R Scott Bakker
So, my feminism inquiries continue. It's eye opening in a "Oh shit, I do do that. And I'm totally guilty of that!" way. There's kind of a lifetime of really awful habits that have to be re-examined.
It also led me to some really great criticism of R Scott Bakker. I said he was a likely misogynist back when I first started reading his books, but I didn't really have the framework with which to rebut his claims that the apparent horrifying misogyny in his books was an effect of the setting. In Bakker's fantasy universe, women are "spiritually inferior" to men. He says that, because this has been traditionally believed by most religions, he thought it would be cool to explore the idea of this being literally true. So he basically created a world where the gods are also misogynists. And if he'd explored this concept thoughtfully, it's possible that he might have actually had something interesting to say[1]. He hasn't though. It's been pretty much awful treatment of all women from the outset.
I've written before about my love-hate relationship with Bakker. I think he's got some of the coolest fantasy ideas I've encountered since the first time I read WOT. The plot of his series is actually pretty unique within epic fantasy. And he's got this kind of "deconstruction of Tolkien" thing going that's really cool.
On the other hand, his prose is pretty embarrassing. His pacing is terrible (he's written five books that really should have been one and a half). And he fills everything, every conversation, every inner monologue, with bullshit philosophy[2]. And, of course, the misogyny.
This article pretty much hits the nail on the head, and crystalises a lot of problems I had with the book, but couldn't articulate to myself. And also, highlights some problems I wasn't even aware were there. I won't reiterate what the article says, but I wanted to point it out as a concrete example of how Bakker is a) an idiot, and b) thinks he's so not-an-idiot that he can rationalise away basically any criticism with a lot of words that all essentially boil down to: "I'm really fucking smart, I'm operating on a whole other level to you, so you can't possibly understand what I'm getting at." Also, this is awesome(scroll down a little, it's in three parts).
I know this isn't any great revelation to anyone familiar with Bakker's work, but I feel its important to point it out. There's something fascinating about the guy. He arouses enormous amounts of discussion - mostly not related to misogyny - despite his relatively small fanbase. He writes a series that I will continue reading, because I think his poorly written books have some really cool ideas trapped inside them. But he's also a raging dickhead. It's entirely possible that his cool fantasy ideas are a byproduct of the bullshit factory that is his brain.
[1] It's possible that he still does - he's halfway through his series and is only just starting to explore the metaphysics of his world, so it's possible that he might break out some serious insight at some future point. But highly doubtful.
[2] At some point I'll have to read God-Emperor of Dune again. That book was cover to cover philosophical musings, but I remember being enthralled by it. Of course, I was 18, so maybe a reread would have me rolling my eyes as much as I do when reading a Bakker book. But Bakker cites Dune as one of his major influences.
It also led me to some really great criticism of R Scott Bakker. I said he was a likely misogynist back when I first started reading his books, but I didn't really have the framework with which to rebut his claims that the apparent horrifying misogyny in his books was an effect of the setting. In Bakker's fantasy universe, women are "spiritually inferior" to men. He says that, because this has been traditionally believed by most religions, he thought it would be cool to explore the idea of this being literally true. So he basically created a world where the gods are also misogynists. And if he'd explored this concept thoughtfully, it's possible that he might have actually had something interesting to say[1]. He hasn't though. It's been pretty much awful treatment of all women from the outset.
I've written before about my love-hate relationship with Bakker. I think he's got some of the coolest fantasy ideas I've encountered since the first time I read WOT. The plot of his series is actually pretty unique within epic fantasy. And he's got this kind of "deconstruction of Tolkien" thing going that's really cool.
On the other hand, his prose is pretty embarrassing. His pacing is terrible (he's written five books that really should have been one and a half). And he fills everything, every conversation, every inner monologue, with bullshit philosophy[2]. And, of course, the misogyny.
This article pretty much hits the nail on the head, and crystalises a lot of problems I had with the book, but couldn't articulate to myself. And also, highlights some problems I wasn't even aware were there. I won't reiterate what the article says, but I wanted to point it out as a concrete example of how Bakker is a) an idiot, and b) thinks he's so not-an-idiot that he can rationalise away basically any criticism with a lot of words that all essentially boil down to: "I'm really fucking smart, I'm operating on a whole other level to you, so you can't possibly understand what I'm getting at." Also, this is awesome(scroll down a little, it's in three parts).
I know this isn't any great revelation to anyone familiar with Bakker's work, but I feel its important to point it out. There's something fascinating about the guy. He arouses enormous amounts of discussion - mostly not related to misogyny - despite his relatively small fanbase. He writes a series that I will continue reading, because I think his poorly written books have some really cool ideas trapped inside them. But he's also a raging dickhead. It's entirely possible that his cool fantasy ideas are a byproduct of the bullshit factory that is his brain.
[1] It's possible that he still does - he's halfway through his series and is only just starting to explore the metaphysics of his world, so it's possible that he might break out some serious insight at some future point. But highly doubtful.
[2] At some point I'll have to read God-Emperor of Dune again. That book was cover to cover philosophical musings, but I remember being enthralled by it. Of course, I was 18, so maybe a reread would have me rolling my eyes as much as I do when reading a Bakker book. But Bakker cites Dune as one of his major influences.