[BellaGrace]

I was in a discussion today on FB about things Malazan related and I mentioned a theory I had about ST and Cotillion and wanted to see what you guys had to say about it. Keep in mind that I've only done one read through, so there's likely details that I have forgotten.

I have always felt like ShadowThrone and Cotillion (or Kellenved and Dancer) were gay and together. As far as I can remember there is nothing in the books about them having past or present lovers, they spend all their time together and seem to be happy that way. They have always seemed to me more as a couple, than a couple of friends.

Someone on FB said that Kellenved had a son (I had no idea), but that doesn't preclude him from being in a relationship with Cots now.

Thoughts?

[champ]

I am guessing this is your own personal interruption of events?

I cannot recall a single quote or event that made me pause and wonder if they were together.

[BellaGrace]

champ, on 14 May 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

I am guessing this is your own personal interruption of events?

I cannot recall a single quote or event that made me pause and wonder if they were together.

Of course it is... that's why it's "my theory" and I said things like "I feel..."

I'm not suggesting that it is overtly laid out that they are together, but there is no evidence that they aren't either. I can not recall any instance of either of them being mentioned in a sexual context with a woman. I have gotten the impression they were gay from very early on. I never asked about it here because I figured there might be some mention of past loves, or new loves farther on into the books.

I know there are a lot of people here with multiple rereads, so I'm trying to find out if I'm wrong and there has been mentions of them with women that I don't remember.

[Puck]

Quote

[Shadowthrone] 'Do you see me holding a leash? He's not here. He's off doing other things. We're allies, do you understand? An alliance. Not a damned marriage!'
[tCG, HC, p. 27]

Quote

'Yes,' Cotillion said, 'I am well aware of your long-standing fear of the swaying sex.'
'I blame my mother.'
[tCG, HC, p. 656]

..sorry, couldn't resist.

But on a more serious note, like champ, I do not think that's the case. On an story level there's the above quotes, though it's more humorous than serious, but they only ever call each other 'friend' onpage, even in their thoughts (well, Cotillion does), and I'm pretty sure there's some discussion between Lostara and Cotillion about the latter being very lonely. But those are details, and as I said, I doubt there's anything of the sort between them. Also, the series is not really big on the romantic side of things, so it's not unusual for there to be no mention of past loves or whatever.

Not that there have to have been. On a non-story related level I feel compelled to mention that not only are there more sexual orientations (yes, plural) than straight and gay, but there are also people who have no inclination towards.. ah, how to put it, romance seems so out of concept when connected to ST&Cots, but yeah, no inclination towards romance - shock and gasp! The range of relationships people are capable of is more varied than 'friends' and 'lovers', there's a whole bunch of possible relationships that lie inbetween or completely outside those things, and I think the MBotF has plenty of such examples, which is GREAT. So whatever ST&Cots are, simply friends, business partners or queerplatonic amoebas, I'm pretty sure they aren't and haven't been lovers. In fact, they seem exceptionally un-close and business-like at times, when compared to other duos in the series of whom we know that they're 'just' friends.

Edit: I just want to make clear that I'm not trying to say your idea is stupid or anything of the sort. I have wondered about the relationship dynamics of some character duos in the series, including ST&Cots, as well, but it never seemed to me like there's anything more to it than the text says.

Edit2: Oh, and about ST's child (not son, child), here's the quote and it's reaaaally vague, so the general assumption is that 'child' means 'the empire' in this case, which I'm inclined to see as, too, because the topic of the conversation is just that:

Quote

[Shadowthrone & Tayschrenn talking at the end of tBH]
Neither spoke for a time after that, until the god murmured, 'My poor Wickans...'
'They are not as vulnerable as you fear, Emperor. They will have Nil and Nether. They will have Temul, and when Temul is old, decades from now, he will have a young warrior to teach, whose name shall be Coltaine.' He clasped his hands behind his back, frowning down at the smoke-wreathed city as the first greying of dawn approached. 'If you would fear,' he said, 'fear for your own child.'

Oh, and also, there's at one point an instant where Cotillion mentions have a daughter of sorts. It's probably Apsalar, since he was so instrumental in making what became of her. And he thinks of 'making amends' in tCG, so yeah.

This post has been edited by Puckstein: 14 May 2015 - 05:05 PM

[Abyss]

I've never thought anything indicated a homosexual relationship there. I can see how one might extrapolate it from the interaction and history, but i doubt anything more than a hearty bromance best friendship alliance thing is at work along the lines of Kalam / QB, Onrack / Trull, Mael / Tehol etc.

I'm fairly certain that Shadowthrone's 'child' ref'd upthread is the Malazan Empire. It makes sense in the context of Tays' comments about the Wickans as a whole.

Cots mentions he has a 'daughter of sorts' in HoC i believe. We mostly figured that was a ref to Apsalar, but in RCG there was a young female Claw who fought Topper, leading to the comment "you're his daughter", which could go any which way including Cots as the father.

[Nevyn]

Really don't think it matters. The story can be read that way if it makes you happy, but it really doesn't change the understanding of the story in any way.

As far as I can recall, SE's world really doesn't discuss or tackle any of these issues, or how gayness would be viewed on Wu (or if they even if they exist there).

This post has been edited by Nevyn: 14 May 2015 - 05:39 PM

[Puck]

Nevyn, on 14 May 2015 - 05:37 PM, said:

Really don't think it matters. The story can be read that way if it makes you happy, but it really doesn't change the understanding of the story in any way.

As far as I can recall, SE's world really doesn't discuss or tackle any of these issues, or how gayness would be viewed on Wu (or if they even if they exist there).

1. I agree, well put.

2. It does, but not in the open. SE has mentioned elsewhere that he cares about equality of gender and such issues in fiction, and there are several characters who are implied to be bi, lesbian and gay. Just think about Tavore, arguably one of the most important characters. It's just not central to the plot, so tne issue is presented as something normal to the setting and nobody blinks an eye twice about it.

[worry]

On the Tor reread for one of the books I asked SE why the Malazan pantheon didn't have a "God of Love", thinking there would be a good in-world reason, and his reply was that essentially he and ICE were two goofy young men at the conception of the world and the touchy-feely stuff just didn't resonate at the time (I'm badly paraphrasing, but that was the gist of it). My guess is it just wasn't on their radar w/ ST and Cots, but further into adulthood and writing the novels it entered their thoughts that of course it has to be addressed on occasion, though their tastes/comforts seem to be not to focus on romance. That said, Picker and Blend, for example, aren't merely implied to be a couple (even if the touchy-feely stuff is still largely absent on screen), and of course there's Yedan by the end, and Skulldeath appears to be pan. All of these are explicit.

[Felisin Fatter]

I also seem to remember an off-hand mention that Karsa kicks over a cot at some point holding two men. And there is the suggestive-ness between Stormy and Gesler, which is likely just bro-humor or something. I have also wonderend aout Kalam and QB, and ST and Cot. But none of those seems to be interested in romance, or even sex, much. And even if they were, the friendship aspect is the important one.
Most likely, any suggestion of sex here squeaks out the authors, as in their minds, they are these couples and even flirting between male friends is pretty taboo in our (their) society.

[BellaGrace]

I don't recall ever reading anything to indicate that ST and Cots were a couple together.... like I said - it was just my impression. It just seems odd that almost all the major characters have a lover mentioned in some context at some point in the series. I realize it doesn't matter either way - I was just throwing an idea out there to see what everyone thought.

[Puck]

Not to beat a dead horse here, but I want to ask you: WHY does it seem odd? Especially considering that the MBotF does not give much attention to such things. I'd see the point in a series that does, but this one doesn't. Is it because everyone has to be paired up to be whole? I challenge that assumption. It's not even that I don't see where your idea's coming from, and just to make clear, I'm not attacking your or your idea, but the underlying assumption is simply antiquated. I'm genuinely curious about the WHY, but don't want to go off-topic too much here.

[Gorefest]

Have to agree with Puck here, I'm not really sure why it matters. Throughout the book we have pairings, some of which are friendships, some are hierarchical, some are love interests (both heterosexual and gay, or left ambivalent), some are chance encounters. If it is left ambivalent, clearly it is not of importance or interest to the story or the character development. In the case of ST and Cots it seems, from all available content, to be a combination of friendship and hierarchy. Nowhere is the impression given that they are lovers, so either they simply aren't, or we will never know. Personally, I don't think they are, but why would it be of interest to know if they were? What relevance would there be to it? Does Ormulogun have a bestial relationship with his toad critic Gumble? Does Tehol have a sexual relationship with Bugg? Do Pust's and Kruppe's mules make out off-screen? Does Rake eat muesli for breakfast? We'll simply never know, and as these are fictional characters, I don't think it will have much significance to the rest of their or our lives.

[Egwene]

Of course it is of interest how two characters view each other. A personal relationship is quite different from a business relationship and trying to figure out the dynamics between characters is part of trying to figure out their motivations and likely actions/reactions. I think we make these observations about people a lot of the time without necessarily being conscious of doing so.

As Puckstein already mentioned, there are a multitude of different types of personal relationships and we'll probably never know for sure in the case of ST and Cotillion... If they were lovers once, then they strike me as having moved moved on from that. I think that what binds them now is eons of shared history rather than amorous feelings.

[BellaGrace]

Puckstein, on 17 May 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

Not to beat a dead horse here, but I want to ask you: WHY does it seem odd? Especially considering that the MBotF does not give much attention to such things. I'd see the point in a series that does, but this one doesn't. Is it because everyone has to be paired up to be whole? I challenge that assumption. It's not even that I don't see where your idea's coming from, and just to make clear, I'm not attacking your or your idea, but the underlying assumption is simply antiquated. I'm genuinely curious about the WHY, but don't want to go off-topic too much here.

I only mean it's odd because SE takes the time to mention that sort of information for almost all the other characters in the book - so not making mention of it for these two is out of the ordinary.

I never said it matters. You guys are reading way too much into it.

Gorefest, on 17 May 2015 - 01:00 PM, said:

Personally, I don't think they are, but why would it be of interest to know if they were? What relevance would there be to it? Does Ormulogun have a bestial relationship with his toad critic Gumble? Does Tehol have a sexual relationship with Bugg? Do Pust's and Kruppe's mules make out off-screen? Does Rake eat muesli for breakfast? We'll simply never know, and as these are fictional characters, I don't think it will have much significance to the rest of their or our lives.

Again - I never said it mattered. All I said was that it was my opinion. Knowing if they were lovers would be interesting to me because it adds to their back story and provides more information on the characters. If you're going to go by the "why does it matter, what relevance does this hold" - a quarter of the books could be thrown out since you could say "hey, does this really matter or have relevance". There are TONS of examples in the book where someone's lover is mentioned or random details are added about what people are eating, drinking or doing. You can't just say that any information not directly related to the plot would have no relevance and therefor no value.

Not sure why there's so much push back on a simple idea . Obviously the examples you are using here are just ridiculous and one of them reinforces my point about the major characters all having past or present lovers. Tehol, Bugg, Rake, Pust, Kruppe - all have that information covered.

Egwene, on 17 May 2015 - 07:57 PM, said:

As Puckstein already mentioned, there are a multitude of different types of personal relationships and we'll probably never know for sure in the case of ST and Cotillion... If they were lovers once, then they strike me as having moved moved on from that. I think that what binds them now is eons of shared history rather than amorous feelings.

I agree with this - for me it seems their relationship seems to me to be like an old married couple. Although I disagree on the "eons of shared history" - at most it's a couple hundred years since they are new gods.

[Puck]

BellaGrace, on 19 May 2015 - 01:16 PM, said:

Puckstein, on 17 May 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

Not to beat a dead horse here, but I want to ask you: WHY does it seem odd? Especially considering that the MBotF does not give much attention to such things. I'd see the point in a series that does, but this one doesn't. Is it because everyone has to be paired up to be whole? I challenge that assumption. It's not even that I don't see where your idea's coming from, and just to make clear, I'm not attacking your or your idea, but the underlying assumption is simply antiquated. I'm genuinely curious about the WHY, but don't want to go off-topic too much here.

I only mean it's odd because SE takes the time to mention that sort of information for almost all the other characters in the book - so not making mention of it for these two is out of the ordinary.

I never said it matters. You guys are reading way too much into it.

Well, it's not like there's no mention whatsowever, at least regarding Cotillion. Behold, from tBH:

Quote

He turned at her tone, half-smiled. 'You fear that you are now in my debt, Lostara Yil. And that I will one day return to you, demanding payment.'
'It's how gods work, isn't it?'
'Some of them, yes. But you see, Lostara Yil, what I did for you in Y'Ghatan four days ago was my repayment, of a debt that I owed you.'
'What debt?'
Shadows were gathering about Cotillion now, and she barely heard his reply, 'You forget, I once watched you dance...' And then he was gone.
Moonlight streamed into his wake like quicksilver. And she sat for a time, bathed in its light, considering his words.

[BellaGrace]

Puckstein said:

1432053869[/url]' post='1186511']

Well, it's not like there's no mention whatsowever, at least regarding Cotillion. Behold, from tBH:

Quote

He turned at her tone, half-smiled. 'You fear that you are now in my debt, Lostara Yil. And that I will one day return to you, demanding payment.'
'It's how gods work, isn't it?'
'Some of them, yes. But you see, Lostara Yil, what I did for you in Y'Ghatan four days ago was my repayment, of a debt that I owed you.'
'What debt?'
Shadows were gathering about Cotillion now, and she barely heard his reply, 'You forget, I once watched you dance...' And then he was gone.
Moonlight streamed into his wake like quicksilver. And she sat for a time, bathed in its light, considering his words.

Are you using that as evidence for heterosexuality?

[Puck]

No. I am using this as possible - note the emphasis - evidence of Cotillion not being homosexual. That does, of course, not mean squat, as he could be bi or pan or just pulling the incident with Lostara out of his godly ass. I was mostly just having a crack at the thread's expense, as in 'Hey, look, there IS evidence of Cotillion getting some action, so it's not like there's a complete blank in that regard re ST&Cots!'.

That said, my personal opinion is that both Cotillion and Shadowthrone are indeed heterosexual. My reasoning for this has been beat almost to it's last wheeze in this thread already, but here goes:

1. There's a serious lack of evidence for them being anything more than friends, really good friends who have spent over 100 years in each other's company, know each other damn well, and have built not only an empire together (and with Dassem and some other people; let's not forget to credit Dassem, who was - as some instances indicate - just as instrumental in building the empire) but also ascended to godhood AND hatched plans to secure their place in the pantheon.

2. As worry already mentioned above, SE is known to have admitted that there's no deity of love in the MBotF because at the world's conception, he and ICE were two college age dudes living together. Iirc, Cotillion and Shadowthrone - or rather Dancer and Kellanved - were among the first characters they played in that setting. Now imagine two college age heterosexual dudes who are too much college age heterosexual dudes to include a deity of love into their world playing homosexual characters in love with each other. Yeah, right. And it's not even an issue of being open and stuff, it's an issue of such things being unlikely to happen at that age. Unless one's directly involved in such issues by being non-heterosexual, one simply does not think about these things at that age.

3. There's a gradual appearance of non-heterosexual references and characters in the books. Compare the amount between the beginning and the end. At first we've got sparse allusions in DG about Felisin and the inn proprietor at the Otataral mine, then hints about Picker and Blend in MoI, and in HoC Karsa runs into and kills two men huddled together in a bed at the town beside Silverlake. By TtH, Picker and Blend are openly flirting with Scillara (who seems to be bi), in RG (I think it was RG) there is explicit mention of Skulldeath sleeping with both men and women (or rather, men and Hellian), and in tCG we find out that Yedan Derryg is gay and men marry each other 'all the time' among the Meckros. In FoD there two PoV characters who are very likely to be bi (or pan, but I'm using that sparsely due to believing that authors write about what they know about, and pansexuality is not that widely known, so just to be on the safe side and inclusive and stuff). There is a steady development of relevance starting with isolated distanced mentions and ending with a major important character being gay. I'd hazard this reflects a gradual maturity of SE regarding the topic. And since ST & Cots were characters of the first hour..

I understand where you're coming from, but there's zero evidence for them to be/have been lovers. And a lack of evidence is just that, and not evidence to the contrary. In this instance. Of course, every theory and idea is valid, and I'm not trying to scream that my opinion si right and duh, how dare you.. Just stating my opinion and trying to back it up with evidence.

Oh, and before I get accused of heteronormativity (one never knows these days on the internet), a bit of a disclaimer:

Spoiler

I am neither hetero nor a hypocrite. Due to that I enjoy casts with characters of varied sexual orientations, however I see no reason to try to shoehorn characters into something there is zero evidence for. I am 100% sure, for example, that there is no asexual character in the whole of the MBotF. If I dig around I could probably come up with a few I could shoehorn into possibly being ace due to lack of evidence to the contrary (HELLO, Kadaspala, how ya doin'?). But that would feel like a poor attempt, and I generally prefer to not mess around unless there is evidence in the text or from the author.

This post has been edited by Puckstein: 19 May 2015 - 07:52 PM

[Egwene]

I think it is great that even what one might consider a simple question 'are they a couple' in the case of the gruesome twosome is shrouded in shadow

I remember reading the scene Cotillion/Lostara and thinking that we might see their relationship turn into romance but then it didn't. There was also a hint of it in his dealings with Apsalar. But then, I also see him and Shadowthrone seeming to be joined at the hips, i.e., always in each others company, planning and scheming together... regardless of any orientation, that doesn't seem to leave much time for anyone else. Then there are some hints IIRC, that being an Ascendant/God has skewed their emotional perception somewhat.

[Puck]

Egwene, on 19 May 2015 - 08:10 PM, said:

I think it is great that even what one might consider a simple question 'are they a couple' in the case of the gruesome twosome is shrouded in shadow

I remember reading the scene Cotillion/Lostara and thinking that we might see their relationship turn into romance but then it didn't. There was also a hint of it in his dealings with Apsalar. But then, I also see him and Shadowthrone seeming to be joined at the hips, i.e., always in each others company, planning and scheming together... regardless of any orientation, that doesn't seem to leave much time for anyone else. Then there are some hints IIRC, that being an Ascendant/God has skewed their emotional perception somewhat.

Ha! Exactly!

Same, actually, I always got a bit of a romancy vide from Cotillion and Lostara post their conversation in tBH. And there's a scene, also in tBH, where Apsalar gets close-ish to Cotillion and in a bad romance novel, this might have led to something, but she realises that the scene's kinda off and backs away. But neitehr are clear evidence, just scenes that invoke a certain feeling, so wether they're valid as solid evidence..

Simply put, your summary is pretty much what I mean.

This post has been edited by Puckstein: 19 May 2015 - 08:29 PM

[worry]

Wow, now I'm thinking The Bonehunters has even more layers of meaning than I thought. Bravo, SE!