the archives

dusted off in read-only


posted 27 Oct 2004, 19:10 by Wil, Head Moderator

I think this makes a lot of sense. Very interesting. view post

posted 20 May 2005, 17:05 by Sovin Nai, Site Administrator

I concur (though some time after the post). view post

posted 20 May 2005, 17:05 by White Lord, Subdidact

I'm a bit strapped for time, so I'll just make a few observations and pose some questions. First of all, I'd say that both certainty and doubt are very dangerous if carried to extremes. Then I'd also question your view on Kellhus's spreading "his" certainties, or the belief that his new religion is one of certainty. For one, Kellhus as a [i:v77ug38c]person[/i:v77ug38c], with his peculiar attributes, is much more responsible for the virtual enslavement of his adherents, than is his religious message. Of course, he uses his gifts to compel people's actions in the direction he needs them to go, and this for reasons that we can regard as justified (if we believe that Kellhus himself may be an unconscious agent for some entity in the Outside). On the other hand, his "religious" message is one of true liberation, because he is effectively espousing Achamian's own views on uncertainty (remember that what goes on in Kellhus's head -- or what he believes to be [i:v77ug38c]certain[/i:v77ug38c] at the moment -- is not reflected in his words and instructions to the outside world; what he currently is differs from the image he projects and this can be a source of confusion). Basically he's saying that you may believe, and hope you're right, but this should not carry you as far as eliminating physically your opponents (and all the other hallmarks of fanaticism). At the moment, from the Holy War's perspective, and for Kellhus's own need, it's much safer to have him have his way. As for what happens when his message begins to spread, well, as I said, it should be a lot of help in decreasing religious tensions in the Three Seas, and if Kellhus's "miracles" continue, I expect a significant number of converts. This is also a sound strategy for gaining secular power in the fastest possible way. view post

Re: Achamian vs. Kellhus: faith vs. certainty posted 21 May 2005, 21:05 by diarmuid, Peralogue

[quote="matthewcreelman":9x7kkfzg] At the core of TWP it's a conflict of doubt and faith. Achamian is a creature of doubt; Kellhus is a creature of certainty. Kellhus has absolute certainty in his own abilities, whereas Achamian worries constantly. More importantly, Kellhus creates a belief that inspires solid certainty in people, whereas Achamian spreads a faith that inspires only doubt. [/quote:9x7kkfzg] I don't know that fatih and certainty are really based on knowledge..which is stself anchored by the possibly mistaken certainty that you are wrong about what you know.. While faith seems to be the beleif of and in something in the abscence of knowledge or facts [quote="matthewcreelman":9x7kkfzg] Just look at the decline of Esmenet as an example of what he can do to people. For someone who follows Kellhus, “I understand” is the key term. [/quote:9x7kkfzg] i disagree that Esmi is declining...i think she is becoming something much more than herself. view post

Does Akka waver?Where was he at the End? posted 26 May 2005, 15:05 by Ishmael, Commoner

As a reader I found Akka's character to be dynamic. Bakker transformed Akka through torture and loss. I was pleased that Akka thought himself different and I expected him to be portrayed differently when he and Xin rejoin the Holy War. I was a little disappointed (as reader I had different expectations of what Akka's character was going to do) when Akka reunites with Esmi and filled w/ jealousy and self doubt. His selftalk and how he imagines Esmi talking about him was a "disconnect" from his purged-no weakness- post torture persona. As a reader I had expectations for Akka to perform differently when he addresses the council, I expected others to notice a change in him. He stumbles then hints at being different than he was before when he tells his story (which he doesn't seem so embarrased about ) but the resulting ridicule seems to place Akka back to an ineffectual position. I can't believe that Akka didn't turn the city into ruin trying to find Elazaras. He seems fixated on Iokus (understandable- his torturer- who gave him time to escape (hey MacGyver Im going to lock you in this metalshop))but he lets Elazaras off the hook?? His character demonstrated a capacity to destroy everything in his path and I thought that he woud demonstrate that character change. I also expected the end of the Siege of WP-- to feature more of Akka and Cnauir in the battle over the pajaradja. They weren't mentioned as far as I could tell. Just depictions of mal nourished wraiths beating a well fed foe because they had "conviction" I can imagine that the book would much longer if Bakker decided to address these themes. view post

posted 26 May 2005, 19:05 by Sovin Nai, Site Administrator

Why is this post here as well as a topic? view post

posted 14 Jun 2005, 10:06 by azdahak, Candidate

I would say that the difference between Akka and Kellhus isn't fath vs certainty, but scepicism vs certainty. Achamian has a true sceptical mindset and questions almost everything. Kellhus has the certainty of the fanatic, not that he believes in the "cause", but an utter faith in his own abilities. As one sees at the end of this book it backfires, although he wins his life and position back and doesn't seem to have learnt anything from the experience (at least not yet). After reading it again I get the feeling that the key is gonna be Achamians scepticism noot Kellhus' "certainty" or perhaps "hubris". HOT view post


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