Aliroz-The-Confused

Members
  • Content count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

46 Noble

About Aliroz-The-Confused

  • Rank
    Gator of Preservation
  • Birthday April 11

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Deseret

Recent Profile Visitors

750 profile views
  1. Well, that's just really depressing, then. Every time you make a concession to reality, a part of your heart dies, and a bit of your soul fades. Eventually, your compromises and your imperfect methods and the things you had to do to make the world as good as it is will result in the next generation having to oppose you and destroy what you've made to make something better/"better". There's a quote from a movie that has always stuck with me (it's too much of a spoiler for me to say what movie it's from, but the quote is pretty universal). The context is that a horrific act of unjustified violence has been done by associates of Character 1 upon people that Character 2 was supposed to protect, but, because of other "greater good" considerations, Character 2 more or less abandoned -- and when Character 2 calls out Character 1, 1 points out 2's own complicity and claims that what happened was inevitable because: Character 1: We must work in the world, the world is thus. Character 2: No... thus have we made the world. Thus have I made it. What makes the Radiants special in my eyes is that they won't say things like "We must work in the world, the world is thus.", but they will say things like "Honor is dead... but I'll see what I can do.".
  2. That just means that murdering people who use language badly is "doing my brother's work". See, it turns out that Wax's uncle and his hooligans are all jive turkeys, and the Life-Death Brothers aren't having any of it.
  3. Any ship that involves belongs in this thread. Also, (spoilers All) on Raysecult
  4. Raysecult is especially wrong because of a bunch of spoiler reasons and the longer I think about it the more wrong it gets... Also, Daddy Gavvy seemed to be a Jamaram shipper.
  5. Of course it drives him crazy. Why do you suppose he's the last thing so many people see before they die...
  6. First, am I doing it right? Second, I'm so very very sorry and we should all be ashamed of this thread.
  7. While I'm usually one for world/setting over characters/people, and I like not having the mortals be responsible for everything in a story involving mortals and gods, I feel like this would be a cop-out. Having to live in a world damaged by the-previous-groups-of-Radiants's failure-at-the-very-ideals-that-our-heroes-struggle-with-and-try-to-embody adds a lot of "oomph" to the moral struggles that the characters have, and helps moments like "You cannot have my pain" feel not just powerful, but "earned". Forgive me for being ignorant, but I can't find where it was established that BAM being imprisoned or released had/has-had/will-have/has anything to do with deadeyes or the recreance. Is there a specific book and chapter, or is it a theory, or a WOB? But anyways, I think this would also feel like a cop-out, or, at least, unsatisfying to me. It feels like such a balance would be having-your-cake-and-eating-it-too for the humans. The very start of the Stormlight Archive was the Heralds (sans Talenelat) breaking the Oathpact and leaving him to be tortured forever. The first "proper" chapter was about Szeth, defining him as someone who does terrible things without regret because he doesn't consider himself responsible for his actions, and believes that he has no free will (so he has to do whatever his masters tell him). Kaladin and Amaram are, to a large extent, defined by the moment that Amaram did what was expedient and seemed "practical/pragmatic" at the time. I'd rather have the resolution of the series be people taking responsibility for their actions and the consequences of such, and making the hard-but-right choices, than have it be a balance between idealism and realism. See, I think we are using the word "idealism" in the same way. I think you lose your idealism when you make these concessions to reality, when you see the world as the imperfect world it is rather than the perfect world it might (never) be, when you stop believing in perfect solutions. It might be better in the long term, but I think it should disqualify you from at least the higher Ideals. Honor/honor, in this series, isn't an objectively good morality, or even always a healthy one, any more than Preservation/preservation was in Mistborn, but it is a cause that, in the end, defines Roshar's heroes, what they do, and why they do it. I find that a lot more engaging (especially in fiction) than any kind of reasonable worldview. Honestly, having the Radiants (especially Skybreakers) and Spren learn that they need to make concessions to reality and adopt a nuanced view of things would be really depressing in my opinion, a loss of some of what made SA so different from reality, and different from a lot of other fiction. Of course, I'm probably wrong about all of this, and whatever Mr. Sanderson does, it will almost certainly be brilliant and I'm sure that even if his resolution isn't what I would have chosen, it will be better than anything I could have come up with (that's why he's the author and I'm the fan).
  8. See, here's the thing, those people, that innocent majority, are innocent in ignorance, not knowing any better and just trying their best. Lacking their ignorance, I would feel that I lack their innocence, too. The Skybreaker in me can't let a betrayal like that go without condemnation, or let mortals off the hook by placing the blame on the gods, but also refuses to condemn the ignorant, innocent majorities, so the only resolution, the only one I could allow to carry that burden, would be myself, (or. on a bad day, myself and those of the Knights Radiant who are no longer ignorant). I certainly wouldn't see myself as worthy of the Ideals, so I'd probably end up trying to "protect" everyone else by ensuring that nobody else ever learns about the origins of humanity (especially those Radiants who don't already know). And if I would feel that way, probably at least a couple of the Skybreakers felt something like that.
  9. Someone else was there before them, and someone else was before them, and there will be someone else in the future, but all those people are of my species (kin, in a way, to myself and, more abstractly, to every other living thing on Earth), native to the planet on which I live. It's not the same. And the revelation that the humans came as refugees, and were given refuge by the Listeners, and then later took everything from them and then forgot that they ever existed as anything other than their slaves in the first place? That would shake my foundations, no matter how many thousands of years later, because that kind of betrayal is not something you just forget. Even if Honor and Cultivation and all the Spren and Roshar itself said otherwise, I would still feel like an usurper, a cuckoo bird being cared for by the parents/gods/planet of someone who'd been killed and replaced by my ancestors. I wouldn't have the certainty to be a Radiant after that, especially if I'd formerly been a slave or bridgeman and knew what betrayal and oppression felt like. Or, at least, that's how I feel about it, but I guess that feeling is less universal than I assumed.
  10. Well, if knowing that you're usurpers on the place you consider your native planet DOESN'T wreck all your idealism and confidence in the rightness of your cause, I'm not sure what will. I mean, what secret could possibly be worse? "The Shin are right, and you all are eternally condemned in the afterlife for stepping on stone"?
  11. Wait, so does that mean that the current Radiants don't know that Humanity isn't native to Roshar, and that the planet was stolen from its true natives? I could have sworn there was a conversation about that somewhere...
  12. I'm having trouble parsing this. Did you mean to put "didn't" in the first sentence? I hadn't considered that, but given how strict the Shards on Roshar are, I wouldn't be surprised if both beliefs and deeds matter enough to disqualify. My point is that I don't think that the Radiants can both keep their own individual beliefs AND embody the Ideals without a conflict between the two arising. At least, not in the long term. I think it might apply in Taravangian's boon, in which what he sees as his "Logos" and "Pathos" are inversely proportional to one another, especially considering that this is a boon by Cultivation, and that it is so strongly tied to him becoming Odium, but that's tenuous at best. That's a good point. I suppose Odium would be to Pathos as Ruin is to Harmony. Ruin isn't Harmony, but Harmony is Ruin and Preservation; so Odium wouldn't be Pathos, but Pathos would be Odium, Devotion, and perhaps Mercy (or even Whimsy). For that matter, perhaps Ethos would be Honor and Valor (or even more)? Perhaps Logos would be Cultivation and Invention (or more)? To be fair, neither was Ethos + Logos + Pathos, but you're right that I have no sound reasoning for such a claim other than both being groups having a size of three. I didn't know that. When was this revealed/shown/said? What changed to make it be this way?
  13. Before Oathbringer, we had reason to believe that the Recreance was, rather than a single event, a gradual process, a slow dying of the convictions held by the Knights Radiant. In Oathbringer, we learn the blow from which they never recovered (the origins of humanity on Roshar). Now, the new Radiants have learned this awful truth, and in the infancy of their existence as an organization/culture/group(s), and yet, it seems to have very little effect upon them, even after a year. I expected that a lot of RoW would be about how the Radiants deal with this fundamental wrongness, and the uncertainty such a revelation would bring. Many of the Honorspren seemed to think that humans could not be trusted to hold to the Ideals, that the conviction and unwavering certainty required was too much to ask of mankind. The basic premise these Honorspren are going by is "humans are fallible, Spren are not, therefore humans cannot be trusted". Here's the thing: I don't think the Honorspren are wrong about humans, despite the narrative all but screaming that they are. I think I was wrong. I think I overestimated the effect that that revelation would have. I think the first Recreance would have happened with or without it, and the new Recreance will happen regardless. I think the dying of idealism, the loss of certainty, the fading of conviction, the rotting of the heart, has already begun. Sigzil's conversation with Kaladin shows that not even the small, tight-knit Bridge Four can keep to a clear and unified vision of what is right. Sigzil feels that there are some who are "imitating an oath without the commitment", and Kaladin snaps at him to not be judgemental, and tells Sigzil to distinguish "your morals" and "your beliefs" from "our code", but, crucially, he does not tell Sigzil to give up on his morals and beliefs (in fact, he tells Sigzil to present them as his own, and "make a good argument"). I think this very distinction between an individual Radiant's ideals and the Ideals of the Radiants, is the beginning of a dissonance that will grow worse until "distinct" becomes "different" becomes "irreconcilable", and a choice must be made between one's morals/beliefs and the Code. See, the ancient Greeks used to talk of three thought-methods that were essential to normal cognition, which, if understood, would form the basis of persuasion (the most basic form of communication): Logos, Ethos, and Pathos (While modern culture views the Logical Argument and the Ethical Argument as superior to the Emotional Argument, it still acknowledges its mental debt to Pathos in words such as Empathy, Sympathy, Psychopathy, Sociopath, and Pathetic.). Interestingly, Odium claims to be all Passions. He pretty much claims to be Pathos, so essential, even fundamental to sentience/sapience (or, at least, as the Greeks would define it). This would make Honor and Cultivation the equivalents of Ethos and Logos. But humans are defined by all three (and an imbalance between them is not healthy in the long run). Honorspren are not, they are of Honor only. In fact, this is why the Honorspren act so unreasonable - they are of Ethos, not Logos. Human beings are too complicated, too nuanced, too mortal and fallible, to adequately embody these ideals in large numbers for an indefinite period of time. They are, in general, mostly incapable of the certainty required. The Honorspren are entirely right about humanity. Sure, the fact that Maya and her ilk chose their fates and volunteered to break their bonds knowing that they could die, seems like an acquittal of humanity to the audience, a rebuttal of "humans are fallible, Spren are not, thus, humans cannot be trusted" which proves that humans can be trusted and there is hope. But couldn't one argue that, on the other hand, the fact that "WE CHOSE" is actually proof that the part of the premise which was wrong was the assumption that the Honorspren weren't fallible. In fact, you could argue that mankind is so contagiously nuanced that they even influenced their Honorspren to break the oaths. I predict that a new Recreance will take place before the Stormlight Archive is done, that Sigzil and Kaladin's conversation was foreshadowing of this. (For realsies, though, I'm probably wrong, and Mr. Sanderson probably isn't going to have "Nuance is evil, only unwavering Absolutism can save the world because Mankind is too inherently flawed to achieve the Ideal" as his message. Still, though, I totally get why that's the point that the Honorspren took from the Recreance, and I think it's kind of sad that the narrative condemns them so hard for their illogical reactions and thought-patterns when Honor before Reason is only natural for splinters of Honor). (I look forward to being proven wrong).
  14. So, I would be bacon, not only entirely delicious, but for the first time ever, the best-smelling thing in the room. And you would still be a non-tasty indigestible thing that smells like a person, so, in this situation, I still win.
  15. allomancy

    If I remember right, though, the Red Brasses (which were to a large degree replaced by steel once industrial Steel could be mass-produced) can have more than 1% tin, and those few brasses which contain about 1% tin are, or at least once were not uncommon (Tin helps things survive seawater, which historically been a good feature for a metal). For a pre-industrial setting like Mistborn's original trilogy, and one in which people can get trace metals from water, I assumed that those tin-containing brasses which were historically so useful for bells, plumbing (given that Vin getting trace metals from drinking water is a plot-point, I assumed that Luthadel had some sort of water-pipes made of metal), seafaring, and early machinery (There aren't guns, so I guess that rules out the main use of a good portion of the Red Brasses, but there are watches, so there's got to be at least the beginnings of early machinery, thinks my younger self), would be relatively preva-okay yeah I'm an idiot and didn't do the research. Accursed alloys, always messing me up.