Am I the only one who feels uncomfortable with the idea of Autonomy being the big bad

[inactive]

So, I see a lot of theories floating about with regards to Autonomy being the "final antagonist" of the cosmere. It does not sit right with me that this particular Shardic Intent would be the final boss. Autonomy, in my eyes, is a good thing.

Odium feels more natural an antagonist. Hatred, even if it is Adonalsium's divine hatred without the context of emotions, feels like more of a destructive force than Autonomy. And then there are the unknown Shards. I feel like they need to be brought in some time or the other, and maybe one of them is the big baddie. I feel the known Shardic Intent have more positive and neutral intents (positive: Honor, Cultivation, Preservation, Endowment, Devotion, Survival?; neutral: Ambition, Autonomy,) than negative ones ( Odium, Ruin, Dominion) and the field seems biased to one side (I know my classification is a bit arbitrary)

So, while I am happy with the Autonomy being a troublemaker on Scadrial in the form of Trell, I cant really buy in to the idea of the cosmere concluding with a 'battle against Autonomy'. The phrase sounds off to me.

Ps. Maybe I am overthinking this. Maybe the reason Autonomy is the last one standing is because they will go to any extent to stay autonomous.

Thoughts?

[Lunamor]

I haven’t read any of those theories, but Autonomy could be a good end game villain if they wanted to be truly alone and accomplished that goal by destroying everyone else/the other remaining Shards. The cosmere will eventually start to connect each of its worlds, and Autonomy will likely feel threatened by that.

[+Invocation]

The thing about Autonomy being a potential end-of-the-cosmere villain is it's betting on an unknown: the interpretation of Autonomy by the Vessel. For all we know, the person who became Autonomy has taken their Autonomy as "colonizing the whole cosmere to make it me, willing or not" a la GOTG2. 

Or maybe they think of being Autonomous as being the sole controlling being of the cosmere (which is almost the same thing, except less absorption, more genocide).

We can't know until we know the prime Autonomy if they're actually the villain. (But they do have a bad habit of sticking their nose in everywhere)

[Yezrien]

Maybe someday we'll learn that "Autonomy" is like "Passion." It's just Bavadin's way of putting a good spin things, and the shard's true (or at least more accurate) name is something a bit more sinister, like "Exclusion" or "Sovereignty."

[Eternal Khol]

26 minutes ago, Invocation said:

For all we know, the person who became Autonomy has taken their Autonomy as "colonizing the whole cosmere to make it me, willing or not" a la GOTG2. 

Or maybe they think of being Autonomous as being the sole controlling being of the cosmere (which is almost the same thing, except less absorption, more genocide).

a little tidbit on her perspective 

 

Brandon Sanderson

To break up Unity. It's so hard to say, because Autonomy is a bit of a strange duck. Like, what counts as being Autonomous? Is absorbing everything and becoming one again Autonomous or not? That's kind of your question that you get into. And the way Autonomy looks at it right now, is no. Autonomy wants to remain Autonomy. Autonomy does not want to be corrupted by anything else. And Autonomy would think the Shards are better on their own.

[inactive]

1 hour ago, Lunamor said:

I haven’t read any of those theories, but Autonomy could be a good end game villain if they wanted to be truly alone and accomplished that goal by destroying everyone else/the other remaining Shards. The cosmere will eventually start to connect each of its worlds, and Autonomy will likely feel threatened by that.

Yes, I did think of that. I was just thinking that by then, multiple shards may already have started merging, a la Harmony. And I dont think Autonomy would have merged. So, instead of being the more powerful shard, Autonomy feels like more of an underdog in this situation to me. Though Brandon can always write that very dfferently.

19 minutes ago, Invocation said:

The thing about Autonomy being a potential end-of-the-cosmere villain is it's betting on an unknown: the interpretation of Autonomy by the Vessel. For all we know, the person who became Autonomy has taken their Autonomy as "colonizing the whole cosmere to make it me, willing or not" a la GOTG2. 

Or maybe they think of being Autonomous as being the sole controlling being of the cosmere (which is almost the same thing, except less absorption, more genocide).

We can't know until we know the prime Autonomy if they're actually the villain. (But they do have a bad habit of sticking their nose in everywhere)

That is an interesting take. Though I wonder, how does Autonomy feel about other's autonomy. Or is it just their autonomy that matters.

I feel most shardic intents can be tweaked a lot by how the holder views them. And we just don't know enough about most of their inner workings other than Preservation, Ruin and Harmony.

[inactive]

13 minutes ago, Yezrien said:

Maybe someday we'll learn that "Autonomy" is like "Passion." It's just Bavadin's way of putting a good spin things, and the shard's true (or at least more accurate) name is something a bit more sinister, like "Exclusion" or "Sovereignty."

Hadn't thought of that. How we know the Shards doesn't always match how they view themselves.

I wonder how important the names they go by are. We know that Harmony can change into Discord. But can they still call themselves Harmony? Is there a Cosmere noticeboard where you find out that Harmony is now Discord?

Your point may also help explain why there are more positive sounding shards than negative ones. I wouldn't want to go around with a negative sounding intent if I could spin it into something more positive

Edited August 15, 2020 by inactive

[+Invocation]

6 minutes ago, Eternal Khol said:

To break up Unity. It's so hard to say, because Autonomy is a bit of a strange duck. Like, what counts as being Autonomous? Is absorbing everything and becoming one again Autonomous or not? That's kind of your question that you get into. And the way Autonomy looks at it right now, is no. Autonomy wants to remain Autonomy. Autonomy does not want to be corrupted by anything else. And Autonomy would think the Shards are better on their own.

"Autonomy wants to remain Autonomy" That doesn't sound good. That sounds genocidal in an "I can only be me if everyone else is dead, or everything will be affecting me making me not me anymore" kind of way. Bad vibes off that.

7 minutes ago, inactive said:

That is an interesting take. Though I wonder, how does Autonomy feel about other's autonomy. Or is it just their autonomy that matters.

From the way they appear to be interfering on Scadrial, it seems like they only care about the various portions of themself being completely Autonomous. 

11 minutes ago, inactive said:

I feel most shardic intents can be tweaked a lot by how the holder views them. And we just don't know enough about most of their inner workings other than Preservation, Ruin and Harmony.

Yeah, that's exactly the issue. 

And Harmony doesn't exactly appear to be stable, if you take my meaning, so Brandon only knows what's going on in Autonomy's head.

[inactive]

4 minutes ago, Invocation said:

"Autonomy wants to remain Autonomy" That doesn't sound good. That sounds genocidal in an "I can only be me if everyone else is dead, or everything will be affecting me making me not me anymore" kind of way. Bad vibes off that.

 

Autonomy seems to be one of the more complicated shards. And I can't even start thinking about if the different splinters have a different take on what it means to be autonomous.

[+Invocation]

1 minute ago, inactive said:

Autonomy seems to be one of the more complicated shards. And I can't even start thinking about if the different splinters have a different take on what it means to be autonomous.

Those two might be connected. Maybe the splinters aren't completely voluntary. For all we know, the primary Vessel has conflicting views in and of themself, so the splinters just kind of happen as their own viewpoint shifts.

[inactive]

1 minute ago, Invocation said:

Those two might be connected. Maybe the splinters aren't completely voluntary. For all we know, the primary Vessel has conflicting views in and of themself, so the splinters just kind of happen as their own viewpoint shifts.

Well at least the collective seems to have some level of control on the new splinters, as Patji's letter says that the Obrodai splinter has been 'given' a hatred for Hoid. Patji also says some splinters may be more amenable to Hoid's cause than others. So they have at least some individuality.

[+Invocation]

Just now, inactive said:

Well at least the collective seems to have some level of control on the new splinters, as Patji's letter says that the Obrodai splinter has been 'given' a hatred for Hoid. Patji also says some splinters may be more amenable to Hoid's cause than others. So they have at least some individuality.

Yeah, they're definitely able to be shaped during creation, but after that seem to be free to go their own way and become their own Autonomous being. But that could easily have been born from primary Autonomy learning to realize when a new splinter is beginning to emerge and twisting it slightly (more towards what they want it to be) but not being able to interfere come full sapience.

[Eternal Khol]

1 hour ago, Invocation said:

"Autonomy wants to remain Autonomy" That doesn't sound good. That sounds genocidal

How does wanting the right of self governance/freedom from outside influence sound genocidal?

 

 

 

            

56 minutes ago, inactive said:

And I can't even start thinking about if the different splinters have a different take on what it means to be autonomous.

I bet some of them do.

 

 

 

Josh

Do Splinters have their own Intent, in addition to the Shards'?

Brandon Sanderson

Splinters often have their own intent.

West Jordan signing (Aug. 4, 2011)

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Eternal Khol

[+Invocation]

13 hours ago, Eternal Khol said:

How does wanting the right of self governance/freedom from outside influence sound genocidal?

It's mostly the easy slip into "I can't allow anything to influence me at all, so I killed everyone and now there's no other influences left to bother me!" as a mindset.

[Kesamijr]

15 hours ago, Yezrien said:

Maybe someday we'll learn that "Autonomy" is like "Passion." It's just Bavadin's way of putting a good spin things, and the shard's true (or at least more accurate) name is something a bit more sinister, like "Exclusion" or "Sovereignty."

I think this makes a good point too in that this all assumes Bavarian stays as Autonomy! I personally don’t really think any of the Intents have particularly positive or negative connotation cuz I’ve always thought that one of the big ideas B Sands is exploring with is comparing different ambiguous traits and how they manifest in different situations and what that creates! (Miles vs. Kelsier, Gavilar vs. Dalinar, Szeth vs. Nale, etc.) I think and hope that one of the things that he’s trying to show is that nothing (or very little) is the correct path of action in every situation so it’s down to an individual introspection and understanding of values, situation, responsibilities, morals, etc..

All that being said the point was: if Bavadin stays Autonomy, you’re right it seems somewhat out of character for them to become the big bad, but that assumes that Bavadin stays Autonomy! If someone who’s like super anti-coalition, anti-nation, anti-agreement, anti-interaction between humans becomes Autonomy then maybe I can see them being opposed at the end (cuz I know Brands said it was gonna be about inter-culture interaction and conflict) but that feels a little like a reach. I always thought the big bad was some force anti-Adonalsium I thought that was talked about in a WoB somewhere. 

[Fezzik]

1 hour ago, Kesamijr said:

I always thought the big bad was some force anti-Adonalsium I thought that was talked about in a WoB somewhere

The group of people who Shattered him were probably the force that opposed Adonalsium.

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/10/#e6551

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/30/#e2612

[Ripheus23]

I don't doubt that the long-term consequences of Autonomy's actions will lead to crisis events, but how deliberately diabolical these would be...?

[inactive]

9 hours ago, Kesamijr said:

I think this makes a good point too in that this all assumes Bavarian stays as Autonomy! I personally don’t really think any of the Intents have particularly positive or negative connotation cuz I’ve always thought that one of the big ideas B Sands is exploring with is comparing different ambiguous traits and how they manifest in different situations and what that creates! (Miles vs. Kelsier, Gavilar vs. Dalinar, Szeth vs. Nale, etc.) I think and hope that one of the things that he’s trying to show is that nothing (or very little) is the correct path of action in every situation so it’s down to an individual introspection and understanding of values, situation, responsibilities, morals, etc..

All that being said the point was: if Bavadin stays Autonomy, you’re right it seems somewhat out of character for them to become the big bad, but that assumes that Bavadin stays Autonomy! If someone who’s like super anti-coalition, anti-nation, anti-agreement, anti-interaction between humans becomes Autonomy then maybe I can see them being opposed at the end (cuz I know Brands said it was gonna be about inter-culture interaction and conflict) but that feels a little like a reach. I always thought the big bad was some force anti-Adonalsium I thought that was talked about in a WoB somewhere. 

After reading all these posts, I think we know too little about Autonomy to try to predict the end game. There are just too many variables. The main questions boil down to

1. Is Autonomy actually Autonomy? Can and will its intent change to something else?

2. Will Bavadin stay Autonomy?

The whole multiple avatar gambit makes Autonomy the most interesting shard to theorize about, while also making it the one we least understand. And  we have a not insignificant amount of feedback from Brandon on Autonomy (Surely more than comparable players like Endowment). I wonder if the multiple avatars are a result of Bavadin's personality, or if the shard's intent drives its multiple voices to seek independence.

I'm not a big fan of graphic novels, but I hope the next Taldian ones shed more light (no pun intended) on Autonomy's actions

Edit: Found an interesting theory on Autonomy's agenda here:

 

Edited August 16, 2020 by inactive

[Kesamijr]

22 hours ago, Fezzik said:

The group of people who Shattered him were probably the force that opposed Adonalsium.

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/10/#e6551

https://wob.coppermind.net/events/30/#e2612

Ah yeah there we go thank you!

15 hours ago, inactive said:

After reading all these posts, I think we know too little about Autonomy to try to predict the end game. There are just too many variables. The main questions boil down to

1. Is Autonomy actually Autonomy? Can and will its intent change to something else?

I'm not a big fan of graphic novels, but I hope the next Taldian ones shed more light (no pun intended) on Autonomy's actions

Edit: Found an interesting theory on Autonomy's agenda here:

 

That’s true and it’s also an interesting question to ask how much we know about any of the vessels cuz we obviously know the fates of Ati, Leras, Aona, Skai, and Sazed, but I saw a post the other day that talked about how they weren’t sure if Rayse was still Odium that I found somewhat compelling! Our lack of knowledge about the vessels combined with the possibilities of Shardic Intent definitely leave a lot open for sure!

[Honorless]

I think I see what you mean, individualism as evil does sound a bit... yeah.

But probably, we'll see several interpretations of this particular Intent, I think Brandon intends to take advantage of Autonomy's multiple Avatars to this narrative purpose

[Mage_914]

So I did a theory on this a while back (I don't know how to link it on mobile). Autonomy hates interconnectedness. They are isolationist by nature as is seen when they blockade Taldain to the point that Khriss can no longer go home. Thus as the Cosmere becomes more interconnected they will feel threatened. As more Shards go the Harmony route (which should be much easier and more stable in most cases than we see with Sazed as Preservation amd Ruin were opposites. Imagine combining two similar shards like Ruin and Cultivation, both shards that deal with change, I imagine it should be much easier) and start recombining they will feel like they have no choice but to wage war on the Cosmere to stop all this Unity that is taking place. Thats my interpretation at least.

[Halyo_Alex]

6 hours ago, Mage_914 said:

So I did a theory on this a while back (I don't know how to link it on mobile). Autonomy hates interconnectedness. They are isolationist by nature as is seen when they blockade Taldain to the point that Khriss can no longer go home. Thus as the Cosmere becomes more interconnected they will feel threatened. As more Shards go the Harmony route (which should be much easier and more stable in most cases than we see with Sazed as Preservation amd Ruin were opposites. Imagine combining two similar shards like Ruin and Cultivation, both shards that deal with change, I imagine it should be much easier) and start recombining they will feel like they have no choice but to wage war on the Cosmere to stop all this Unity that is taking place. Thats my interpretation at least.

ah yes, Unity with a capital U.

As of recently I've started to wonder if Unity is actually a property of Shards (and by extension, Adonalsium, which was exploited to Shatter him), with each Shard having different amounts of Unity. For example Odium doesn't want to dilute his Intent with other Shards despite the power it would give him, so he probably has low Unity. In this case I think Autonomy has the lowest Unity out of any Shard (perhaps even a negative amount, or something so low/small that it may as well be minutely negative by comparison to even Odium).

[+robardin]

On 8/14/2020 at 10:21 PM, Invocation said:

Those two might be connected. Maybe the splinters aren't completely voluntary. For all we know, the primary Vessel has conflicting views in and of themself, so the splinters just kind of happen as their own viewpoint shifts.

So what I hear you saying is that someday Shallan Davar will take up Autonomy? --- Naaaaah.

[Halyo_Alex]

50 minutes ago, robardin said:

So what I hear you saying is that someday Shallan Davar will take up Autonomy? --- Naaaaah.

I mean when [RoW chapter 7 spoilers]

Spoiler

Shallan starts referring to her 3 selves as "The Three", it kinda starts sounding more plausible.

 

[inactive]

20 hours ago, robardin said:

So what I hear you saying is that someday Shallan Davar will take up Autonomy? --- Naaaaah.

 

19 hours ago, Halyo_Alex said:

I mean when [RoW chapter 7 spoilers]

  Reveal hidden contents

Shallan starts referring to her 3 selves as "The Three", it kinda starts sounding more plausible.

 

I wonder if Bavadin had Dissociative identity disorder, or the shard causes DID like symptoms.

I feel like there would be a whole planet of Shallans if she took up that shard... Roshallan, say?

Edited August 20, 2020 by inactive