[Morgoth]

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

And theres the problem. We might as well not believe a single word about anything cosmological/timeline-wise/character-based in this trilogy. Gallan is SE's get-out. I think there is no point at all in trying to reconcile this trilogy with the 10 book cycle. It exists in an alternate universe. It can be enjoyed for itself (and I did enjoy many parts of it) but don't bother using it's facts to make sense with the 10 book cycle.

I see very little in FoD that doesn't fit well with what we've learned throughout MBotF. Might be the nature of T'riss (and yeah, I can see the Brood angle) but those are pretty insignificant.

When that is said, having an unreliable narrator is a pretty common literary tool, and only forces you to think a little more than if everything is told from the view of God.

[blackzoid]

Spoiler

Nature of T'riss, pretty insignificant. Ya, she was never a character who we spent time with or around. Agree.

Brood though. His whole nature in MoI is now very different. Almost unrecognisiable to me. (All the other Elder Gods that survived to the modern age, keep a low profile or have much reduced power. He is leading armies?!. And notice that the Errant doesn't try and call/force him to the meeting in DoD. Or indeed mention him as an Elder. Why? Because almost certainly SE didn't think of making him a Elder God at that moment.)

Maybe I have over-egged the thing, but the scene in MoI where everyone seems fine with Silverfox killing off the Jaghut and Kallor is the only one who defends them really struck with me, the further we went on. Kallor was right, they were all wrong. And now,Brood was just being a prick instead of ignorant? Why didn't he speak up in MoI when his ally advocates genocide of a people of whom he really knew were not all Tyrants?

And ya, I actually like unreliable narrator's too. But unreliable narrator's are planned right? Not usually retconns added later. Cos sorry but thats what this change in Brood really feels like to me. As opposed to T'riss who wasn't a character we spent time with. (The same way I don't care about the 3 Sister's/Osserc's changes as those are not major ones and we only assumed they were blood-related before anyway.)

This post has been edited by blackzoid: 13 August 2012 - 03:33 PM

[anothevilbadguy]

QuickTidal, on 13 August 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

Other than a lack of humour I have one other complaint as I read.

Spoiler

Orfantal (and then subsequently Sukhul Ankadhu) are meant to be kids. I think something in his first or second appearance put Orfantal at around 5 years old (though I could be wrong about that), he is AT LEAST young enough to still be playing with toys, and playing at war with the stable boy (10 at the eldest I think, but that's pushing it) before he leaves his home heading for Karkhanas...and yet once he meets Sukhul (who is either his age or a year older) they begin to converse and for an entire section I was taken out of the narrative by two KIDS speaking like adults, using words, sentence structure and thought processes of people much older. Couple that with the young hostage in the Citadel (Legyl?) in the very next chapter who actually talks and reasons like a child...it was all really weird and like I said took me right out of the narrative. Anyone else?

Orfantal is noted as about five, and he thinks Sukhul Ankadhu is only a little older. However, from her point of view bits it seems clear she is not that young, more in the 15-25 age group. Orfantal seems pretty sheltered so may not grasp age that well plus Sukhul could be pretty small/slight so that could confuse him.

[Fid]

Morgoth, on 13 August 2012 - 03:06 PM, said:

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

And theres the problem. We might as well not believe a single word about anything cosmological/timeline-wise/character-based in this trilogy. Gallan is SE's get-out. I think there is no point at all in trying to reconcile this trilogy with the 10 book cycle. It exists in an alternate universe. It can be enjoyed for itself (and I did enjoy many parts of it) but don't bother using it's facts to make sense with the 10 book cycle.

I see very little in FoD that doesn't fit well with what we've learned throughout MBotF. Might be the nature of T'riss (and yeah, I can see the Brood angle) but those are pretty insignificant.

When that is said, having an unreliable narrator is a pretty common literary tool, and only forces you to think a little more than if everything is told from the view of God.

I think I am inclined to agree - there is nothing that I have read as yet (just in book 3) that invalidates anything in TMBOTF - and of course still 2 more volumes to things to unfold.

[Urizen]

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Spoiler

Nature of T'riss, pretty insignificant. Ya, she was never a character who we spent time with or around. Agree.

Brood though. His whole nature in MoI is now very different. Almost unrecognisiable to me. (All the other Elder Gods that survived to the modern age, keep a low profile or have much reduced power. He is leading armies?!. And notice that the Errant doesn't try and call/force him to the meeting in DoD. Or indeed mention him as an Elder. Why? Because almost certainly SE didn't think of making him a Elder God at that moment.)

Maybe I have over-egged the thing, but the scene in MoI where everyone seems fine with Silverfox killing off the Jaghut and Kallor is the only one who defends them really struck with me, the further we went on. Kallor was right, they were all wrong. And now,Brood was just being a prick instead of ignorant? Why didn't he speak up in MoI when his ally advocates genocide of a people of whom he really knew were not all Tyrants?

And ya, I actually like unreliable narrator's too. But unreliable narrator's are planned right? Not usually retconns added later. Cos sorry but thats what this change in Brood really feels like to me. As opposed to T'riss who wasn't a character we spent time with. (The same way I don't care about the 3 Sister's/Osserc's changes as those are not major ones and we only assumed they were blood-related before anyway.)

Spoiler

I actually have more problem with T'riss being an Elder than Brood being one since in OST we learn that Arsata was the "old" Queen of Dreams and she got supplanted by T'riss, one of the "young" gods.

[Aptorian]

Urizen, on 13 August 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Spoiler

Nature of T'riss, pretty insignificant. Ya, she was never a character who we spent time with or around. Agree.

Brood though. His whole nature in MoI is now very different. Almost unrecognisiable to me. (All the other Elder Gods that survived to the modern age, keep a low profile or have much reduced power. He is leading armies?!. And notice that the Errant doesn't try and call/force him to the meeting in DoD. Or indeed mention him as an Elder. Why? Because almost certainly SE didn't think of making him a Elder God at that moment.)

Maybe I have over-egged the thing, but the scene in MoI where everyone seems fine with Silverfox killing off the Jaghut and Kallor is the only one who defends them really struck with me, the further we went on. Kallor was right, they were all wrong. And now,Brood was just being a prick instead of ignorant? Why didn't he speak up in MoI when his ally advocates genocide of a people of whom he really knew were not all Tyrants?

And ya, I actually like unreliable narrator's too. But unreliable narrator's are planned right? Not usually retconns added later. Cos sorry but thats what this change in Brood really feels like to me. As opposed to T'riss who wasn't a character we spent time with. (The same way I don't care about the 3 Sister's/Osserc's changes as those are not major ones and we only assumed they were blood-related before anyway.)

Spoiler

I actually have more problem with T'riss being an Elder than Brood being one since in OST we learn that Arsata was the "old" Queen of Dreams and she got supplanted by T'riss, one of the "young" gods.

Spoiler

This isn't so much a problem chronologically as in terms of scope. It just means the world is SO MUCH older then we thought and we need to move around puzzle pieces on the time line. If the High King really is Kallor then he is already messing around with Ardatha in this age. By the time of FOD Ardatha's time could have come and went, or more in line with the emerging warrens, she is about to become the Queen of Dreams. Then in a couple of hundred thousand years from now Ardatha gets supplanted by T'riss. Not a problem.

This post has been edited by Aptorius: 13 August 2012 - 05:15 PM

[blackzoid]

Aptorius, on 13 August 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

Urizen, on 13 August 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Spoiler

Nature of T'riss, pretty insignificant. Ya, she was never a character who we spent time with or around. Agree.

Brood though. His whole nature in MoI is now very different. Almost unrecognisiable to me. (All the other Elder Gods that survived to the modern age, keep a low profile or have much reduced power. He is leading armies?!. And notice that the Errant doesn't try and call/force him to the meeting in DoD. Or indeed mention him as an Elder. Why? Because almost certainly SE didn't think of making him a Elder God at that moment.)

Maybe I have over-egged the thing, but the scene in MoI where everyone seems fine with Silverfox killing off the Jaghut and Kallor is the only one who defends them really struck with me, the further we went on. Kallor was right, they were all wrong. And now,Brood was just being a prick instead of ignorant? Why didn't he speak up in MoI when his ally advocates genocide of a people of whom he really knew were not all Tyrants?

And ya, I actually like unreliable narrator's too. But unreliable narrator's are planned right? Not usually retconns added later. Cos sorry but thats what this change in Brood really feels like to me. As opposed to T'riss who wasn't a character we spent time with. (The same way I don't care about the 3 Sister's/Osserc's changes as those are not major ones and we only assumed they were blood-related before anyway.)

Spoiler

I actually have more problem with T'riss being an Elder than Brood being one since in OST we learn that Arsata was the "old" Queen of Dreams and she got supplanted by T'riss, one of the "young" gods.

Spoiler

This isn't so much a problem chronologically as in terms of scope. It just means the world is SO MUCH older then we thought and we need to move around puzzle pieces on the time line. If the High King really is Kallor then he is already messing around with Ardatha in this age. By the time of FOD Ardatha's time could have come and went, or more in line with the emerging warrens, she is about to become the Queen of Dreams. Then in a couple of hundred thousand years from now Ardatha gets supplanted by T'riss. Not a problem.

Spoiler

We would have to have Kallor using the century candles waaaay before MoI prologue though. That takes place about 150,000ish years before the Jaghut Tyrants involvement with the Imass. Which apparently starts in FoD?
While this gives Kallor time to have had a few empires to rule over and destroy as he said, it means he has had many many years to Ascend and he still hasn't accomplised that by the time K'rul, Draconus and Sister of Cold Nights curse him. A slacker. But ya, century candles will have to be used to explain that.

[QuickTidal]

Morgoth, on 13 August 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 13 August 2012 - 01:58 PM, said:

Aptorius, on 13 August 2012 - 01:56 PM, said:

Spoiler

But this is Eriksons writing we are talking about here. Everyone is foil for his observations of the world. This is universe where everyone from soldiers, to dock workers, to fucking oxen has the observational talents of Sherlock Holmes, the analytical skills of Sigmund Freud and Philosophical depth of Plato. Nobody thinks like average human beings in these books. Even a toddler probably spends its time in the Crib contemplating the meaning of its existence, worshipping its own poo and shaking a tiny fist at the elitist wind chimes hanging over its head.

Spoiler

And I'd not have had a problem with it if a kid of a similar age in the VERY NEXT CHAPTER hadn't spoken like a kid. It was incongruous because of that, otherwise I'd have let it slide.

Remember that this entire story is told by Gallan, who readily admits in the prologue to the use of some artistic flourish.

Huh, I'd forgotten that he said that (though I recall noting it and thinking "Unreliable narrator, gotcha."). A very good point.

[Ceda Cicero]

QuickTidal, on 13 August 2012 - 06:11 PM, said:

Morgoth, on 13 August 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 13 August 2012 - 01:58 PM, said:

Aptorius, on 13 August 2012 - 01:56 PM, said:

Spoiler

But this is Eriksons writing we are talking about here. Everyone is foil for his observations of the world. This is universe where everyone from soldiers, to dock workers, to fucking oxen has the observational talents of Sherlock Holmes, the analytical skills of Sigmund Freud and Philosophical depth of Plato. Nobody thinks like average human beings in these books. Even a toddler probably spends its time in the Crib contemplating the meaning of its existence, worshipping its own poo and shaking a tiny fist at the elitist wind chimes hanging over its head.

Spoiler

And I'd not have had a problem with it if a kid of a similar age in the VERY NEXT CHAPTER hadn't spoken like a kid. It was incongruous because of that, otherwise I'd have let it slide.

Remember that this entire story is told by Gallan, who readily admits in the prologue to the use of some artistic flourish.

Huh, I'd forgotten that he said that (though I recall noting it and thinking "Unreliable narrator, gotcha."). A very good point.

I mean, the point about Gallan and the prelude is the most salient here.

I'm not saying it's a waste of time or an valueless exercise to question things, note inconsistencies, and try to iron them out as best you can (ie Brood, T'riss, etc.) What I will say is that SE has made it pretty clear (the prelude to FoD was, I think, the most blatant instance of this) that the inconsistencies are going to be there, and frankly, he doesn't give a fuck. The question ultimately becomes whether you can stomach that or not.

For my part, I found myself, for whatever reason, way less willing to stomach them now, with a new trilogy, than I was when I was in the grip of MBotF, even though I'm fully aware that if I could— and just get over them, and appreciate all of SE's remarkable strengths and what it is he's trying to do, the same way I did with MBotF—it would be vastly rewarding.

Maybe it's just because it's a new series, or maybe because I'd pinned too much expectation on this trilogy being a kind of "herein lie answers" trilogy.

This post has been edited by Ceda Cicero: 13 August 2012 - 11:18 PM

[Morgoth]

With Apt's apt point regardin T'riss, Ardatha and time, what discrepancies are there apart from Brood?

People continue to talk of discrepancies as if the book had many, but apart from Brood, what are they?

[Iamme]

There are Gods and then there are Gods in waiting. A god needs worshipers. A god needs to claim his/her position. Just existing doesn't make you one.

[QuickTidal]

Iamme, on 14 August 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

There are Gods and then there are Gods in waiting. A god needs worshipers. A god needs to claim his/her position. Just existing doesn't make you one.

Yeah, that whole conversation was a bit of a convoluted mess wasn't it? It also makes the water the gods exist in a rather weak tea to me...

[Aptorian]

Spoiler

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 05:34 PM, said:

Aptorius, on 13 August 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

Urizen, on 13 August 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

blackzoid, on 13 August 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

Spoiler

Nature of T'riss, pretty insignificant. Ya, she was never a character who we spent time with or around. Agree.

Brood though. His whole nature in MoI is now very different. Almost unrecognisiable to me. (All the other Elder Gods that survived to the modern age, keep a low profile or have much reduced power. He is leading armies?!. And notice that the Errant doesn't try and call/force him to the meeting in DoD. Or indeed mention him as an Elder. Why? Because almost certainly SE didn't think of making him a Elder God at that moment.)

Maybe I have over-egged the thing, but the scene in MoI where everyone seems fine with Silverfox killing off the Jaghut and Kallor is the only one who defends them really struck with me, the further we went on. Kallor was right, they were all wrong. And now,Brood was just being a prick instead of ignorant? Why didn't he speak up in MoI when his ally advocates genocide of a people of whom he really knew were not all Tyrants?

And ya, I actually like unreliable narrator's too. But unreliable narrator's are planned right? Not usually retconns added later. Cos sorry but thats what this change in Brood really feels like to me. As opposed to T'riss who wasn't a character we spent time with. (The same way I don't care about the 3 Sister's/Osserc's changes as those are not major ones and we only assumed they were blood-related before anyway.)

Spoiler

I actually have more problem with T'riss being an Elder than Brood being one since in OST we learn that Arsata was the "old" Queen of Dreams and she got supplanted by T'riss, one of the "young" gods.

Spoiler

This isn't so much a problem chronologically as in terms of scope. It just means the world is SO MUCH older then we thought and we need to move around puzzle pieces on the time line. If the High King really is Kallor then he is already messing around with Ardatha in this age. By the time of FOD Ardatha's time could have come and went, or more in line with the emerging warrens, she is about to become the Queen of Dreams. Then in a couple of hundred thousand years from now Ardatha gets supplanted by T'riss. Not a problem.

Spoiler

We would have to have Kallor using the century candles waaaay before MoI prologue though. That takes place about 150,000ish years before the Jaghut Tyrants involvement with the Imass. Which apparently starts in FoD?
While this gives Kallor time to have had a few empires to rule over and destroy as he said, it means he has had many many years to Ascend and he still hasn't accomplised that by the time K'rul, Draconus and Sister of Cold Nights curse him. A slacker. But ya, century candles will have to be used to explain that.

Doesn't need to be century candles. Consider that there has been much more advanced civilizations before the age of the Malazan Empire. Back in the day Kallor had the greatest physicians, alchemists and mages working for him. They probably had rituals and injections and healing stones that could make you live for ever. Probably. The century candles Kallor uses now may simply be the best thing he is able to get his hands on currently.

We might also need to consider that Kallor was probably always immortal. And always really powerful. Remember Rake wanting to use 1100 Andiis against Kallor when 70 Andii or something like that was enough to destroy a small warren.

Maybe Kallor didn't need the century candles before he was cursed? Perhaps the curse that stated that he would know mortal life unending didn't make him immortal. It made him frail. It stripped his agelessness and agility, which he now instead needs alchemy to sustain.

This all hinges on the question of who the High King across the sea really is. Maybe it's Kallor's father. Maybe it is Nefarias Bred. Maybe it is the Mule God.

QuickTidal, on 14 August 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Iamme, on 14 August 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

There are Gods and then there are Gods in waiting. A god needs worshipers. A god needs to claim his/her position. Just existing doesn't make you one.

Yeah, that whole conversation was a bit of a convoluted mess wasn't it? It also makes the water the gods exist in a rather weak tea to me...

You're going about this idea wrong. There aren't gods and gods in waiting. There are powers and there are manifestations of these powers. Powers waiting for somebody to give them shape and form. Remember Grizzin Farl talking about Azathanai being able to take what ever form they wanted? A tiste, a butterfly, etc. How Olar Ethil was once somebody else or something else but not she's a hideous flesh beast with a furnace inside her that spits out clay figurines.

The powers don't need worshippers to be powerful but they do need the worshippers to give themselves shape and form and ultimately a purpose with their existence.

What I wonder about is what they are doing in the village and why they (if I recall correctly) are worshippers of the Azath. And why are the Azathanai so enthralled with building stuff? Why is Old Man waiting to chose a role?

This post has been edited by Aptorius: 14 August 2012 - 05:43 PM

[Luzburg]

Morgoth, on 14 August 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

With Apt's apt point regardin T'riss, Ardatha and time, what discrepancies are there apart from Brood?

People continue to talk of discrepancies as if the book had many, but apart from Brood, what are they?

Envy and Spites mother.
The fact mother dark is no longer an elemental force that existed before time.

[Morgoth]

Luzburg, on 16 August 2012 - 04:38 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 14 August 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

With Apt's apt point regardin T'riss, Ardatha and time, what discrepancies are there apart from Brood?

People continue to talk of discrepancies as if the book had many, but apart from Brood, what are they?

Envy and Spites mother.
The fact mother dark is no longer an elemental force that existed before time.

These are not discrepancies, retcons or whatever. They are natural changes in the story developed through hundreds of thousands of years.

[blackzoid]

Yes, those ones I don't mind.

[Puck]

Morgoth, on 16 August 2012 - 06:37 AM, said:

Luzburg, on 16 August 2012 - 04:38 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 14 August 2012 - 08:17 AM, said:

With Apt's apt point regardin T'riss, Ardatha and time, what discrepancies are there apart from Brood?

People continue to talk of discrepancies as if the book had many, but apart from Brood, what are they?

Envy and Spites mother.
The fact mother dark is no longer an elemental force that existed before time.

These are not discrepancies, retcons or whatever. They are natural changes in the story developed through hundreds of thousands of years.

Indeed. We can safely assume that the whole 'mother' and 'father' thing is more spiritual than biological in these cases, which makes sense for beings worshipped as gods.

Also, Mother Dark is an elemental force now, she just did not start out as one. It never said she existed before time, it only said that Darkness did, and then warred with Choas etc. No contradiction there. And as soon as MD became the personification of that force and the Gate of Darkness was created and thus bound to one place the natural balance of things demanded that everything else develops gates, too, and so on. That's Draconus's screw up, though, not SE's.

Also, what Morgoth already said.

This post has been edited by Puck: 16 August 2012 - 09:40 AM

[The Retired Bridgeburner]

I've only read through Malazan once and am currently towards the end of FoD, so forgive me if I've gotten some of this wrong but....

Spoiler

I'm not really coming across anything I think is entirely inplausible given Erikson's love of being a bit of git in frustrating his readers. He also frequently makes use of the unreliable narrator throughout Malazan and highlights to the reader in a couple of instances (mostly between Fisher and Blind Gallan) - and something I seem to remember (correct me if I'm wrong) is that a lot of the "elder" characters (Errant, Draconus, his daughters, Mother Dark, the three brothers etc etc) have their stories conveyed by present-day characters who are merely telling the accepted rumour or version of their story (look how wrong the Tiste Edur had their whole history, for example). I don't rememeber really coming across anyone actually telling their own story in detail.

Also, I don't think the gods and ascendants are quite the set in stone concepts that people like to believe (from reading reviews elsewhere shouting about inconsistencies). I've seen a lot of complaint about the Burn inconsistences (in DoD I think Olar Ethil claims to be Burn, in FoD she says Burn is her child) and all I could think was "Have you forgotten the Sister of Cold Nights?" Off the top of my head the Sister of Cold Nights is revealed to be Nightchill and Korlat (or that was my interpreation) and she's obviously had more than one previous incarnation.

I'm leaning on the Draconus being an Azathanai theory too. Their forge work is mentioned over and over and Draconus forges Dragnipur, a feat requiring no mean skill I should think. Also, it's mentioned they can take any form they want so that leaves more than enough room for him to be masquerading convincingly as a Tiste.

I'm enjoying the name changes which have clearly added to the twisting and bending of the characters' stories in the next hundred thousand years or so. So far I think I've picked up on Scabandari and the three sisters, and I've enjoyed the concept that characters aren't related the way we necessarily think. All in all I think it's very clever.

I can perfectly believe Spite and Envy behaving the way they do. Their names are curses (fairly sure Arathan says something along those lines) and they certainly show potential for evil in Malazan. My thought on the possible change in their characters is the subsequent travel with Rake and the others. I think they would find themselves outmatched in such company, possibly leading to some humility in the long run.

Also, nice to see the Errant is still a complete bastard as a young 'un too

.

[Puck]

I have a question: where does it say that Nightchill and Korlat are two manifestations of the Sister of Cold Nights? I see you mentioning this for the second time now and aside from Korlat taking on the Andii title of 'Sister of Night' or something like that at the end of tCG I can't remember any connection.

[The Retired Bridgeburner]

It's possibly my interpretation that's askew, but she offers to be Sister of Night(s) and then I think it's Nimander gives the full title "Sister of Cold Nights" – it seemed a bit too glaring to be a mistake so I assumed the titles are meant to be interpreted as one and the same.

EDIT: After some reading around, I'm not so sure. Sister of Night is a role in the royal house of the Shake. I'm sure Nimander uses the entire phrase "Sister of Cold Nights" though. Argh!

This post has been edited by littlemissmetal: 17 August 2012 - 02:00 PM