[Woden]

Totally agree with Condyoke and Panorama.
 The end is too abrupt for me. I mean, half of the book lingers in grisly descriptions that surely creates a great atmosphere, but don't match with a climax too short and sharp and with tons of unanswered questions.

[Wolfdrop]

Yeah, I still don't know why the skin-spy protected her, that was a burning question.

I'm disappointed that Kellhus didn't hold a wingless Aurang over the edge by his throat a la Cnaiur and then cast him from the Vigil.

I got excited about it when he made some reference to doing it to the Consult, figuratively, but it would have been cool.

[Wilshire]

edit: I feel like these types of feelings and minor disappointments are par for the course on anything I read, but some people seem genuinely pissed off that their expectations have been thoroughly overturned. I'm reading a lot about what they didn't like but not a lot of examples of what type of ending they expected overall? e.g. Return of the King type ending, Last Argument of Kings perhaps? Idk.

...

Welcome to the forum panorama

In response:
A) Good, because he didn't. DEM is something that appears without explanation to magically solve the issue at hand. This doesn't happen in any sense of the trope other than literal (ie actual God shows up) which isn't at all what DEM even is (as a literary device).

B) You may choose to fixate on whatever you prefer. I'd imagine though if you count the words, you'll be surprised how much you're overstating it. What you're expressing is an emotional response to emotional scenes - likely a commentary on a certain aspect of the human condition (ie the readers): that grievous violence doesn't get under our skin unless you add sex into it, its OK to slaughter billions but god forbid there's anything beyond head chopping. The unmitigated gall!

C) All major arcs have closure. That it doesn't fit your prescription of what closure is isn't really the author's fault, is it?

D) It did. Again, YMMV, but I don't think its the author's job to pander to each reader's sensibilities.

As for Kelmomas affecting the gods, that is explained. He is the No-God, gods can't see him. Gods see the entire timeline, when the timeline changes, the gods change. If you surprise a god, that fundamentally changes that god and Kelmomas always surprises as he is invisible to them.

What? How about when Nau-Cayuti was the No-God...could the gods see Kelmomas then?

Dunkelheit already answered you. Its a complex subject though, and if you want to dig in, you'll have to read more than one post. Short answer, no they couldn't see Kelmomas ever - read the book again or explore the forum for further clarity.

[Dunkelheit]

What? How about when Nau-Cayuti was the No-God...could the gods see Kelmomas then?

You are projecting our sense of time onto the gods, the gods experience the entire timeline at once. Since Kelmomas ended up being the No-God, he has always been the No-God to the gods. As we see when Mimara looks at him with the Judging Eye. Mimara is another example. She gets the Eye because she miscarries, even before she ever was pregnant since the gods don't distinguish between before, after or during because of how they perceive time. They also have no memory (and why would they if they can always see everything that ever happened and will happen) so they are oblivious to the timeline changing. At least that is what Kellhus claims.

I get the confusion, Bakker is definitely fucking with cause and effect, and our sense of time throughout the books. As well as many other things we take for granted. I can't quite wrap my head around how people can prophesy things that even the gods can't see.

[themerchant]

I absolutely loved the ending.

I never viewed the Consult as that effective, in fact my gripe was that we were seeing the dregs of a 8000 year war of extermination that started after a huge cataclysm(arkfall) fighting. Against a Dunyain it didn't seem really that fair.  All they really seemed to have was a shit tonne of sranc. This bugged me till after i read TGO, then i sort of settled in my head we were seeing the "end" of he conflict so of course both sides were reduced.

Another point is for me it's just not possible to know the book well enough after one frenzied read through. I personally need to read it again before i start to get a drift, as i power through the first read, trying to find out what happens.

[CondYoke]

What? How about when Nau-Cayuti was the No-God...could the gods see Kelmomas then?

You are projecting our sense of time onto the gods, the gods experience the entire timeline at once. Since Kelmomas ended up being the No-God, he has always been the No-God to the gods. As we see when Mimara looks at him with the Judging Eye. Mimara is another example. She gets the Eye because she miscarries, even before she ever was pregnant since the gods don't distinguish between before, after or during because of how they perceive time. They also have no memory (and why would they if they can always see everything that ever happened and will happen) so they are oblivious to the timeline changing. At least that is what Kellhus claims.

I get the confusion, Bakker is definitely fucking with cause and effect, and our sense of time throughout the books. As well as many other things we take for granted. I can't quite wrap my head around how people can prophesy things that even the gods can't see.

I asked this somewhere else, but doesn't the existence of the outside, as it is, auger the ultimate failure of the consult? If the outside is timeless, wouldn't it be closed for ever once it is closed? If they succeeded sometime in the "future", it would "already" be closed, no?

[Gorgorotterath]

Well panorama, I mostly agree with you.
I have to agree on the "deus-ex-machina" as well I fear, it seems so much a solution concocted out of thin air, just because RSB didn't have one when he started the series. Maybe this is not the truth but that's how it felt for me.
The way the Inchoroi/Consult are disposed was such a letdown for me...well I've already ranted a lot on this before.
I also hated the immanent Gods of TAE, but in that it seems I am in a minority...
I think I will read the third series though, but sure the damage is done.

[Wilshire]

What separates a DEM from anything else in a book? It's context. You can isolate anything, any plot point, and conclusion, and call it DEM, but that doesn't make it one.

I guess it comes down to a matter of opinion, but Ajokli specifically, and the rest of it, was adequetly foreshadowed. Nothin that happened was without precedence. All of TAE is about the gods and them interacting directing with humanity. To miss this is, to me, to not have read it.

[MSJ]

Agree with Ol' Banhammer here. Nothing , from Ajokli to the walking of the No-God can be considered DEM. It is all a very huge part of TAE, the gods at least, Ajokli in particular. As far as the No-God, that is what the entire series is about and is foreshadowed from the very first book, TDTCB.

I feel this is another instance of the narrative/plot not meeting the expectations of certain readers. Do me a favor, reread the series and then quote all the passages where the No-God. Ajokli and the Gods are mentioned. Well, that's preposterous because it would be the longest post in history and basically a rewrite of the story. I understand if the ending doesnt meet your expectations, or you didn't see the foreshadowing of these things throughout the whole of the series. But, calling it DEM is rediculous, and cheap way to put down an authors work.

[MSJ]

I asked this somewhere else, but doesn't the existence of the outside, as it is, auger the ultimate failure of the consult? If the outside is timeless, wouldn't it be closed for ever once it is closed? If they succeeded sometime in the "future", it would "already" be closed, no?

Excellent observation! And, i think you are correct. If somewhere along the way the Outside is shut, then it would always be shut, just like Kel was always the No-God. Wow, what a great theory. I think this points to the failure of the No-God.

I believe Kellhua is now warring on the Outside with the 100 and trying to create an Outside where damnation will not exist as it does now. Maybe he is trying to bring forth the God of Gods and stop Objective morality, i dunno (just my guess). But, i think Kellhus has come to believe in humanity, hence him truly warring against the Consult to prevent the rise of the No-God. And, if he failed in that, he believed humanity would find a way to survive and defeat the No-God. Maybe Mimara and the tapestry is proof of this? That she is the key to defeat the No-God? Remember, we have Akka's dream (the "real" dreams) where the Heron Spear doesnt kill the No-God, they dont know what did. Maybe a soul like Mimara did?

[Dunkelheit]

I asked this somewhere else, but doesn't the existence of the outside, as it is, auger the ultimate failure of the consult? If the outside is timeless, wouldn't it be closed for ever once it is closed? If they succeeded sometime in the "future", it would "already" be closed, no?

That's a hard question. I'm gonna mangle together two very different views of time here, and this line of reasoning is kind of a mess, but I think you need something like this to square the circle.

The future the gods see can be changed. We saw this with both the White Lucks, and when the future changes the gods change. So from the earth perspective perhaps up to the future-change we had one set of gods and an Outside that worked a certain way, then after the future-change we have a new Outside? If we take this to be true then there is a Yatwer version 1 before the change and a Yatwer version 2 after the change. The second White Luck is picked before the first one failed, and if the first one is guaranteed 100 % to succeed then it makes no sense to make another one. Perhaps the first White Luck was picked by Yatwer 1, then when it failed Yatwer 2 picked the second one. But the fact that Yatwer 2 was able to pick the second White Luck before the change would seem to indicate that both versions exist throughout time (as they should since they are gods).

So if we follow this line of reasoning further then it seems that we have many different versions of each god interacting with the world, each acting according to the future they see which is caused by future changing actions on Earwa. According to this interpretation there should be versions of the gods that are shut out, but since these versions are shut out they can't act on the world is my guess. Perhaps each god is a superposition of every version of themselves, but as time progresses on Earwa they sheath possibilities. So that Yatwer 1 can only interact with the timeline up to event that changes her into Yatwer 2, but Yatwer 2 can interact with both the time following and preceding the change. Or something like that. I'm just speculating.

[Wilshire]

CondYoke/Dunkelheit, that makes good sense. The gods must exist all at once and be able to change. Part of their 'blindness to their blindness' is them not even being aware of this change. Things get complex and confusing when you involve timetravel, which this basically is. Remember, Kellhus/Moenghused that there must be some kind of causality loops within Earwa - and I imagine this effect is only heightened by Gods dropping in Avatars whenever they please.

[CondYoke]

I asked this somewhere else, but doesn't the existence of the outside, as it is, auger the ultimate failure of the consult? If the outside is timeless, wouldn't it be closed for ever once it is closed? If they succeeded sometime in the "future", it would "already" be closed, no?

Excellent observation! And, i think you are correct. If somewhere along the way the Outside is shut, then it would always be shut, just like Kel was always the No-God. Wow, what a great theory. I think this points to the failure of the No-God.

I believe Kellhua is now warring on the Outside with the 100 and trying to create an Outside where damnation will not exist as it does now. Maybe he is trying to bring forth the God of Gods and stop Objective morality, i dunno (just my guess). But, i think Kellhus has come to believe in humanity, hence him truly warring against the Consult to prevent the rise of the No-God. And, if he failed in that, he believed humanity would find a way to survive and defeat the No-God. Maybe Mimara and the tapestry is proof of this? That she is the key to defeat the No-God? Remember, we have Akka's dream (the "real" dreams) where the Heron Spear doesnt kill the No-God, they dont know what did. Maybe a soul like Mimara did?

Yeah I like your theory - Kellhus' exit was too abrupt- and Bakker just dropped some hints on his Q&A that back you up- "Ajokli can't find him (on the outside)".
He's leaving Akka, Mim, and Moe Jr. behind to deal with the NG.
As always with Bakker, his works grow in my mind from chewing on the ideas! This book keeps getting better, two days after I finished reading.  It's like those delicious burps one gets after a good meal... this meat was delicious.

Dunk, that's interesting, but seems complex- kind of like the multiverse theory- if every time the gods mess with time, another version of the outside pops into existence there would be a multitude of forces on the reality of Earwa. That being said, I can see that these splits in time don't happen often- 2x was the white luck stymied. Dunno, I just think it is overly complex.

[Wilshire]

I asked this somewhere else, but doesn't the existence of the outside, as it is, auger the ultimate failure of the consult? If the , I just think it is overly complex.

Never!

-sorry, misquoted - fixed

[CondYoke]

I asked this somewhere else, but doesn't the existence of the outside, as it is, auger the ultimate failure of the consult? If the , I just think it is overly complex.

Hahaha- just dunk's theory, not the overall... I'll be puzzling over the series' questions for years to come!

Never!