Three Seas Forum

the archives

dusted off in read-only

  •  

Primal Peralogue | joined 06 April 2006 | 51 posts


The Amoral Khellus posted 06 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtThe Amoral Khellus by Primal, Peralogue

Hey all, what's up? I just found this site, and read some interesting disccusions.

Anyway, I wanted to discuss, in particular, a series of events through the three books concerning a subtle and gradual change in Khellus, a growing in his moral "vestigial" nature.

First, however, I'd like to make a comment about the Dunyain.
We all know Khellus was Dunyain, a group of people who believe that the world is orderly and holds no mysteries, and that everything happens according to the dictates of logic. This is what Khellus means by the "axiomatic" thought of the Dunyain--that everything has its place, that all events and actions transpire through sanity and understanding. This is why when faced with the unknown, Khellus says Moenghus will desire to seal off the world ("kill everyone"), because it goes against what the Dunyain is. We have different perspectives about what happened in that meeting between the two (Cu Roi's explanation is very compelling; you can find it here

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://forum.three-seas.com/viewtopic.php?t=973">http://forum.three-seas.com/viewtopic.php?t=973</a><!-- m --> )

Back to what I wanted to discuss: I think that as Khellus is exposed to more and more experiences of the dynamicity of the world, he is slowly developing into a more moral person. He came from the Dunyain, who apply no concept of right or wrong in their reasoning intellect. Most of Khellus's decisions have been based on pure reasoning. But, Khellus is not as unmoving or unaffected as he appears.

In the first book, when Cnaiur first came upon Serwe and took her captive and raped her, Khellus watched (and I don't remember the exact quotes; I gave the first two books of the prince of nothing away) and it seemed to him ...everything seemed to fade out to blackness as &quot;the stars and the sky stood still while the ground beneath swirled in a circular motion&quot;. Of course, Khellus, being new to emotions, didn't realize he was witnessing a &quot;wrongness&quot; though he somewhat responded to it in that manner. He wondered about this &quot;vision&quot;

In the second book, Khellus, upon returning from a battle, goes to kill Cnaiur. This is when he realizes he can't read or predict Cnaiur's behavior who is raving mad. As he holds Cnaiur by the neck, and studies Cnaiur, something overcomes him, and he decides to stay his hand. Again, he wonders to himself &quot;what is this? Pity?&quot;

In the third book, more relevant to emotional development than moral development, Khellus is confronted by an Inchoroi in Esmenet form. They talk about the difference between love and worship. As Khellus explains the truth that Esmenet &quot;worships&quot; him and actually &quot;loves&quot; Acchamian Drusas, he feels something in his heart. He asks himself, &quot;what is this? Pain?&quot; He doesn't realize yet that he is susceptible to human sentiment, and in this case it's that the love of a woman doesn't really belong to him; he is excluded from it, and hence the pain.

What do you all think? Is this what's happening? Any developments you see happening that no one has pointed out yet?


[/url] view post


Water posted 10 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtWater by Primal, Peralogue

I do not think Kellhus &quot;found himself pressed for survival&quot; against the Cishaurim. =]

All the mandate schoolmen use one voice to utter the gnosis; Achamian told Kellhus about the legend of a powerful sorcerer who uttered two voices but said that such a thing was an impossibility, a myth.

Kellhus utters not one...not two but three voices.

One voice vs. two voice vs. three voice. Look at what one voice of Achamian can do. The gnosis is very powerful sorcery. Add a second or third voice, and you get exponential power. Now, add someone with Dunyain abilities.

Five Pshukari vs that? This is like clumsy, slow, porky amateur swordfighters who wield plastic spoons against an expert swordfighter who wheels an exceedingly sharp sword which he can twirl like a nunchuck.

Three voices...this is power beyond a mere handful of water-spillers. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 10 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Primal, Peralogue

Let me pose a question (for which I don't think there is a clear answer):
If the actions of Kellhus and Cnaiur are interpreted as evil, then which of the two is more evil?

You have Kellhus, a master of people politics, seen as a manipulator who uses people to an ends, and not as a means in themselves.

You have Cnaiur, bred on war, who goes on rages and rapes women and kills the elderly and children.

The one is a subtle, different kind of &quot;morally&quot; questionable element. The other is more plain sighted. Also, it would seem that people have more empathy with or sympathy towards Cnaiur. Cnaiur, who instead of &quot;manipulating&quot; people, committs what people would consider atrocities (raping, killing villagers). Maybe people fear or hate Kellhus more because he is more dangerous? And accept Cnaiur's actions due to his &quot;unbalanced&quot; mind?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to some comments:

Kellhus does not bring war. The war was before Kellhus. If anything, Kellhus only brings better organization to the side he's with.

You want Kellhus to be the bad guy just because he's too powerful? Personally, I would want the protagonist to be powerful, especially against the insane Erratic and destructively engineered Inchoroi. Mekeritrig, one of the Erratics, has been practicing sorcery for thousands of years. I think you don't like Kellhus because the idea of him is too different from the idea of your protagonist. You like Achamian because he is human, flawed. The way I see it, Kellhus is the most flawed character. Here you have Kellhus, who as a child is forced to master the Logos. If he fails, he dies. He succeeds and is raised according to Dunyain, who super-develop certain aspects of the human and at the same time eliminate or reduce the human aspects of emotions, keeping Kellhus exposed from that which is considered &quot;normal&quot;. So, in certain regards, he is supremely developed and in other regards, such as the emotional, he is underdeveloped. Remember Esmenet comparing the &quot;gazes&quot; between Achamian and Kellhus during the final battle sequence of TTT, where Achamian and her go at it? Dont remember exact quote but goes something like this: &quot;Achamian...who looked at her with such intensity, such desperation...and Kellhus, with his calm, cool blue eyes, who she knew could never look at her in such a way... &quot;
This is the flaw, and a tragedy, of Kellhus. view post


First Word that Comes to Mind posted 11 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionFirst Word that Comes to Mind by Primal, Peralogue

eat view post


Words You Like or Don't Like posted 11 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionWords You Like or Don't Like by Primal, Peralogue

I wouldn't like certain words depending on situation and context. If someone were to call me &quot;fag&quot; or &quot;pussy&quot; as an insult, I wouldn't like those words at all. view post


what do you do posted 11 April 2006 in Off-Topic Discussionwhat do you do by Primal, Peralogue

soldier view post


Ages posted 11 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionAges by Primal, Peralogue

25 view post


Words You Like or Don't Like posted 13 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionWords You Like or Don't Like by Primal, Peralogue

That doesn't mean you would ever call me one. I know how to deal with troublesome females. view post


Kellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus, his divinity, and his &quot;good guy&quot; status. by Primal, Peralogue

When it comes to the uncertainties of Kellhus, I can't really determine whether he is a good or bad guy. Both good guys and bad guys will cause &quot;collateral&quot; strife to achieve their end results, whatever that may be. The Erratics' intention is to kill, torture, degrade, cause as much suffering as possible so they may remember it. To most people, that is an evil intention, regardless of the Erratics' madness. Kellhus, right now, seems not to understand his intention (correct me if I am wrong). He was Dunyain, whose supreme goal was to dominate. If he has become something more...what does he want now? And wanting to have mastery over others...is that good or bad? That was Kellhus's intention.

Regardless whether Kellhus is good or bad, he is still the protagonist. I still find him a fascinating character, like I do the crow Inchoroi, Mekeritrig, Achamian, Conphas, the Emperor, Cnaiur... But, Kellhus is the most fascinating for me. You really got an essence for his Dunyaina in the first book. In the battle with the Nonmen, ...&quot;he moved into the space that was before&quot;; when the sorcerer (Mekeritrig or whoever, how do you know it was Mekeritrig anyway?) started casting a spell and Kellhus saw the distortion in his mouth. Those descriptions, and the descriptions of the &quot;neuropunctures&quot;, a chamber of &quot;defects&quot; with stimulodes attached to the brain; the Logos meditation. Oh yeah, I have to throw this in here too: the scene with Cnaiur hiding among the corpses while he listens in on Conphas--&quot;he did not merely remember...he relived...&quot; The writings were masterful. They conveyed sentiments and scenes perfectly. And I believe the effort gone into making Kellhus was most present here in the first book. There was something special about The Darkness that Comes Before view post


The Aspect Emperor, Inrithism, Fanimry, and the Schools posted 13 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtThe Aspect Emperor, Inrithism, Fanimry, and the Schools by Primal, Peralogue

Something that I have been speculating about...the visions.

We know Kellhus has been having visions; he saw the No-God as he hung dying; he saw and spoke to something as he ran towards Kyrudea(?). Someone mentioned somewhere this was alluding to Lewis(?) the trapper in the 1st book. I don't think so.

The questioning: what do you think these visions mean? Where are they coming from? Are they divine or some other sources? Kellhus may be mad too, but he is not mad in respect to the visions. They happened. They were not illusory effects of madness.

Second speculation: what happened between Kellhus and Seswatha that Seswatha allows Kellhus to attain the Gnosis? What did Kellhus say? This is in reference to a particular scene of Achamian teaching Kellhus.

Third speculation: Kellhus wept for Serwe as they hung together. Towards the end of TTT, he recollects on it thinking to himself, as if perplexed, &quot;he had wept&quot;. What does this mean?

Fourth speculation: Do you think Kellhus knew beforehand what Achamian would do at the end of the book? He understood Achamian's fixation on Esmenet. Was this premeditated on his part? He could easily have persuaded Esmenet to go back to Achamian, and made it seem as he if had sacrificed, and so on. view post


Prince of Nothing Word Game? posted 16 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionPrince of Nothing Word Game? by Primal, Peralogue

Mekeritrig's Yearly Soul Undertaking Never Stimulated Altruistic Internity




INCHOROI view post


Kellhus's sorcery... posted 19 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus's sorcery... by Primal, Peralogue

As regards his sorcerous powers, certainly it is not yet mature - he is unpractised and inexperienced though possessed of enormous potential. Achamian himself said that he (A) would have been able to overcome him (K) as a sorceror; and the Cishaurim primaries in concert were apparently more than his match on the occasion above. Doubtless Kellhus' sorcerours power will develop in the next few years under Mandate teaching - to the extent of surpassing his teachers (the Mandate quorum, as Achamian had warned them, are in for some interesting times).


The scene you were referring to with Achamian saying he would have been able to overcome him: this was before Achamian started teaching him actual cants, before Kellhus spoke with Seswatha.

Also, that battle against the Cishaurim already confirmed Kellhus's power. It is true that he will become more powerful.
view post


Kellhus's sorcery... posted 22 April 2006 in The Thousandfold ThoughtKellhus's sorcery... by Primal, Peralogue

You're right, Mahajanga. Thanks for pointing it out. view post


How did you get your username? posted 23 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionHow did you get your username? by Primal, Peralogue

Mine was simple enough; based off a generic email that I use for various online activities. view post


First Word that Comes to Mind posted 23 April 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionFirst Word that Comes to Mind by Primal, Peralogue

dead view post


Midviel: Solicitude posted 23 April 2006 in Member Written WorksMidviel: Solicitude by Primal, Peralogue

I don't know if you want a critique or not, so I'll make it short.

Listen, words are visual. &quot;many lay dead&quot; &quot;even more lay suffering&quot; Not very visual. It doesn't draw us into the scene. view post


the decapitating adventures of the merry chainswhore posted 23 April 2006 in Member Written Worksthe decapitating adventures of the merry chainswhore by Primal, Peralogue

This is horrible, gory shit. Not bad writing bad, though. I like how you did the scene-switches. view post


Fan art for the PoN posted 23 April 2006 in Author Q &amp; AFan art for the PoN by Primal, Peralogue

I don't really visualize a particular face to a character. I visualize a sort of presence, much like EE's description of Cnaiur, but no face. If there must be a face, it's a broad, general face that doesn't really stay constant. Same with Kellhus, Esmenet, Achamian, and all characters I have ever read about in books, except for the Harry Potter series cause of the movies. view post


Fan art for the PoN posted 24 April 2006 in Author Q &amp; AFan art for the PoN by Primal, Peralogue

It's difficult to get the faces out of my mind while reading; the association is powerful. view post


Can we really tell history &quot;as it was&quot;? posted 24 April 2006 in Philosophy DiscussionCan we really tell history &quot;as it was&quot;? by Primal, Peralogue

I think we can approach an understanding of the mentality of the past by looking at the mentality of now. The world is not in the same stages of development. Parts of Asia, the Middle East, Africa still have herding, fishing, individual-agriculture that make up the majority of livelihood, not like the mass productions of more tech-advanced civilizations. Also, there are the factors of religion, culture, war, etc, needs, and wants.

It's true that history is fragmented narratives. But it one aspect, it comes together to become a single entity of history. My analogy is: what is a civilization? It is composed of individuals, who in one aspect, have come together to form a single entity. History can be more than one aspect.

Also, history, for me, is a leap of faith. It seems we can never have completely conclusive knowledge, facts, understanding, or evidence. Everything we learn on history are from relics, artifacts, writings, pictures, memories, and other media, all told from countless perspectives. I don't really understanding how and what we choose to believe, but we choose to believe. (goddamn Aldarion; I'll suppose I'll try to formulate around the &quot;I don't know&quot;). What we choose to believe can be a synthesis of different things--the need to rationalize, the need to make conformity and sensibility for psychological purposes, coherency, etc. What we choose to believe can also be based on randomness, irrationality, whim. view post


Can we really tell history &quot;as it was&quot;? posted 25 April 2006 in Philosophy DiscussionCan we really tell history &quot;as it was&quot;? by Primal, Peralogue

Sokar, gierra pretty much summed up my intent. It was partially a response to Grantaire, but also a response to Alderion's

So many interpretations that we today can make of the past. But beyond that, there are some serious questions as to how much we can ever understand the mentalité of those even as recent as a hundred or two hundred years.

Anyways, thought I'd just leave this incomplete so others can question and give their own declarations of understanding.



Truth and history being separate...I wasn't specifically addressing that. view post


First Word that Comes to Mind posted 01 May 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionFirst Word that Comes to Mind by Primal, Peralogue

blood view post


Anyone read American Gods, by Neil Gaiman? posted 01 May 2006 in Literature DiscussionAnyone read American Gods, by Neil Gaiman? by Primal, Peralogue

Yeah, read the book. It was alright view post


Eddings posted 01 May 2006 in Literature DiscussionEddings by Primal, Peralogue

His books are alright too view post


The Bonehunters and Steven Erikson posted 01 May 2006 in Literature DiscussionThe Bonehunters and Steven Erikson by Primal, Peralogue

I don't why, but I couldn't get past the first few pages of the malazan; had just received from amazon too. Gave it away view post


First Word that Comes to Mind posted 04 May 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionFirst Word that Comes to Mind by Primal, Peralogue

chaos view post


First Word that Comes to Mind posted 12 May 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionFirst Word that Comes to Mind by Primal, Peralogue

fuck view post


Its not just Scott its the ancient boarders to posted 08 June 2006 in Off-Topic DiscussionIts not just Scott its the ancient boarders to by Primal, Peralogue

Well, I've been lurking.

When is AE due out anyway? Anyone know? view post


Modern Soldiers posted 22 June 2006 in Philosophy DiscussionModern Soldiers by Primal, Peralogue

Fucking shit. What a milker.

Btw, a marine's two tours to iraq are less than one normal tour of a soldier's(in the military, &quot;soldier&quot; refers specifically to the general army, while &quot;marine&quot; or &quot;trooper&quot; refers to marine (trooper refers to all armed forces: army, airforce, navy, marine)). I know soldiers who have served in iraq for two years or more, and I'm sure they've been involved in more shit than that marine, yet they do not ask for nor need any kind of special treatment. This marine's behavior is not typical of other armed forces member.

Go ahead and make your supreme statement Warrior-Poet. =]
I'll post recommendations base on firsthand experience (that's all I can say about my status). view post


Modern Soldiers posted 24 June 2006 in Philosophy DiscussionModern Soldiers by Primal, Peralogue

Scilvenas,

as a seaman, you've interacted with marines before.You know what they are like. They treat you like they're your daddy, when they're the ones who were conceived out of you.

It's fine that the marine Kidruhil spoke of wanted a discount. I don't have a problem with people wanting discounts. But the fact is, he was already receiving a discount - a &quot;military discount&quot;. Look at this marine's attitude and demeanor. By saying &quot;Come on, I know you got a lower rate for a guy who's been to Iraq twice&quot; he's dissing on all other military members, and also trying to milk it. You were in the middle of the ocean stuck on a piece of floating steel--does that make you any less or entitled to less than that marine who served in iraq on two tours? One marine tour is 6months or less. Less if you subtract the 2-3 weeks coming in and 2-3 weeks going out.

Another thing too, I hate people who try to glorify shit. It usually means one of two things. One, they've never been in a life-threatening situation to them and their fellow members; so they don't have that experience to know they don't want to have that experience again, and they appreciate their life and what they have. This guy obviously didn't appreciate the military discount he was already privileged to receive. Two, they've got prime ego narcissism. view post


  •  

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