Great! Amazon is just what you want and need. However, I don't think I've ever bought a book on the day it was released, nor have ever particularly wanted to. There's points for and against every method of buying books. Personally I dislike buying things online and going out shopping is something I really enjoy.
I just finished reading it (finally got some time recently to start reading it.) Anyway,
-Cleric is badass, I'm really looking forward to understanding more about him. There is obviously something important there. -I found it interesting that we don't see anything from Kellhus's pov. It would have been nice to, but it obviously would have given something away. -I found myself really wanting to read the Akka chapters more then any of the others. -There is something about the Ordeal that isn't right. I just thought of something because of what Rym said, "Why would the gods fight against that which strives to prevent them from being shut out of the world?" What if the Ordeal isn't just to stop the No-God, but for Kellhus to figure out how the No-God shuts the gods from the world so that he is able to, and thus making him the only "god?" -Something about Soma doesn't feel right. -I miss Cnaiur.
You know, I was lulled into a false sense of security by the first half of the book. Then there was menstrual blood everywhere and a creepy old naked cultist woman was swinging a knife around. It was at that point when I remembered what I was reading.
Bakker kind of jumped the shark with this one for me. If he said "whore of fate" one more time I was going to drive to Ontario and smack him. Plus, that part where Frodo and Gandalf had to go under the mountain and were chased by gobins... Er, I mean Achamian and Mimara had to go under the mountain and were chased by Sranc.
The whole white luck bloody old lady scene almost seemed like Bakker was thinking: "what's the most disgusting sex scene I can think of?" Also, he doesn't even try to hide his sexism anymore. To Bakker, women are slaves. The next book should be called Aspect Emperor of Gor.
I was surprised that Kellus couldn't read through the earth magic or catch his son (seemingly anyway).
I hesitated to start reading this book because I just didn't want to immerse myself in this world again. I will probably read the next two books because I want to find out what happens when Gandalf makes it to Mordor.
The whole white luck bloody old lady scene almost seemed like Bakker was thinking: "what's the most disgusting sex scene I can think of?" Also, he doesn't even try to hide his sexism anymore. To Bakker, women are slaves. The next book should be called Aspect Emperor of Gor.
Believe me, I am all about strong female characters and using fantasy as a vehicle for illustrating feminist principles or alternative takes on gender. However, what makes you think that Bakker is directly vomiting his own personal view of women onto the page? Look at his writing - he is a master. Everything in the text is the product of conscious thought and craft; otherwise, he would not be able to make his philosophical points as well as he does. If everything else is laid out so carefully to bring out the point of the novels, it stands to reason that how women are treated in Earwa is also deliberately decided for a purpose in the narrative.
Interviewer: Are there specific themes you wanted to explore in this second series?
Bakker: Specifically, IÂ’m interested in what it means to live in a world where value is objective - which is to say, to live in the kind of world our ancestors thought they lived in. Could you imagine, for instance, what it would mean to live in a world where, say, the social and spiritual inferiority of women was a fact like the atomic weight of uranium. Biblical Israel was such as world, as were many others.
He's clearly using a world where women are property, slaves, and prostitutes to explore an idea here. And to answer Thaed's comment even more directly (all emphasis is mine):
Interviewer: The genre exhibits a strong (albeit recent) tradition for subverting gender stereotypes by presenting worlds in which strong, independent female characters are plausible or even expected. Yet your world is as patriarchal as the reality that inspired it. I expect that this theme makes up for a good part of the discussions you have about your creation, possibly detracting from what you actually want to talk about. Is it difficult to resist the temptation to put something like a bad-ass tomboy warrior-princess with snappy dialogue and a heart of gold into the books?
Bakker: First, let me say that I think I should be called out on the carpet on this issue, simply because I cover some pretty troubling ground. I certainly donÂ’t believe in "quota characterization," either to be politically correct or to broaden the "gender appeal" of my books. Leave this for the after-school specials. I also donÂ’t think that depiction automatically equals endorsement. The question that people should be asking, it seems to me, is one of whether I reinforce negative gender stereotypes or problematize them. If the books provide enough grist to argue this question, then the answer, it seems to me, automatically becomes the latter.
But the fact remains that a lot of people get hung up on my female characters: On the one hand, I self-consciously chose the harlot, the waif, and the harridan for my female characters, yet some seem to think a kind of unconscious moral defect chose them for me. If so, it would be a truly colossal coincidence that I would happen to pick the three misogynic types - I mean, isnÂ’t it obvious that IÂ’m up to something critical? On the other hand, I wanted my fantasy world to be realistic, to temper our yearning for premodern times with a good look at how ugly things got, particularly in times of war. When bad things happen to my female characters, itÂ’s the circumstances that are being criticized, not the characters themselves!
But people get hunches while they read, and once they do, confirmation bias goes to work (and this is simply one among many reasons why we always buy our own bullshit), and the text, I think, possesses more than enough ambiguities for people spin any number of self-validating interpretations. ItÂ’s when they insist their interpretation is the only interpretation, or even worse, that it captures whatÂ’s really going on in my bean, that I become baffled.
In conclusion: Bakker is NOT sexist. The Prince of Nothing books are not a manifestation of his supposed misogeny. He's showing us a world with sexual discrimination much, much like real-world history. So either man up (ha) and find intellectual enjoyment of a book that discusses a problem you may not agree with or find pleasant, or acknowledge that the subject matter is not for you and move on, which is fine. In the end, we all read to satisfy our tastes. But saying that aspect of Bakker's books comes from his own sexism is just ridiculous.
What's funny here is that I'm (a guy) arguing that the book is misogynist and Uglyfred (a gal) is arguing that it's not. UF, you've quoted Bakker defending himself quite eloquently, but all that does is show that he doesn't think that he is a misogynist. Objectively speaking, I would argue that his world is misogynist on a level with the Gor books. If you read the book, that's what you're going to get whether Bakker himself is sexist or not. I do agree with you that the book is what it is and people should either read it or not depending on what they like. Again, I will probably read the other 2 out of curiosity. But the series has fallen into yarn status for me.
So Thaed,Rootsis racist right? The people who made it just don't think they are racist, but they are.
LOL. Roots, from what I remember, portrays slavery (which actually happened) in a realistic way and shows how bad it was. Bakker creates a misogynist wish-dream world that is very similar to Norman's Gor and which revels in itself. Roots and the Aspect Emperor series are apples and oranges.
`LOL. Roots, from what I remember, portrays slavery (which actually happened) in a realistic way and shows how bad it was. Bakker creates a misogynist wish-dream world that is very similar to Norman's Gor and which revels in itself. Roots and the Aspect Emperor series are apples and oranges.
I didn't read Judging Eye yet, but the misogyny of the first three books was pretty much in line with the realities of medieval Europe, which actually happened.
So Thaed,Rootsis racist right? The people who made it just don't think they are racist, but they are.
LOL. Roots, from what I remember, portrays slavery (which actually happened) in a realistic way and shows how bad it was. Bakker creates a misogynist wish-dream world that is very similar to Norman's Gor and which revels in itself. Roots and the Aspect Emperor series are apples and oranges.
While Bakker's world is fantasy, it certainly does not seem to pass itself off as some kind of Eden (for male characters or female characters). His world is based on past civilizations which did have limited roles for women. This is a primitive society similar to many past human Empires; in its treatment of women it is accurate. He does not seem to glorify these roles as none of the female characters seem content in their lot (excepting the mad priestess who is, as I said, mad). He makes their plight sympathetic and complex. Unlike many authors in his genre, the primary female characters are capable, bright, conflicted, multidimensional characters that see the bonds of their world and strain against them. Moreover, Kelluhs (his main character) points out how foolish it is to keep women subjugated and begins to change laws to allow women more opportunities.
I'm probably going to re-read starting with #1, but somebody has my books. I bought paperbacks #1-3 with the ugly covers, and none of them are in my possession.
Started the Judging Eye last night. What's with Mimara's POV being told in present tense? I checked the very next chapter just to see whether it goes back to past tense and that the narration hadn't just caught up to an arbitrary "now".
Comments
-Cleric is badass, I'm really looking forward to understanding more about him. There is obviously something important there.
-I found it interesting that we don't see anything from Kellhus's pov. It would have been nice to, but it obviously would have given something away.
-I found myself really wanting to read the Akka chapters more then any of the others.
-There is something about the Ordeal that isn't right. I just thought of something because of what Rym said, "Why would the gods fight against that which strives to prevent them from being shut out of the world?" What if the Ordeal isn't just to stop the No-God, but for Kellhus to figure out how the No-God shuts the gods from the world so that he is able to, and thus making him the only "god?"
-Something about Soma doesn't feel right.
-I miss Cnaiur.
The whole white luck bloody old lady scene almost seemed like Bakker was thinking: "what's the most disgusting sex scene I can think of?" Also, he doesn't even try to hide his sexism anymore. To Bakker, women are slaves. The next book should be called Aspect Emperor of Gor.
I was surprised that Kellus couldn't read through the earth magic or catch his son (seemingly anyway).
I hesitated to start reading this book because I just didn't want to immerse myself in this world again. I will probably read the next two books because I want to find out what happens when Gandalf makes it to Mordor.
To back up my point, here is a segment from one of Bakker's interviews at SFFWorld: He's clearly using a world where women are property, slaves, and prostitutes to explore an idea here. And to answer Thaed's comment even more directly (all emphasis is mine): In conclusion: Bakker is NOT sexist. The Prince of Nothing books are not a manifestation of his supposed misogeny. He's showing us a world with sexual discrimination much, much like real-world history. So either man up (ha) and find intellectual enjoyment of a book that discusses a problem you may not agree with or find pleasant, or acknowledge that the subject matter is not for you and move on, which is fine. In the end, we all read to satisfy our tastes. But saying that aspect of Bakker's books comes from his own sexism is just ridiculous.
I look forward to what Cleric has to say when he comes bounding up the trail to meet everyone.