Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Cnair posted 04 September 2004 in The Thousandfold ThoughtCnair by Scarred, Candidate

Quote: "Andrew":2yxgh3es
Scarred: In terms of the Nietzschien element - i've always considered both Cnaiur and kellus to be reflections of two Nietzschien ideals. Cnaiur on the one hand seems to be a perfect example of the Master Morality ideal. Strength, dominance, power etc. affirming itself through action. Nietzche i think would approve of Cnaiur. Kellus seems to be a perfect example of the Uber-Mensch. An individual that has transcended humanity - is in complete control of his actions and of all men, most perfectly able to choose. Nietzshe (N) would also approve of Kellus. From that perspective, what either character does is right and good regardless of its consequences on other people. N viewed things like compassion, forgiveness, mercy, humility etc., in, shall we say, a less than favourable light. The weak and pitiful value mercy etc. and set such values up to be desired in order to subvert the natural order and value system of dominance, strength etc. N derided Christianity because it says, "blessed are the meek, poor, merciful etc.; turn the other cheek - if a man asks you to go one mile, go two miles." Having said this, i don't believe that Bakker is setting up these two characters as ideals or saying their actions are actually good. Just because N would tell you they are good, right, above reproach whatever, doesn't mean they actually ARE good.

I think that if anything Bakker has set out to destroy those 2 ideals because scarred, you are perfectly right when you say that in a universe goverened by Nietzschean ideals, the Consult is exactly the same as Kellus. - actually it might be better to say that the Consult is the same as Cnaiur. In a typical book, the characters from whose point of view the book is told, or who the action follows most closely, are intended to be the sympathetic character - the 'good guy'. I don't think that is the objective in the PON - i think what we have in the PON are the extraordinary characters. The characters, good or evil, upon which the fate of the world rest. I don't think we can say from this that Bakker is sold on N. It doesn't follow that the actions of the principal characters are good.

It certainly doesn't follow that I am going to say "oh, it's a nietzschean universe, i guess i'll have to applaud Cnaiur's raping and murder" - hang that! i'm solidly against N and the moral system he espoused.
[/quote:2yxgh3es]

I agree with you on pretty much everything. The one mai thing that I found most fascinating about PoN, is that NO character is entirely free of blame in anything, everyone has their own agenda of sorts. There are various times when every character may seem sympathetic, there are times when every character seemed repulsive to me. There have been times when I felt that the Holy War itself was the real antagonist of the story, ot the Consult, Kellhus or anyone else.

And just for the record, (I dont think anyone assumed this) I didnt feel any sympathy towards Cnair or applaud his actions of rape and murder, I felt sympathy towards him for his past manipulation, which haunts him in the present time, as well as for his conflicts between whether he helps the Inirithi for whom he has developed some sympathy, or for him to stay true to his heritage. view post


  •  

The Three Seas Forum archives are hosted and maintained courtesy of Jack Brown