darniil

Come Together

28 posts in this topic

Chaos' post made me think of putting this together. Here's the image that accompanies this post. (I would have attached it directly to this post, but I didn't realize there was such a small limit on a "global upload quota".)

It's a little difficult for me to put it together in words, so I went the picture route. I was originally planning on doing something in Gimp while at work, but I don't know it that well, so I just grabbed some pens and sketched it out on some printer paper.

So, Adonalsium was one thing at one point in time. Then it shattered into sixteen different intents (Shards). Each intent was adopted by one person, and over time that person essentially became the intent. (As an aside, I just reminded myself of the Endless. Each one is the aspect that it governs. If one dies, it is replaced with another aspect of itself. However, the thing that it governs can still do its thing without active administration. I wonder if Shards work the same way - the intent still causing things to happen, but without a consciousness guiding it.)

Anyhow, Sazed has done something unprecedented. Not of his own doing, of course - Preservation laid the ground work for it - but he's the one who finished the job. Now we have one person with two intents, two Shards. In the days of the Final Empire, those shards were distinct - Preservation and Ruin. In Waxillium's time, there is only Harmony.

What does this mean for the Shards of Preservation and Ruin, though? Did they fuse into one shard? Probably not, as Chaos explains, since the Metallic Arts still exist as they did in the Final Empire. (Or, at least, we assume they do. The only real evidence we have is that they exist as they did before the Final Empire: only Allomancy and Feruchemy.) Hemalurgy probably does still exist, as if it didn't, that would mean there was no Ruin, and without Ruin there would only be Preservation, not Harmony.

As we know, Allomancy was fueled by Preservation, Hemalurgy was fueled by Ruin, and Feruchemy came about from the interaction between Preservation and Ruin. (Top graphic in my image.) Since all three Metallic Arts still exist, they must still be separate from each other, right?

Not necessarily. (And this is where my words begin to fail me and I have to rely on the image.) We've been told that, normally, those two Shards taking up one place would annihilate each other. However, with a mind directing them, they wouldn't. They can't be separate, since they're both being contained by (or containing) the same mind. One mind, two Shards.

The one mind keeps them together, but at the same time holds them distinct from each other. This allows each Shard to continue to fuel its Metallic Art, and also allows the two of them to interact with each other, conflicting with each other, to generate Feruchemy.

(An aside: If this is the case, it would be interesting to see what would be made if other Shards were held by the same mind. What would become of Honor/Odium? (Something Lawful Evil?) Or Endowment/Cultivation?)

Now, we've also been told that, after some very long time, Sazed would be changed by the two Shards. Perhaps that would also be the same duration that it takes two Shards in constant contact to reunite. If that happens, would this entity still be known as Harmony, or would it become something else - after all, there would no longer be a balance, as there would only be one Shard, not two. It would contain within it the intents of Preservation and Ruin, but it would be neither. And if the two Shards reunited, what would become of the Metallic Arts? I imagine they would still exist, but not in the form(s) we know them now.

As regards the image, I'm also planning on trying to make something that contains more Shards, so as to give more detail to my thoughts along this line. If I can manage it in Photoshop, it'll be a little easier to get across. If not, I'll just have to break out my compass and Prismacolors and do it the old fashioned way.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll buy it when there no longer two kinds of mist. In Alloy, there are indeed two kinds of mist, so that largely suggests that Harmony is just what Sazed decided to call himself in the context of his religion.

Shard merging creates big problems, and as I've said before in the post you linked, there is nothing even close to supporting evidence of this theory except pure desire and speculation. But that doesn't make it right, especially when there is more than enough evidence showing how it wouldn't work.

Plus: there are two kinds of mist. Obviously the Shards have not merged, and I have no reason to expect that will ever change.

Please, seriously, case closed.

EDIT: Okay, that sounded mean, but I want to impress upon people how the logic of the cosmere does not support this at all. This is very important. It all comes from a miscommunication about this:

In the days of the Final Empire, those shards were distinct - Preservation and Ruin. In Waxillium's time, there is only Harmony.

This doesn't mean anything, because there are two kinds of mist. The Shards are still distinct entities.

Edited by Chaos
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never claimed they've merged. As I said, they're distinct. The existence of two types of mist supports this, as is coincides with the two mists that existed when Preservation and Ruin were each held by one individual.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. They are distinct. Very distinct. Nor do I find a reason why that should change. Am I misinterpreting what this is saying? Because if they do not merge at all, ever, this theory does nothing.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I misunderstood, but it sounded to me like you were trying to argue that two Shards could not exist in one person. I was trying to show how it's possible. I guess I could have just used a coin as a much simpler example: there's a face on one side and a building on the other, but they're still part of the same coin.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not what I am saying at all. I am suggesting that no matter what becomes of Sazed, the Shards of Ruin and Preservation--their base intents--have not changed at all. Calling the whole entity Harmony does not change the fact that those intents are there. Calling the whole system Harmony, at that point, is purely a matter of semantics. You can call it whatever you want, and it does not matter. The two Shards are separated by that intent, always.

Sazed can hold two Shards just fine. That deals with Sazed's Cognitive aspect, and how it relates to a Shard's power (presumably, Spiritual power). Just because he holds two Shards does not change the fact that there are two opposing intents there.

And that's the thing. Intents are what distinguish a Shard, in my mind, so any implication that the Shards have "merged" suggests, in my mind, that the two separate powers have become one power. If they are of one power, they will be of one intent. But Ruin and Preservation's power has not merged in this way. Does that make sense?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does, but at the same time, I think you're using "merged" in too simplistic a way. Too binary. As if the only result of a merging of two things is the destruction of those things as unique entities in favor of the creation of a new, third entity. I don't believe that.

I just thought I'd mention something I thought was a neat idea - the joining of two Shards within a single entity. (Not the merging of two Shards into one, though I won't say it's impossible since they were originally joined.) However, there seems to be some rather strong and passionate opposition to this idea. As a result of that, the only thing I can do is stick to this theory until it's proven wrong.

As KChan said in another thread, "The Cosmere is more like the natural world, with the addition of magic...." And much like the natural world, we don't know all the rules. We don't know how things interact. All we can do is hypothesize based upon the information we have. If we didn't have the Mistborn books, we'd never have proof that it's possible for someone to do what Sazed did; it would just be wild speculation. But he was able to show the cosmere something new (at least, show it to those who were paying attention). The sixteen Shards were all together in one entity at one point, but now they're apart. The liquid metal in the Well of Ascension got dispersed whenever it was used, but it came back together. Atium beads are effectively atomized when burned allomantically, but they coalesce over time. I think these two examples, plus the fact that the sixteen Shards were once together as one, plus the lack of evidence saying that Shards can't be reunited is enough for me to think that it's possible.

Do I think Preservation and Ruin have merged? No. I think I explained that very clearly in my initial post. But I don't think it's impossible, over time. (Eons, perhaps.)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but we know a lot of the rules.

The Shards are joined to Sazed, but the Shards are not themselves joined. And since the Shards are not themselves joined, you can describe everything here not as "merging." It's rather sloppy language, because the two intents would remain separate.

The question of the two separate intents on Sazed's mind is a more interesting question, but I think it is more intuitive to characterize the composite as having two components, Ruin and Preservation, because those are the things that actually exist.

EDIT: And as I've said before, I don't think it is going to be so easy to fix Adonalsium.

Edited by Chaos
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darniil, that is a complete and utter misinterpretation of what I was trying to say in that thread. If you read on in that very paragraph, you'll see the point is that the natural world is governed by laws that cannot be bent or broken, even if we as humans think doing so would make sense. And yes, we don't know all of the rules. But just as Chaos pointed out, we know a lot of them just by simple observation.

And as far as evidence goes? If you want evidence that Shards can't merge, answer me this: If Shards can merge, why isn't Adonalsium whole again yet?

And just so we're clear:

merge /mɜrdʒ/

verb (used with object)

    1. to cause to combine or coalesce; unite.
    2. to combine, blend, or unite gradually so as to blur the individuality or individual identity of: They voted to merge the two branch offices into a single unit.

verb (used without object)

    3. to become combined, united, swallowed up, or absorbed; lose identity by uniting or blending (often followed by in or into ): This stream merges into the river up ahead.
    4. to combine or unite into a single enterprise, organization, body, etc.: The two firms merged last year.

One person holding two things is entirely different from those same two things merging. If I have a glass of milk in one hand and a glass of water in the other, they will never, ever merge into a single glass of juice, which is what people who claim Harmony is a new Shard are trying to justify.

There will never be juice, folks. Just milk and water.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darniil, that is a complete and utter misinterpretation of what I was trying to say in that thread. If you read on in that very paragraph, you'll see the point is that the natural world is governed by laws that cannot be bent or broken, even if we as humans think doing so would make sense. And yes, we don't know all of the rules. But just as Chaos pointed out, we know a lot of them just by simple observation.

Wrong. It is not a misinterpretation. As you just said here, again, the laws cannot be bent or broken. (For the most part, of course. Change the Planck Constant, and the laws change. This has already happened at least once in our universe. Excepting that, however: ) While laws are immutable, human interpretation of those laws is not. Human understanding is not a constant. A red dwarf was discovered fifteen years ago. With current science, we've discovered that this star is not only much younger than we originally thought, but also much closer to our star system.

Just because we think that things work a certain way in the cosmere doesn't mean that they do. The magic systems in these books are so different that they, upon initial inspection, appear to be completely separate. The only reason we know they're not is because the author of this universe has told us that there's an equivalent of a Grand Unification Theory that binds all of these magic systems together.

So, until we hear something definitive from the creator of this universe, neither of us can say with 100% certainty that either of us is correct in our theorizing. We may get more clues, but clues may not always suggest one theory over another - they could be ambiguous, they could even be red herrings.

I disagree with the claim that the Shards cannot be reunited. Destroying is easy. Creating is hard. Repairing is almost as hard. I like the thought of a broken thing being repaired, particularly if it is a difficult endeavor and the rewards would be great. Would reconstructing Adonalsium be a good thing? I have no idea. But as I like the books and I like the idea of repairing the Shards, I may as well run with that idea until something better comes along.

And as far as evidence goes? If you want evidence that Shards can't merge, answer me this: If Shards can merge, why isn't Adonalsium whole again yet?

(If the US economy can be repaired, why hasn't it been done yet?)

Perhaps because nobody has thought of making Adonalsium whole? Perhaps because nobody has tried? Perhaps because the only person who is trying, who can try, is being opposed?

I imagine that the shattering of Adonalsium would have been a very confusing time for anyone around back then. If we assume that magic systems on given planets exist because of the presence of a Shard, then it's safe to assume that a different magic system existed prior to Adonalsium's shattering. The Shards could have fallen in one "location", or they could have been scattered. If they were scattered, then odds are there weren't multiples in one location for someone to test "Shardic Superglue".

Rayse has only killed two Shardholders that weren't local to his planet. That suggests it's difficult for one Shard to find another if they're not in close proximity. (Unless, apparently, there is diametric opposition, as was the case for Preservation and Ruin.) At some point, though, regardless of the desires of the Shardholder, eventually that holder's mind will bend to the intent of the Shard, and unless there is a Shard of Reconstruction, none of the Shards would have a desire to find other shards for purposes of reunification. (That's beyond their intent.)

That may be why a third-party is necessary for something like this. And with so few people having knowledge of What Was, the odds of someone attempting a reforging are slim.

And just so we're clear:

merge /mɜrdʒ/

verb (used with object)

  • 1. to cause to combine or coalesce; unite.
    2. to combine, blend, or unite gradually so as to blur the individuality or individual identity of: They voted to merge the two branch offices into a single unit.

verb (used without object)

  • 3. to become combined, united, swallowed up, or absorbed; lose identity by uniting or blending (often followed by in or into ): This stream merges into the river up ahead.
    4. to combine or unite into a single enterprise, organization, body, etc.: The two firms merged last year.

Again, too black & white. Too boring. These are worlds of fantasy, not our world. Yes, there are laws and rules, and yes, those laws and rules are the norm for the natives of those worlds, but for us it is fantasy. Fëanor's techniques to capture the light of Telperion and Laurelin within the Silmarils would be considered magic to humans and hobbits, but it is a simple science to the Noldori. Fantasy to one, mundanity to another. These books are being written as stories of fantasy, not science textbooks or nonfiction histories.

There are more philosophical ways of looking at things. There are shades of gray.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong. It is not a misinterpretation.

This is arguing for the sake of arguing. I know what I meant when I wrote what I did, and it is the complete opposite of what you're telling me it means. It's kind of silly to try and argue otherwise.

I imagine that the shattering of Adonalsium would have been a very confusing time for anyone around back then. If we assume that magic systems on given planets exist because of the presence of a Shard, then it's safe to assume that a different magic system existed prior to Adonalsium's shattering.

There wasn't life on the worlds before the Shards arrived on them that we've seen, let alone magic.

The Shards could have fallen in one "location", or they could have been scattered. If they were scattered, then odds are there weren't multiples in one location for someone to test "Shardic Superglue".

They landed on the Shardworlds, which means there were multiples on at least three planets: Sel, Roshar, and Scadrial. So far, no merging.

Again, too black & white. Too boring. These are worlds of fantasy, not our world. Yes, there are laws and rules, and yes, those laws and rules are the norm for the natives of those worlds, but for us it is fantasy. Fëanor's techniques to capture the light of Telperion and Laurelin within the Silmarils would be considered magic to humans and hobbits, but it is a simple science to the Noldori. Fantasy to one, mundanity to another. These books are being written as stories of fantasy, not science textbooks or nonfiction histories.

There are more philosophical ways of looking at things. There are shades of gray.

Language is language. It doesn't matter if it feels too boring, too "black and white," a word is always going to mean what it means. Language evolves over time, but you can't change the definition of a word just to suit your own purposes, because the rest of the speakers of a language will still associate the word with his standard meaning. It causes a break in communication. Language doesn't work if everyone claims words mean something different.

Again, you're missing the point of having a rule-based world. Amazing things can be done - just look at the ending of Mistborn 1 - but by discarding the rules, you're also discarding what makes these revelations as amazing as they were. Not to mention, the perspective doesn't matter here. Yes, these are worlds of fantasy, but within those worlds, the rules are just as important as our rules are to us. You can't throw them out the window and do whatever you want just because it's fantasy. Especially to a world that someone else has written to operate on a rule-based system. We can't apply our own preferences to someone else's work. It just doesn't work that way.

I get the feeling your post is argument for the sake of argument. I don't want this to devolve into an online shouting match, so if it keeps up this way, I'll have to lock the thread. Rather than continuing this way, why don't you try and tell us more clearly what your original point was? There's obviously been a break in communication here.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Kerry, I'm not entirely sure what we're even talking about. Arguing yes, and we're surely contributing. But I don't understand what your original point was. Sazed is reforming Adonalsium... kind of? But Ruin and Preservation still hold their separate intents? There has certainly been some miscommunication. How are they being "merged." I'd like this to be a lot more concrete, because I'm getting conflicting signals to what precisely you are saying. What do you mean by that they "merged"?

(And on a personal note, I do know Kerry is studying linguistics... so I would say that language is her area of expertise. She probably knows what she is talking about regarding that...)

Edited by Chaos
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And please do so without using the word "merge" or any of its variants - merged, merging, etc - at all, anywhere in the post. I think that would be better for all of our sanity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like, if their intents are not changing, what exactly is happening with Ruin and Preservation? That's my thing. Because if their intents are separate, under my conceptions and theoretical understanding, the powers are totally separate and not really "merged."

EDIT: I like Kerry's idea, the semantics are derailing us. No more using the word "merge."

Edited by Chaos
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, Ruin and Preservation would not so much merge as mix-like an alloy you see.

If I remember my chemistry right, metals in an alloy still retain their identities and can be separated by physical means.

Similarly, Ruin and Preservation would over time form a mixture (Creation perhaps?) but would still be two separate entities.

Not that I have any evidence to support this.

Edited by Aashyma
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is a much clearer metaphor. I'm still not sure about the whole idea of Shards mixing at all, but I think this way of putting it is much easier to digest.

Based on my own interpretation of the events at the end of Hero of Ages, I've put together my own informational picture, courtesy of Google Images and Photoshop:

post-6-0-39179800-1314829646_thumb.jpg

Look, a glowing scale. How pretty.

Okay, not really, but I'm easily entertained when it comes to playing with text effects. Anyways, in this metaphor, Sazed himself - as Harmony - plays the role of a balance scale. One one side of the scale he holds Preservation, on the other, Ruin. Sazed, like the scale, is still one body holding two powers, but those two powers remain separate and distinct.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one hand pushing, the other hand spiking! :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chaos and KChan, I think you guys were being too harsh. I agree that Darniil needs to clarify what he means, and you were right to say so, but the principle of intent is just a theory, folks. Lighten up, dudes.

I've seen it happen before: people get so attached to their theory that *anybody* who comes up with an alternative gets slammed, hard. It happened to me on Theoryland where I accidentally went up against an elaborate, established theory and got slammed for, as far as I can tell, the sheer audacity of contradicting a long-time poster. The fact that his theory was turned into mulch by later books (as was mine) showed how unjustified and counterproductive the whole exercise was.

I think Darniil is not completely wrong. We don't know, metaphysically, how the different Intents came from one entity, or if they existed a distinct powers before the shattering. We don't know if things that were split can merge. We do know, from Sazed's final POV, that the powers of Ruin and Preservation do belong together and can work together if the entity controlling them so wills it. The whole thing is still mysterious, doubtless as Brandon intended it to be.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, as I reread, I was definitely too harsh.

But I think my issue with the theory, darniil, is that if the Shard intents are not merging, I don't understand exactly what you are implying. It's like you're saying that Adonalsium is coming back together, but in a vague sort of way. As such, I don't think it does anything more than the canonical description of Sazed: two distinct Shards, connected by one mind (Sazed).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also tend to word things a little strongly, just because I like being clear and concise and getting my point across exactly as I intend it. In real life, my tone makes up for that and strikes a balance, but sometimes I slip and forget that typing doesn't include tone. In addition, it's frustrating when you're trying to talk to someone and you not only have no idea what they mean, but there's a complete breakdown in communication - and telling somebody "No, you're wrong; you didn't mean to say what you're telling me you meant, you meant what I'm saying you meant" is a really good way to get people riled up. I apologize if I came across harshly. I didn't mean intend it to sound that way.

But seriously, folks. Can we at least stop flouting the cooperative principle and explain ourselves clearly?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think darniil was trying to make two points. The first is that though Ruin and Preservation have not merged together, they are linked in a fashion. Let's use legos as an analogy.

Let's say we got two legos, a blue one and a red one, named Preservation and Ruin respectively. Some guy named Sazed goes over to the the legos and picks them up. He holds the blue lego in left hand and the red lego in his right hand. Thus, the legos are completely separate from each other, and the only connection they have to each other is that they are both being held by the same person. This is the way most people seem to view Sazed's current state in relation to the Shards he holds.

Not let's consider another example. Sazed goes over and picks up the blue and red legos and smashes them together somehow. Poof! Now he's just holding a single lego, and it's got a new color, purple. This is the idea that Chaos and KChan so vehemently disagree with, the idea that the Shards have merged and now have a new intent. This is also not what darniil was suggesting.

Final example. Sazed goes over to the two legos, and sticks the red one onto the blue one. They are now held together in the standard lego way and can be moved about as though they were a single piece. But they are still separate. The red lego is still red, the blue lego is still blue, they are still two different legos. But they now have a connection to each other, a connection that is more than just "they are being held by the same person" like in the first example. This, I believe, is what darnill was thinking.

Basically, his idea is that when two Shards come together, there are more than just two possibilities. It's not just "they become a single Shard" or "they remain totally separate with absolutely no connection to each other." It's possible for them to become linked together while remaining distinct, or so darnill is speculating.

The second point I got from darniil's post was that just because Ruin and Preservation remain separate Shards now (or so most of us think) doesn't mean they will remain that way always. Perhaps, if Sazed holds them long enough, they will indeed combine into one. The red and blue lego attached to each other will become a single purple lego.

As for my own views, assuming the above understanding of darniil's points is correct, I'm not sure. I do think that there is a way to merge Shards together, but I don't think it's something simple or something that will happen automatically just by Sazed holding two Shards together. I'm also not sure whether I think it's possible to merge only some of the Shards together or whether you have to merge all 16 together at once. Regardless, I don't think Ruin and Preservation will ever become a single Shard just by Sazed holding the both of them for a long period of time.

As for whether Sazed is holding two legos separately or has attached them to each other, I also am unsure. It's something to think about I suppose.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Legos analogy is a great one. Thank you for using it.

I've been putting off typing up a response to this, as I wasn't sure how to word it, plus I also wanted to keep chugging along with the MB1 summaries I'm typing up. (I did, however, briefly speak with Chaos about it over Google Chat recently, so I haven't been completely silent on the matter.)

The "stacked blue and red Legos" is pretty much what I was going for, how things are "now". And the other 14 could also be stacked, too, in theory. (Okay, the 12 other 4-peg blocks, and the other 2- or 1-peg blocks that are left over on Sel.)

Thank you, Mad_Scientist, for helping me clear this up.

(Though I have to admit, I'm still sad nobody commented on the Beatles reference. :-/ )

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think darniil was trying to make two points. The first is that though Ruin and Preservation have not merged together, they are linked in a fashion. Let's use legos as an analogy.

Let's say we got two legos, a blue one and a red one, named Preservation and Ruin respectively. Some guy named Sazed goes over to the the legos and picks them up. He holds the blue lego in left hand and the red lego in his right hand. Thus, the legos are completely separate from each other, and the only connection they have to each other is that they are both being held by the same person. This is the way most people seem to view Sazed's current state in relation to the Shards he holds.

Not let's consider another example. Sazed goes over and picks up the blue and red legos and smashes them together somehow. Poof! Now he's just holding a single lego, and it's got a new color, purple. This is the idea that Chaos and KChan so vehemently disagree with, the idea that the Shards have merged and now have a new intent. This is also not what darniil was suggesting.

Final example. Sazed goes over to the two legos, and sticks the red one onto the blue one. They are now held together in the standard lego way and can be moved about as though they were a single piece. But they are still separate. The red lego is still red, the blue lego is still blue, they are still two different legos. But they now have a connection to each other, a connection that is more than just "they are being held by the same person" like in the first example. This, I believe, is what darnill was thinking.

Basically, his idea is that when two Shards come together, there are more than just two possibilities. It's not just "they become a single Shard" or "they remain totally separate with absolutely no connection to each other." It's possible for them to become linked together while remaining distinct, or so darnill is speculating.

The second point I got from darniil's post was that just because Ruin and Preservation remain separate Shards now (or so most of us think) doesn't mean they will remain that way always. Perhaps, if Sazed holds them long enough, they will indeed combine into one. The red and blue lego attached to each other will become a single purple lego.

That is an excellent set of analogies, AWESOME. Only one problem, its lego, both singular and plural. *shivers with outrage* :P

As for my own views, assuming the above understanding of darniil's points is correct, I'm not sure. I do think that there is a way to merge Shards together, but I don't think it's something simple or something that will happen automatically just by Sazed holding two Shards together. I'm also not sure whether I think it's possible to merge only some of the Shards together or whether you have to merge all 16 together at once. Regardless, I don't think Ruin and Preservation will ever become a single Shard just by Sazed holding the both of them for a long period of time.

As for whether Sazed is holding two legos separately or has attached them to each other, I also am unsure. It's something to think about I suppose.

It's totally probable that there's a way to smoosh the shards together again. and no doubt there's a way to smoosh the bits and pieces of shards back together. It might be the case that we have to wait for all the bits to be brought together before we get any merging, but it might be that, as you said, Harmony may appear, and Sazed may merge and yet break apart into Harmony and Discord... yeah Eric, whachu gonna do? I just said something horrible :P

It might be that you can Lego them together until you get sufficient legoy potential that the amalgam falls in on itsself and (re)forms an Adonalsium-like lego piece. Maybe Adonalsium was Duplo (kids Lego) :D and, to grow, it needed to be broken to be reforged... lol

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Darniil is onto something here, even if imprecise wording might have caused some argument. Look at this quote:

The powers were opposites. As he drew them in, they threatened to annihilate each other. And yet, because he was of one mind on how to use them, he could keep them separate. They could touch without destroying each other, if he willed it. For these two powers had been used to create all things. If they fought, they destroyed. If they were used together, they created.

Contrast with what happened when different people held each shard:

She didn't shy back, though the conflict of opposites ripped her apart. Ruin screamed in terror as the force of her power completely melded with Ruin's.

Her consciousness - now formed and saturated with Preservation - moved to touch that of Ruin. Neither would yield. And, with a surge of power, Vin bid farewell to the world, then pulled Ruin into the abyss with her.

Yes, Ruin and Preservation are still separate, but being held by the same person has made them functionally something quite different than just two opposed shards. Ruin or Preservation alone could never have created anything new, we heard that quite a bit throughout the Hero of Ages, but Sazed could change the Koloss into essentially being their own creatures, and not just a simple hemalurgic creation.

While we've still got a red brick and a blue brick, to extend the Lego analogy, we ended up with not only the two connected as separate bricks, but they become much more useful when connected together- as if we had holes in a structure that could only be filled by two bricks joined together, that an individual brick wouldn't be able to do anything about. It's more like instead of throwing an acid and a base into a bowl together and neutralising them, instead Sazed is holding one in each hand, and can use them for different parts of the same task.

This also has some interesting consequences for the interactions between Shards and Shardholders- yes, a Shard's intent greatly influences the holder, but the holder's will, their cognitive power, can also allow shards to act in ways that don't explicitly agree with those intents without ill effect, much like the original bargain between Preservation and Ruin to create people on Scadrial- because both Shards were of a common purpose, the opposite powers could interact without harming each other. It may be that there are some holes in Chaos' Theory of Intent that need patching once we have some more information on things in general- hopefully in the next Stormlight volume, because it appears that Brandon's theory of magic is a bit more permissive than the Theory of Intent is.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the Principle of Intent is worded too strongly. The base principle itself is fine, just not the implications after it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.