Help
I think, as satisfying as it would be on a lot of levels to have clear and explicit rules that could definitively explain something like this, it's one of many things in MBotF that it's definitely possible to over-think, and both we as readers and Steve as the writer would be best served by looking at scenes like this more tongue in cheek, giving SE poetic license.
The objective of that passage, as I interpret it (and as I interpret many/most Cotillion passages from HoC on) is just to once more highlight Cotillion's lingering humanity, and contrast it with his godhood. It's meant to evoke the same theme and characterization that's taking place as when Erikson describes him as "the god Cotillion" in a remarkably human moment. While it's true that it also evokes some interesting metaphysical questions about the nature of physical existence post-Ascension (I remember being curious about this very same question when I read this bit for the first time,) I think those are secondary, at least to Erikson, to the goal of characterization.
Gods and bodies
#21
Ceda Cicero 
- Ceda of Team Quick Ben
-
- Group: Team Quick Ben
- Posts: 1,053
- Joined: 12-February 09
Posted 13 December 2010 - 06:37 PM
Illuyankas, on 07 April 2011 - 08:37 PM, said:
How do you rape a cave? Do you ask, "You want to fuck, yes?" hear the echo come back, "Yes... es... es..." and get your barnacle-gouged groove on?
#22
The Seguleh 46th
- High Fist
-
- Group: Malaz Regular
- Posts: 362
- Joined: 22-March 10
Posted 14 December 2010 - 12:08 AM
Ciceronian, on 13 December 2010 - 06:37 PM, said:
I think, as satisfying as it would be on a lot of levels to have clear and explicit rules that could definitively explain something like this, it's one of many things in MBotF that it's definitely possible to over-think, and both we as readers and Steve as the writer would be best served by looking at scenes like this more tongue in cheek, giving SE poetic license.
The objective of that passage, as I interpret it (and as I interpret many/most Cotillion passages from HoC on) is just to once more highlight Cotillion's lingering humanity, and contrast it with his godhood. It's meant to evoke the same theme and characterization that's taking place as when Erikson describes him as "the god Cotillion" in a remarkably human moment. While it's true that it also evokes some interesting metaphysical questions about the nature of physical existence post-Ascension (I remember being curious about this very same question when I read this bit for the first time,) I think those are secondary, at least to Erikson, to the goal of characterization.
The objective of that passage, as I interpret it (and as I interpret many/most Cotillion passages from HoC on) is just to once more highlight Cotillion's lingering humanity, and contrast it with his godhood. It's meant to evoke the same theme and characterization that's taking place as when Erikson describes him as "the god Cotillion" in a remarkably human moment. While it's true that it also evokes some interesting metaphysical questions about the nature of physical existence post-Ascension (I remember being curious about this very same question when I read this bit for the first time,) I think those are secondary, at least to Erikson, to the goal of characterization.
You aren't wrong at all here, but it still is fun for us as readers to speculate on the mundane anyways, IMO!
