the archives

dusted off in read-only


Is Achamian the No God? (TWP, pg 12)... posted 20 Apr 2007, 23:04 by Incu-Pacifico, Peralogue

This takes place while Achamian is teaching Kellus: [quote="TWP,pg 12":22v46wnj] "[i:22v46wnj]Who am I?[/i:22v46wnj] he would often think, listening to Kellus's melodious voice. [i:22v46wnj]What do you see[/i:22v46wnj]" [/quote:22v46wnj] Hmmm.... Speculate. :) view post

posted 21 Apr 2007, 00:04 by Nauticus, Auditor

Interesting, but I don't think thats possible. At all. view post

posted 22 Apr 2007, 01:04 by Incu-Pacifico, Peralogue

[quote="Nauticus":336q38wv]Interesting, but I don't think thats possible. At all.[/quote:336q38wv] A little bit more support for that position would be nice. :) view post

posted 22 Apr 2007, 18:04 by Phil, Candidate

"What do you see?" is asked of Kellhus quite a lot (all in a person's thoughts, though, not out loud). Cnaiur asks it on more than one occasion, Achamian here too. I think others may do the same (maybe Conphas, but I can't be sure). If you ask me, this is no coincidence. What it means exactly, I don't know, but I'm sure that Kellhus has a profound connection to the No-God. I mean that philosophically, not literally. I have said elsewhere that Kellhus may become the No-God in the final series, and my big betting hat is on, so I'm predicting that will be the title of the last set of books. view post

posted 22 Apr 2007, 23:04 by Gravity Gun, Candidate

Let's simply admit this outright: Bakker has constructed the perfect mystery. We just have not the slightest clue what the No-God is. Upon re-reading TWP, the haunting words of the No-God has somehow managed to baffle me even more -- it's something that cannot see itself yet is desperate to know what itself looks like. Far from some battlefield boasting ("Mwahahahaha! I shall smite all you puny humans down and rule the world!"), the No-God asks these utterly incomprehensible questions before being cut to pieces by a laser cannon. On a related note: Lokung is No-God, right? So the Scylvendi are also traitors to humanity, right? But why would they follow the No-God? view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 01:04 by professor plum, Peralogue

Long post follows. Could be a load of bollocks. You have been warned! [b:1ed6xh2c]What do we know about the No-God?[/b:1ed6xh2c] His presence in the World prevents live human births (I recall a mention of "the great cycle of souls" being interrupted). He can control Sranc, Bashrag and Wracu "as extensions of his own will" ([i:1ed6xh2c]No-God[/i:1ed6xh2c], Encyclopedic Glossary, TTT). His armour is a carapace adorned with chorae, surrounded by a giant whirlwind. He seems either ignorant to his own nature or inordinately focused on others' perceptions of him ("WHO AM I?"; "WHAT DO YOU SEE?") — I would assume the former, given that he has a habit of killing those in a position to answer his questions. :) The theory I'm toying with at the moment is that these attributes point to the No-God being the repository of souls, torn from the Outside and trapped within the Carapace via the Aporos, conveniently acting as both a defense and a prison. This theory seems (to me, anyway) to satisfy the "why?" questions about the No-God: [b:1ed6xh2c]Why are there no live human births?[/b:1ed6xh2c] Easy: having a soul is necessary for human life. If all the souls are locked up in the Carapace... [b:1ed6xh2c]Why is Mog-Pharau ignorant of his own nature?[/b:1ed6xh2c] Perhaps because self-awareness is new to him. Soulled beings in the World are self-aware, and quite possibly they are in the Outside, given the stuff about demons binding summoners for eternity after they bite the big one. But are they ever coerced into a single entity? Alternatively, Mog-as-Oversoul, residing in the Outside, may have always been as unknowing as we see him in the books*. Either way, as yet we still have no idea how the Consult bound him. [b:1ed6xh2c]Why can he control Sranc, Bashrag and Wracu?[/b:1ed6xh2c] They are unsoulled. If Mog-Pharau is a vast bank of souls, given fledgling sentience by virtue of being thrust into the World... you can see where I'm going here. Put a bunch of Sranc near him and he can use his Soul Power (apologies to the late James Brown) to override their animal impulses — perhaps the mechanism involves assigning one Mog-Soul per Sranc. Why can't he do this to humans? They have souls, and while we know souls can be compelled via sorcery, we haven't seen anything to suggest that they can be overridden by other souls. On something of a tangent, perhaps the Plains of Mengedda being haunted (by those slain in the final battle against the No-God during the Apocalypse) answers a question about where souls go when their usual egress from the World is closed. Into the ground? Where they stay, by the looks of things. (Or maybe I'm completely wrong, and the "The land remembers" interpretation offered by one of the characters holds. But that only raises further questions!) Anyway, if I'm on to something with the above, I don't think any one character we've encountered will "become" the No-God (imagine Achamian speaking through the mouths of a thousand Sranc. "COME TO ME, ESMI. KELLHUS, YOU ARE STILL A DICK"). *Perhaps this is why Kellhus perceives the No-God as he does. It's been a while since I read the last two books, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Mog's described as being an old man sitting on a hill beneath a tree, still asking the same questions. Who knows, maybe Kellhus will avert the Second Apocalypse by figuring it all out and helping the No-God make sense of himself. 'Cause, like, man, what does he see, you know? [b:1ed6xh2c]Other questions:[/b:1ed6xh2c] Why would the Scylvendi worship the No-God? Maybe someone convinced them they were damned. Maybe a God of Destruction aligned with their own inclinations just so. Maybe they bargained with the Consult for control of Kûniüri/Eämnor in return for worship and allegiance. Plenty of possibilities there. But why would the [i:1ed6xh2c]Consult[/i:1ed6xh2c] worship the No-God, ostensibly an entity either summoned and bound by them or an invention of their own devising? Here's my theory: we know Mog-Pharau is the key to their twisted brand of salvation. What if the Consult has realised that belief warps reality in Eärwa? If so, there's a strong incentive for them to at least [i:1ed6xh2c]appear[/i:1ed6xh2c] to worship the No-God, so as to improve the chances of others (e.g., the Scylvendi) worshipping it too (as a greater number of worshippers would, presumably, increase the No-God's power). This raises another question — why set about eradicating soulled life instead of controlling it via religion? Perhaps they used the Scylvendi as a test case, or perhaps they reasoned that competing belief systems (which might reintroduce the promise of damnation) would inevitably reappear. Or maybe they just like all the blood and guts and slaughter. :) [b:1ed6xh2c]Regarding the original post:[/b:1ed6xh2c] [quote="TWP,pg 12":1ed6xh2c] "[i:1ed6xh2c]Who am I?[/i:1ed6xh2c] he would often think, listening to Kellus's melodious voice. [i:1ed6xh2c]What do you see?[/i:1ed6xh2c]" [/quote:1ed6xh2c] In terms of awareness, how about "Kellhus is to ordinary people as ordinary people are to the No-God"? Achamian is in awe of the depth of Kellhus's perception, and this makes him question himself. The No-God seems to have the same reaction when encountering humans. Spoiler for the final book of The Second Apocalypse (highlight): [color=#2B2B2B:1ed6xh2c]No-God: "WHO AM I? WHAT DO YOU SEE?" Kellhus: "Search your feelings, bro."[/color:1ed6xh2c] [Edit: added emphasis for clarity.] view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 04:04 by Gravity Gun, Candidate

This explanation, as with any other possible explanation, leaves one big gap for me: the apparent nature of the NG (death and destruction) and its bizzare questions. It clearly wants to destroy the human world, so why when we meet it, it asks all these strange questions, instead of talking about anything related to the Apocalypse (which should have been priority to him, to say the least)? Besides, if the NG is an oversoul -- why would it want to destroy other souls? Maybe it's the collective soul of those who are damned? The Consult somehow managed to pull it out of Hell, and it desperately doesn't want to go back? This would explain its destructive tendency -- no one alive, no crime; no crime, no damnation. But then this would divorce it from the explanation for the stillborn babies. Also it still doesn't explain why it asks these questions. view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 05:04 by professor plum, Peralogue

I'm not sure we should simply assume that the No-God has destructive motivations of his own. If the No-God has been summoned from the Outside, is it a stretch to posit that he would be bound to the will of the Mangaecca, just as the ciphrang was bound to that of Iyokus? Seems to me that if you were going to summon something that powerful, you'd make sure you'd be able to control it. view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 06:04 by Phil, Candidate

Aye, that's reasonable enough, but I do think M-P is referred to as the general of the armies, and the Inchoroi (that are left) worship him. I get the feeling he's not just a puppet. PS - "COME TO ME, ESMI. KELLHUS, YOU ARE STILL A DICK" is going in my sig :) view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 08:04 by professor plum, Peralogue

Any idea where in the books that's mentioned? view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 13:04 by Harrol, Moderator

I agree with Professor Plum's idea. Is that not what the human soul asks? view post

posted 23 Apr 2007, 19:04 by Phil, Candidate

[quote="professor plum":2kfk780j]Any idea where in the books that's mentioned?[/quote:2kfk780j] You mean the general thing, and the worship thing? I'm not sure, tbh, and I'm not going trawling through the three books to find them :P But I would bet my left nut on both of those things being mentioned somewhere. I'm pretty sure Aurang talks (or thinks) about the No-God at some point, and uses the old capital H when referring to "Him." I think he also tells Cnaiur that they worship the same god. The general thing, maybe in the glossaries or somewhere. I'm pretty sure he's described as the tactical nous behind some of the battles. Perhaps someone more meticulous can find some references? view post

posted 24 Apr 2007, 00:04 by professor plum, Peralogue

Yeah, the general thing. If Aurax/Aurang refer to him specifically as Tactics Mog, that kind of puts an end to the bound-by-sorcery speculation. So far I haven't been able to find anything in the Encyclopedic Glossary that mentions General Mog's tactical prowess. view post

posted 24 Apr 2007, 07:04 by Curethan, Didact

Professor, my speculation on the no-god mirrors yours. Harrol makes a good point on 'the questions' that are posed by the no-god... The nature of chorae is key imo. If the souls in the carapace were those of the unborn (i.e. cleansed of most memory by some kind aspect of the cycle of souls - which I would assume to be some kind of re-incarnation thing that includes an afterlife of some kind in the outside) then that might explain their effect on those who bear the mark, who according to Kellhus' discussion with Akka (and to lesser degree, evidenced by the dreams) recall in some way their previous existences. Also, note that the inchoroi pulled the same kind of trick on the non-men before the creation of the no-god (the womb plague), and that chorae are a creation of the branch of sorcery that deals with paradox and contradiction (I forget the proper term). I'm sure the no-god does something 'useful' with all those souls. As for keeping the scylvendi, well the inchoroi still want something to play with when the world is sealed. I believe that when Aurang confronts Kellhus in TTT he himself is described as the tactical nous of the consult, and Kellhus attempts to bait him by mentioning how he 'failed' the no-god. As for worshiping something of one's own creation... people do it all the time. view post

posted 24 Apr 2007, 07:04 by anor277, Didact

Just on this interpretation of the Mog as a soul-stealer or a soul-trapper above. Was it in [i:1nunpuku]The Warrior Prophet[/i:1nunpuku], when Achamian surveys the carnage after the (latest) battle of Mengedda, and relates something like "the soul that encounters him (i.e. Mog) passes no farther". view post

posted 25 Apr 2007, 03:04 by Gravity Gun, Candidate

Again -- not much substantive to contribute :) -- but I just want to say that the No-God surely is the one of the most magnificent villains in all of fantasy. Ultimate evil and ultimate mystery. view post

posted 23 Apr 2008, 20:04 by shuggy, Commoner

yes. to saubon view post

posted 23 Apr 2008, 20:04 by shuggy, Commoner

No-gods a pussy. hung back for 11 years before showing himself and then gets stuck with the only weapon in the world that can hurt him. Scratch pussy, replace with idiot. view post

Roles of Characters in the Aspect-Emperor series posted 03 Jun 2008, 20:06 by ThePrinceofNothing, Candidate

I don't believe that Achamian is the No-God. Furthermore, I don't think that any primary character of the books will prove to become the No-God. I think the No-God is an entity in and of itself. However, I do believe that Kellhus and Achamian have specific roles to play: Achamian=Seswatha Kellhus=Celmomas Proyas=Anaxophus V Esmenet=Celmomas's most "prized wife" Nau Cayuti=Kellhus's son by Esmenet, perhaps? Or, even better, in the Aspect-Emperor series, Achamian and Esmenet will rekindle their love unbeknownst to Kellhus, and Esmenet will bear Achamian's son. This will further prove to parallel history, because there is a rumor that Nau Cayuti was actually Seswatha's son by Celmomas's wife. view post


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