy enough to overcome the Inchoroi pollution in every instance of conception.
And, of course, it is another nod to Dune, specifically the(click to show/hide)
I seem to remember that Kellhus failed to get viable children with some concubines as well. It seems slightly improbable that Aurang had messed with all of them too.
They could be mutually exclusive. Just so happens that the only woman Kellhus could breed with has been raped by his enemy. World conspires?That darned conspiring World, yes. Could be. But it seems a little too... what's the adjectivisation, now again... Nerdany? Nerdanish? Nerdanesque?
The whole World Conspires bit was kind of a joke. I was never able to figure it out enough to use it in a sentence properly.
That is to say, perhaps Esmenet sees Black Seed because this was particularly transgressive behavior, so her mind punishes her with guilt and imagery it finds most offensive, something in proportion to her transgression and the black seed is merely an illusion of her consciousness, it's not actually there, she just thinks it is because the trauma memories help her punish herself for her desire. Her perspective is not broken by the man's discontinuous 'what have I done' she just thinks its in response to the black seed. But he didn't see any black seed, he just now came to his senses and realized he just fucked like a wild animal and broke a vow or moral belief that he had previously not transgressed. His 'what have I done' was a normal guilt reflex, and his fleeing was related to his own internal narrative, and not the black seed, he never even saw the black seed.
for some reason that 'simplest' explanation seemed really difficult and complex to explain. :-p it seems I had an illusion of simplicity when I thought it up.
I might be remembering it badly, but isn't this book where his kids show up first? If not this subforum, where, Mike?Yatwerian denial, with the still births, or unable to resist giving, rebukes in regards to the children that did survive (including if any were subsquently killed by Kellhus that we don't know about)
Just curious. Why this subforum?
Everytime someone calls Madness, Mike, I think of him as looking like the Great Eye, Mike Wazowski.I might be remembering it badly, but isn't this book where his kids show up first? If not this subforum, where, Mike?Yatwerian denial, with the still births, or unable to resist giving, rebukes in regards to the children that did survive (including if any were subsquently killed by Kellhus that we don't know about)
Just curious. Why this subforum?
I might be remembering it badly, but isn't this book where his kids show up first? If not this subforum, where, Mike?Yatwerian denial, with the still births, or unable to resist giving, rebukes in regards to the children that did survive (including if any were subsquently killed by Kellhus that we don't know about)
Just curious. Why this subforum?
I might be remembering it badly, but isn't this book where his kids show up first? If not this subforum, where, Mike?Everytime someone calls Madness, Mike, I think of him as looking like the Great Eye, Mike Wazowski.Working as intended.
WLW? Misc. Chatter? I understand it seems tedious but I really do think that spoilers are a big turnoff to newcomers. So while that might limit the kinds of remaining questions that we who have been immersed can ask in each of the book specific subforums, newcomers could still use those subforums to populate with their own wild theories... Ideally, there would always be another new reader who hasn't yet read Bakker who participates in the forum when they find it along with the series for the first time. When you post it in TJE, I wonder why you want to give me the headache of deciding what does or does not constitute spoilers or priming for narrative, etc, for WLW.Unless I'm remembering the books wrong, his kids are described in the judging eye (if I am remembering wrong and it's all in WLW, okay, move the thread over to there).
Any information in the book is fair game. So everything through the end of TJE is fair game, any information divulged in WLW should be spoiler tagged. Sometimes it can be hard to accurately remember where that line is, so to be safe putting this in WLW or misnc chatter would eliminate any need for the tag.
WLW? Misc. Chatter? I understand it seems tedious but I really do think that spoilers are a big turnoff to newcomers. So while that might limit the kinds of remaining questions that we who have been immersed can ask in each of the book specific subforums, newcomers could still use those subforums to populate with their own wild theories... Ideally, there would always be another new reader who hasn't yet read Bakker who participates in the forum when they find it along with the series for the first time. When you post it in TJE, I wonder why you want to give me the headache of deciding what does or does not constitute spoilers or priming for narrative, etc, for WLW.Unless I'm remembering the books wrong, his kids are described in the judging eye (if I am remembering wrong and it's all in WLW, okay, move the thread over to there).
Apart from that, I think your confusing your own perception of there being spoilers involved as me having an intent to give headaches. Anyway I've edited the OP to spoiler blocked one thing and removefrom it, the rest is my own wild speculation. Perhaps you think I'm so right that you confuse me as giving a spoiler, rather than speculation? ;D(click to show/hide)
as that situation stands only at the end of Judging EyeIf you treat the knowledge that Yatwer is the goddess of birth as a spoiler, okay Mike, shift the thread. As I see it, that's not a spoiler - it's in the glossary. I could be saying 'The state of Kellhus's murderous kids (murderous, as described on the blurb on the back of the book) did Moenghus do that?' or 'His kids - did Gilgaol do that?' and have as many spoilers. Cause it's just regular, crazy speculation. If you want to see Yatwers role as goddess of birth as a spoiler and want to move it because of that, okay. But there isn't much point in wanting me to see it as a spoiler as well - I wont.
Yeah, it'd be interesting, if Kayutas has been affected. Really banking on ancestral memories arising somewhere...
Hey! You take that kind of talk to Herbert and Bakker (http://second-apocalypse.com/index.php?topic=889.0) :P. There are too few of us that can participate in that discussion for the content to be spread all diffusely across the forum.Seriously. Don't dilute the wealth. ;)
(Lol - I distinguish your comment from mine based on quantity ;))