Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The Emperor has been in multiple novels written by multiple authors, from ADB to Gav Thorpe, he's been there, and the authors interpret him in their own way for the story they want to tell. Who is your favorite?

None of them.

The only remotely good portrayal is R. Scott Bakker's The Second Apocalypse novels, if you squint a bit and pretend that Anasurimbor Kelhus is 40K's Emperor.

None of BL's authors are anywhere near skilled anough at writing characters with the sort of superhuman intellect, charisma, ability to manipulate people, or sheer scale of goals/plans that the Emperor needs to have in order for his 'story' to make any sort of sense.

BL has left us with a supposedly uber-smart immortal psyker who can see the future, yet doesn't seem to understand anything about human psychology even after 38,000 years of watching/guiding us.

IMO, the HH novels have done for the Emperor what the Star Wars prequel trilogy did for Anakin/Vader. If you lack the skill to ensure what's behind the curtain is actually good, you're better off leaving it closed.

 Duskweaver wrote:

BL has left us with a supposedly uber-smart immortal psyker who can see the future, yet doesn't seem to understand anything about human psychology even after 38,000 years of watching/guiding us.

Isn't that kind of the point though? At least in my interpretation of the Emperor. Just because you've taken on a role of guiding an entire species doesn't mean they're good at it. If anything that gives the Emperor a distinctly human quality.

The entire 40k lore would be a bit naff if it all worked out grand wouldn't it.

 Olthannon wrote:

 Duskweaver wrote:

BL has left us with a supposedly uber-smart immortal psyker who can see the future, yet doesn't seem to understand anything about human psychology even after 38,000 years of watching/guiding us.

Isn't that kind of the point though? At least in my interpretation of the Emperor. Just because you've taken on a role of guiding an entire species doesn't mean they're good at it. If anything that gives the Emperor a distinctly human quality.

The entire 40k lore would be a bit naff if it all worked out grand wouldn't it.

Yes, but the BL authors haven't really shown that. I can get the idea that the Emperor isn't actually human any more and therefore really struggles to understand humanity. Unfortunately there isn't nearly enough development done in that direction. The Emperor switches from benevolent, wise ruler, to manipulative abusive father, to bloodthirsty warlord, to righteous liberator, to scholar-king over the course of the many BL novels. That might be due to him wanting to be seen as all those things at different times but - again - the quality of the writing doesn't really suggest that's the case. It just seems like a bunch of totally different "character".

Funny, was just commenting on his lack of understanding in human psychology in another thread. But anyways, he seems to get the psychology of society, of the masses. But on a personal level, the psychology of an individual, nope. Which makes a lot of sense.

Slipspace wrote:

 Olthannon wrote:

 Duskweaver wrote:

BL has left us with a supposedly uber-smart immortal psyker who can see the future, yet doesn't seem to understand anything about human psychology even after 38,000 years of watching/guiding us.

Isn't that kind of the point though? At least in my interpretation of the Emperor. Just because you've taken on a role of guiding an entire species doesn't mean they're good at it. If anything that gives the Emperor a distinctly human quality.

The entire 40k lore would be a bit naff if it all worked out grand wouldn't it.

Yes, but the BL authors haven't really shown that. I can get the idea that the Emperor isn't actually human any more and therefore really struggles to understand humanity. Unfortunately there isn't nearly enough development done in that direction. The Emperor switches from benevolent, wise ruler, to manipulative abusive father, to bloodthirsty warlord, to righteous liberator, to scholar-king over the course of the many BL novels. That might be due to him wanting to be seen as all those things at different times but - again - the quality of the writing doesn't really suggest that's the case. It just seems like a bunch of totally different "character".

I mean that's fair enough, I'm way behind on BL novels because the writing see-saws dramatically so I don't tend to buy them haha. So I totally get that.

Again however, you could argue that is the point of the character, multiple avatars fitting different roles at different points of a story as you said. Almost God-like, you might say.
Like with all 40k stuff, the HH novels in particular, it's best to treat them as the gospels but not 'as gospel'. It's a loose-knit narrative made up by different authors interpreting events in different ways each trying to put their own flavour on it. In that sense you can excuse shoddy writing when you accept that is part of the filler.
Indeed as others have said on other threads, it's better to read the whole thing was a propaganda piece written in the 40th millennium rather than actual events at the time. It's a Shakespearean take on history instead of the genuine. When you consider it as an episodic narrative written after the fact, it makes much easier reading. That therefore allows you as the reader to take everything with a pinch of salt, enjoy the books that are better written and let the others fall by the wayside.


Edit:

Funny, was just commenting on his lack of understanding in human psychology in another thread. But anyways, he seems to get the psychology of society, of the masses. But on a personal level, the psychology of an individual, nope. Which makes a lot of sense.

Exactly, I mean if you're focused entirely on the species, your personal skills might be a bit poor.

Big E in my headcanon "suffers" from the Dr. Manhattan-Syndrome.
He is an close to all-powerful being, alive longer than anyone can imagine, having seen things, done things... he has an entirely different perspective to what needs to be done, planning milennia ahead (as proven by the Void Dragon imprisoned on Mars).
You can only see so many of your loved ones pass away over the ages before you detach yourself from this.
You loose the basic humanity and start viewing every human as just a fleck, a spark that will go out in the blink of an eye, turning your focus on the entire human race instead of certain groups,let alone individuals.
That is where imo the bad-daddy-issues comes from (and also why he attached himself to Horus, the first Primarch... since he is the closest thing to himself in ability he EVER had).
And this is also why he adopts all those roles.. benevolent, wise, abusive, bloodthirsty, righteous, scholar... because that is what is required right now. Because he is all this.
Everyone of us thinks himself of having certain traits - kind, funny, charming. Or quick to anger, hard to forgive, whatever. Truth is - you can be wise and calm most of the time, yet if someone pushes the wrong button you might explode like a volcano. Big E is the pinnacle of that, having lived for 35000 years at that point. Can you imagine the gak he has seen, the good things he has seen and then see it all turn to dust?
I cant blame HIM for being a bit...fickle after that sometimes.

Chris Wraight, although Aaron Dembski-Bowden comes in a close second.

The fact that people feel the need to come up with all this post-hoc rationalisation of the Emperor's characterisation makes my point for me. I'm not criticising the rationalisation, BTW. I do it myself. You kind of have to in order to make the 40K background work now. But that doesn't actually fix the bad writing. The HH novels have turned the Emperor from a potentially interesting figure of distant myth and legend (that you could have fun making up fan-theories around) into an inconsistent mess of a character that you now have to construct fan-theories around in order to force his existence in the setting to make any kind of sense.

Fair point and definately true.
It is just like it is with all of 40k - paradox, inconsistent and with plenty of room for YOUR version of 40k so everyone gets what he wants out of it.

I remember when I first read "Machine, heal thyself!" and was in awe. It was HIM that spoke. The first time I ever saw the Emperor utter a word or appear in person.
Now.. we have Master of Mankind and it felt just like any character, nothing special about it at all.

Duskweaver, I agree with that point. I am not excited to see the Emperor in the fiction, I find the purple prose around him and the primarchs to be pretty embarassing and offputting. Also, overuse of "gene" as a descriptor, blech.

I thought the Emperor was supposed to be a gestalt consciousness made from a bunch of different human psykers melding together, so to me it made sense that he is inconsistent as I imagine there is something of a struggle for control of the "driving seat" of this awesome fountain of Psychic power and different personality fragments are "in charge" at different times.
But yeah, again, that is likely headcanon at this point!

 Duskweaver wrote:
The fact that people feel the need to come up with all this post-hoc rationalisation of the Emperor's characterisation makes my point for me. I'm not criticising the rationalisation, BTW. I do it myself. You kind of have to in order to make the 40K background work now. But that doesn't actually fix the bad writing. The HH novels have turned the Emperor from a potentially interesting figure of distant myth and legend (that you could have fun making up fan-theories around) into an inconsistent mess of a character that you now have to construct fan-theories around in order to force his existence in the setting to make any kind of sense.

I think you have a really valid point here that gets right to the core of what people don't like about the HH novels as a whole. But I do have to note that TBF that rationalization has not always been a necessity for 40k but is needed for any sci-fi or fantasy setting in such huge amounts that most people don't even realize it has become a reflex.